Login

Recent searches

No recent searches

Search options

Only available when logged in.
mastodon.online is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
A newer server operated by the Mastodon gGmbH non-profit

Administered by:

Server stats:

11K
active users

mastodon.online: AboutStatusProfiles directoryPrivacy policy

Mastodon: AboutGet the appKeyboard shortcutsView source codev4.4.0-nightly.2025-03-19

Tapani Hopkins

Emil's plus my and Alirezas article is now online 🥳

Quick comparison of two different trap types. Both work, ramp traps caught more 🐜, 🪲 etc; and pitfalls more .

Nothing world-shattering, but useful data for anyone choosing traps.

doi.org/10.1080/14888386.2023.

Jan 08, 2024, 07:31 PM·Public·Web
0boosts·1favorite
Public
rsp

@tapani_hopkins Do you have photographs of ramp traps?

Quiet public
Tapani Hopkins

@rspfau An early version of our article had a photo, but was really unclear. Just a vague pic of a plastic box. I could perhaps ask Emil if he took more clear pics (but I suspect not, otherwise we'd have used them).

For the article, just went with the illustrations.

Drawings of a pitfall trap and a ramp trap. Drawn with a 3D drawing program. The pitfall is an underground cylinder with a rectangular plate as a roof. The ramp trap is basically a box with two rectangular holes on the sides, with ramps sloping up to the holes. Measurements included.
Quiet public *
rsp

@tapani_hopkins I found a pic of one here. I just happen to have lots of pipette tip boxes identical to the one pictured!
bioone.org/journals/The-Pan-Pa

Now I'm picturing armadillos and carnivores totally messing with them.

Preview cover image for the publication The Pan-Pacific Entomologist
BioOne CompletePerformance of Ramp and Pitfall Traps for Arthropods and non-Target Vertebrates in Californian Oak Woodland and Chaparral HabitatsSelection of tools for monitoring epigeal arthropods may be limited by site characteristics and the need to reduce risk of vertebrate bycatch. We designed a ramp trap for sampling surface-active arthropod diversity and compared its effectiveness with pitfall traps. Paired transects of ten ramp and ten pitfall traps were laid out in five sites at the Hopland Research and Extension Center in California. We identified and enumerated the ground-dwelling arthropods in the samples, with an emphasis on beetles and spiders, and compared trap types using t-tests and NMDS. There was no significant difference in abundance and diversity between ramp and pitfall traps for beetles or spiders; however, there were significantly more millipedes caught by pitfall traps. The NMDS analysis of beetle assemblages distinguished between trap types; however, differences were not significant for spider assemblages. The ramp traps were more difficult to fabricate and transport because of their complexity and bulk, but they were easier and faster to setup, more resistant to disturbance, and resulted in less vertebrate bycatch. Ramp traps are a useful tool to be used alongside or as an alternative to pitfall traps.
ExploreLive feeds
About