| 邹言，刘佳文，李立坤，曾路影，陈法军,2021,北京市珍珠泉乡不同昆虫采集方法采集效果对比分析[J].环境昆虫学报,(3):758-767 |
| 北京市珍珠泉乡不同昆虫采集方法采集效果对比分析 |
| Comparison of different insect collection methods in Zhenzhuquan Town, Beijing |
| |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 样线法 马氏网法 灯诱法 糖醋液 相似性系数 |
| 英文关键词:Line transect Malaise trap light trap mixture of sugar and acetic acid and water similarity coefficient |
| 基金项目:生态环境部生物多样性调查与评估项目（2019HB2096001006） |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 452 |
| 全文下载次数: 1156 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 为了探究科研调查中不同昆虫采集方法的采集效率差异，在北京珍珠泉乡不同的生境类型中，采用样线法、马氏网法、灯诱法、陷阱法（糖醋液）4种采集方法进行昆虫采集，按生境类型对不同采集方法采集的昆虫进行统计分析。在实验中共采集昆虫3 996头，隶属12目87科，其中在昆虫种类数量上，鳞翅目最多，其次是半翅目和鞘翅目；在数量上，半翅目昆虫数量最多，依次是双翅目和鳞翅目。样线法共采集到昆虫61科72种、灯诱法共采集到45科95种、马氏网法共采集到39科41种、 陷阱法共采集到14科25种。在调查中，不同方法在不同生境采集昆虫种类数多存在显著差异（P<0.05）。不同的采集方式间除马氏网和样线法采集昆虫的种类相似度为中等不相似（q=0.436），其他方法间均为极不相似。采用不同的采集方式可以采集到更多的昆虫种类。马氏网法是最优选的采集方式，马氏网采集昆虫最方便，节省人力；样线法采集的效果最稳定；灯诱法的采集效果好，但是应用较为复杂；糖醋液陷阱法采集昆虫效率对比其他三种方法，既不能采集到大量昆虫也没有采集到特定种昆虫，如无特别需求可以考虑减少或者放弃使用。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| In order to explore the difference in collection efficiency of different insect capture methods, insects were collected using four sampling methods: The Malaise trap, the pitfall trap (mixture of sugar and acetic acid and water in the trap), the line transect and the light trap, in different habitat types in Zhenzhuquan Town, Yanqing District, Beijing. Insects collected using different collection methods in different habitat types were be analyzed. The results showed that 3 996 insects were collected in the experiments, belonging to 12 orders and 87 families. Among them, Lepidoptera, Hemiptera and Coleoptera were the most diverse species in insecta, and the number of Hemiptera, Diptera and Lepidoptera were the highest. The line transect collected 72 species of 61 families of insects, 95 species of 45 families by light trap, 41 species of 39 families collected by Malaise trap, and 25 species of 14 families by pitfall trap. In the experiment, there were significant differences in the number of insects collected by different methods in different habitats (P<0.05). The similarity coefficient between different collection methods except the Malaise trap and the line transect was low (q=0.436), and the other methods were lower. It is currently believed that the Malaise trap was the most preferred method of collection in survey, because the Malaise trap was the most convenient to collect insects and saves manpower; the line transect had the most stable effect; the light trapping method had good collection effect, but the application was more complicated. Compared with the other three methods, the efficiency of pitfall trap could not collect large number of insects or collect specific insects. If no special demand, it could be considered to reduce or abandon to use in survey. |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
