ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Short Research Article
Updated

Longhorned beetle (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) diversity in a fragmented temperate forest landscape

[version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
PUBLISHED 14 Mar 2013
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

Longhorned beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) are an important component of temperate forest ecosystems.  We trapped longhorned beetles in forests in northwest Ohio during 2008 to test the hypothesis that larger forests have greater species diversity than smaller forests.  Large forests had a significantly greater cerambycid species richness than small forests (t = 3.16. P = 0.02), and there was a significant relationship between forest size and cerambycid species richness.

Updated Changes from Version 1

Upon the recommendation of referee Patrick Tobin, we have provided additional data that shows the relationship between log (species richness) and log (forest area). We have also updated Figure 6 to show if the respective area of each forest could explain the difference in species number. The large R2 value does suggest that larger forests tended to have larger number of cerambycid species. We also estimated the diversity of Cerambycidae using the Shannon Diversity Index value for each of the forests.  These calculated Shannon Index values allows comparisons to other studies that have examined cerambycid diversity (e.g., Ohsawa 2004; Holland 2007).

To read any peer review reports and author responses for this article, follow the "read" links in the Open Peer Review table.

Introduction

Longhorned beetles, or cerambycids, are important species in temperate forest ecosystems, due to their feeding impacts on trees. Many cerambycids feed on dead wood and therefore assist in the decomposition of dead trees in forest ecosystems. Saproxylic cerambycids (dead wood dependent) and other saproxylic beetles are thought to be useful indicators of forest biodiversity1. We were interested in testing the hypothesis that larger forests have greater cerambycid species diversity than smaller forests in NW Ohio, a highly fragmented landscape in terms of forest ecosystems.

Methodology

  • Three types of traps (Lindgren funnel trap, Intercept Panel trap, and Window trap) were set up in each of 8 forests in northwestern Ohio. 95% ethanol was used to attract beetles (Figure 1Figure 3).

  • We started collecting beetles in early June, and we continued to collect them until early October (Figure 4).

  • We put the traps into 8 different forest areas. Four forests were large (>100 hectares) and four forests were classified as small (<20 hectares).

fcd06fc0-8fd5-4a3d-8c00-db48bce4a2c7_figure1.gif

Figure 1. Intercept Panel trap used for capturing Cerambycid beetles.

fcd06fc0-8fd5-4a3d-8c00-db48bce4a2c7_figure2.gif

Figure 2. Lindgren Funnel trap used for capturing Cerambycid beetles.

fcd06fc0-8fd5-4a3d-8c00-db48bce4a2c7_figure3.gif

Figure 3. Window trap used for capturing Cerambycid beetles.

fcd06fc0-8fd5-4a3d-8c00-db48bce4a2c7_figure4.gif

Figure 4. Examples of Cerambycids species that were caught in the 8 forests sampled.

Strophiona nitens (top left), Gaurotes cyanipennis (top right) Urographus fasciatus (bottom left) and Microgoes oculatus (bottom right).

Table 1. Cerambycid (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) Species Captured in Oak Openings Preserve, 2008 (Western Lucas County, OH).

Total number of individuals of each species caught during the entire trapping period (early June to early October). Traps were positioned in the approximate center of each forest and all checked each week.

Cerambycid speciesNumber of individuals
Strangalepta abbreviata (Germar)35
Cyrtophilus verrucosus (Olivier)8
Xylotechus colonus (Fabricius)8
Clytus ruricolis (Olivier)5
Gaurotes cyanipennis (Fabricius)3
Neoclytus acuminatus (Fabricius)2
Microgoes oculatus (LeConte)2
Urographis fasciatus (DeGeer)2
Pidonia ruficollis (Say)1
Phymatodes testaceus (Linnaeus)1
Sarosesthus fulminatus (Fabricius)1
Strophiona nitens (Forster)1
Urgleptes querci (Fitch)1
Total number of individuals (N)70
Species richness (s)13

Table 2. Cerambycid (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) Species Captured in Secor Woods, 2008 (Northern Lucas County, OH).

Total number of individuals of each species caught during the entire trapping period (early June to early October). Traps were positioned in the approximate center of each forest and all checked each week.

Cerambycid speciesNumber of individuals
Clytus ruricola (Olivier)7
Cyrtophilus verrucosus (Olivier)3
Pidonia ruficollis (Say)3
Gaurotes cyanipennis (Fabricius)2
Microgoes oculatus (LeConte)1
Psenocerus supernotatus (Say)1
Trachysida mutabilis1
Astylopsis collaris (Haldeman)1
Total number of individuals (N)19
Species richness (s)8

Table 3. Cerambycid (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) Species Captured in Wildwood Preserve, 2008 (Northern Lucas County, OH).

Total number of individuals of each species caught during the entire trapping period (early June to early October). Traps were positioned in the approximate center of each forest and all checked each week.

Cerambycid speciesNumber of individuals
Strangalepta abbreviata (Germar)3
Clytus ruricola (Olivier)2
Gaurotes cyanipennis (Fabricius)2
Microgoes oculatus (LeConte)2
Cyrtophilus verrucosus (Olivier)1
Analeptura lineola (Say)1
Pidonia ruficollis (Say)1
Total number of individuals (N)12
Species richness (s)7

Table 4. Cerambycid (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) Species Captured in Pearson Park, 2008 (Eastern Lucas County, OH).

Total number of individuals of each species caught during the entire trapping period (early June to early October). Traps were positioned in the approximate center of each forest and all checked each week.

Cerambycid speciesNumber of individuals
Clytus ruricola (Olivier)3
Astylopsis macula (Say)2
Urographis despectus (LeConte)1
Cyrtophilus verrucosus (Olivier)1
Psenocerus supernotatus (Say)1
Total number of individuals (N)8
Species richness (s)5

Table 5. Cerambycid (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) Species Captured in Bradner Preserve, 2008 (Western Wood County, OH).

Total number of individuals of each species caught during the entire trapping period (early June to early October). Traps were positioned in the approximate center of each forest and all checked each week.

Cerambycid speciesNumber of individuals
Xylotrechus colonus (Fabricius)2
Total number of individuals (N)2
Species richness (s)1

Table 6. Cerambycid Cerambycid (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) Species Captured in Carter Woods, 2008 (Central Wood County, OH).

Total number of individuals of each species caught during the entire trapping period (early June to early October). Traps were positioned in the approximate center of each forest and all checked each week.

Cerambycid speciesNumber of individuals
Heterachthes quadrimaculatus Haldeman4
Xylotrechus convergens LeConte1
Obrium maculatum (Olivier)1
Total number of individuals (N)6
Species richness (s)3

Table 7. Cerambycid (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) Species Captured in Fuller Preserve, 2008 (Central Wood County, OH).

Total number of individuals of each species caught during the entire trapping period (early June to early October). Traps were positioned in the approximate center of each forest and all checked each week.

Cerambycid speciesNumber of individuals
Heterachthes quadrimaculatus Haldeman4
Neoclytus acuminatus (Fabricius)3
Total number of individuals (N)7
Species richness (s)2

Table 8. Cerambycid (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) Species Captured in BGSU-ENVS Woods, 2008 (Central Wood County, OH).

Total number of individuals of each species caught during the entire trapping period (early June to early October). Traps were positioned in the approximate center of each forest and all checked each week.

Cerambycid speciesNumber of individuals
Neoclytus acuminatus (Fabricius)2
Sternidius variegatus (Haldeman)1
Urgleptes signatus (Fabricius)1
Anelaphus villosus (Fabricius)1
Total number of individuals (N)5
Species richness (s)4

Table 9. Shannon Diversity Index Values for Forest Study Sites.

Forest siteShannon Index (H’ = -∑pilnpi)
Oak Openings1.78
Secor Woods1.81
Wildwood Preserve1.86
Pearson Park1.49
Bradner Preserve*-
Carter Woods0.87
Fuller Preserve0.68
BGSU-ENVS Woods1.33

*It is not possible to calculate a Shannon Diversity Index value for this site, because only one cerambycid species was caught.

Results and discussion

  • Large forests had greater cerambycid species richness than small forests. (Figure 5, Figure 6).

    The larger forests had larger Shannon Diversity index values compared to the smaller forests. The calculated Shannon Diversity Index Values allows comparisons to other studies that have focused on cerambycid diversity in forest ecosystems1,2.

  • Regression of log (species richness + 1) versus log (forest area + 1) indicated a strong linear relationship between cerambycid species richness and forest size (R2 = 0.80). (Figure 7). The large R2 value suggests that larger forests tend to have greater cerambycid species diversity than do smaller forests, perhaps due to greater amounts of resources for these beetles in the larger forests compared to the smaller ones.

  • Future research should focus on the landscape matrix and degree of isolation of forests, especially isolation of smaller forests.

  • Many other beetle species from other families were also captured (e.g., Elateridae, Curculionidae), so these data should also be examined.

fcd06fc0-8fd5-4a3d-8c00-db48bce4a2c7_figure5.gif

Figure 5. Comparison of Cerambycid species richness between large forests and small Forests.

The four large forests were Oak Opening, Secor, Pearson, and Wildwood, and the four small forests were Bradner Preserve, Fuller Preserve, Carter Woods, and Environmental Studies Woods. The t-test was significant (t = 3.16, df = 6, P = 0.02).

fcd06fc0-8fd5-4a3d-8c00-db48bce4a2c7_figure6.gif

Figure 6. Total number of Cerambycid species caught in each forest during 2008.

Oak Openings, Secor, Wildwood, and Pearson were the Large Forests, and Bradner Preserve, Carter Woods, Fuller Preserve, and ENVS Woods were the small forests.

fcd06fc0-8fd5-4a3d-8c00-db48bce4a2c7_figure7.gif

Figure 7. Regression of Log (Cerambycid Species Richness + 1) versus Log (Forest Area + 1).

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2
VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 09 Oct 2012
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
F1000Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
- -
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
Pavuk DM and Wadsworth AM. Longhorned beetle (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) diversity in a fragmented temperate forest landscape [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 1:25 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.1-25.v2)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Version 2
VERSION 2
PUBLISHED 14 Mar 2013
Views
13
Cite
Reviewer Report 20 Jan 2014
Peter Silk, Insect Chemical Ecology, Atlantic Forestry Centre, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada 
Approved
VIEWS 13
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Silk P. Reviewer Report For: Longhorned beetle (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) diversity in a fragmented temperate forest landscape [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 1:25 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1259.r3190)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Views
15
Cite
Reviewer Report 18 Mar 2013
Patrick Tobin, Ecology and Management of Invasive Species and Forest Ecosystems Unit,, USDA Forest Service, Morgantown, WV, USA 
Approved
VIEWS 15
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Tobin P. Reviewer Report For: Longhorned beetle (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) diversity in a fragmented temperate forest landscape [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 1:25 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1259.r842)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Version 1
VERSION 1
PUBLISHED 09 Oct 2012
Views
11
Cite
Reviewer Report 17 Oct 2012
Peter Silk, Insect Chemical Ecology, Atlantic Forestry Centre, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada 
Approved
VIEWS 11
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Silk P. Reviewer Report For: Longhorned beetle (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) diversity in a fragmented temperate forest landscape [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 1:25 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.123.r330)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Views
29
Cite
Reviewer Report 15 Oct 2012
Patrick Tobin, Ecology and Management of Invasive Species and Forest Ecosystems Unit,, USDA Forest Service, Morgantown, WV, USA 
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 29
The overall merits of the study, general aspects of the experimental design, and hypothesis tested are interesting and conceptually sound.

The incredible amount of work involved in such a study is also recognized. A primary concern is that only one year
... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Tobin P. Reviewer Report For: Longhorned beetle (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) diversity in a fragmented temperate forest landscape [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 1:25 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.123.r329)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2
VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 09 Oct 2012
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.