Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [beemonitoring] pan trapping vs malaise trapping for pollinator inventories

Expand Messages
  • Julio A. Genaro
    I agree with Matt I ran Malaise traps in subtropics without many success on bees. More on Diptera, moths and parasitic wasps. An interseption trap with big
    Message 1 of 6 , Jan 7, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      I agree with Matt
      I ran Malaise traps in subtropics without many success on bees. More on Diptera, moths and parasitic wasps.
      An interseption trap with big yellow plates below was better for me.
      a combination of several techniques will be better. Don't forget to sweep with an entomological net
      cheers
      julio

      ________________________

      Julio A. Genaro
      http://caribbeanahigroup.org
      Editor Cocuyo:
      Newsletter of Invertebrate Zoologists of the Antilles
      Editor Solenodon: Antillean Journal of Zoological Taxomomy 
      Personal webside: http://www.caribbeanahigroup.org/editorialboard.htm 






      To: beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com
      From: mjsarver@...
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 10:35:16 -0500
      Subject: RE: [beemonitoring] pan trapping vs malaise trapping for pollinator inventories

      Dave -
       
      Since malaise traps don't rely on the insect being attracted to the colored bowl, the malaise will yield a much broader sample of the flying insect community, especially if you use a modified design that includes a lower collection chamber for those insects that drop down, rather than fly up, when they hit the mesh.  I don't know how bee catches in particular compare between malaise and bowl traps, but you will likely get a much larger sample (in terms of both diversity and bulk) of other Hymenoptera, Diptera, and Coleoptera from a malaise, including many groups of insects that you would not get from bowl traps.  Conversely, you lose the attraction power of the UV paints, so the malaise is likely to be less efficient at capturing bees, if that is your group of interest.  You will also catch a lot moths, and will have a lot of sorting (and washing of moth scales) to do to pick out your groups of interest.  Make sure you have the finances and manpower to process malaise samples before you decide to use them.  The process is extremely labot-intensive.  Bowl trap and netting samples are much less labor-intensive to clean and sort.  Malaise traps definitely still have their place in the sampling repertoire, if you have the resources to purchase, deploy, and process samples from them.  It really depends upon the goals of your study.  Hope that is helpful!
       
      Best
      Matt
       
      Matthew Sarver
      Sarver Ecological Consulting
      173 Wallace Rd
      Blairsville, PA 15717
      Cell: 724-689-5845
        


      From: beemonitoring@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:beemonitori ng@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of David_r_smith@ fws.gov
      Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 10:12 AM
      To: beemonitoring@ yahoogroups. com
      Subject: [beemonitoring] pan trapping vs malaise trapping for pollinator inventories


      Hi All,

      I have looked at earlier studies where malaise traps were used to collect flying insects as part of montane pollinator studies.  Are malaise traps still used or have pantraps and netting been deemed a suitable replacement? .  I know you can buy a lot a small plastic cups for the price of a malaise trap.

      Thanks  a lot,

      Dave Smith




      Get easy photo sharing with Windows Live™ Photos. Drag n’ drop
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.