Skip to main content
Log in

Ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) as bioindicators

  • Published:
Biodiversity & Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One of the primary goals of research on bioindicators is to identifyspecies or other taxonomic units that would reliably indicate disturbances inthe environment, and reflect the responses of other species or the overallbiodiversity. However, there is no perfect bioindicator and selecting the mostsuitable one depends to a great extent on the goal of the survey. In this paperwe examine the suitability of carabids as bioindicators. Carabids are frequentlyused to indicate habitat alteration. They have been used in grasslands andboreal forests where species number and/or abundances have been noted to changealong a habitat disturbance gradient. A common trend is that large, poorlydispersing specialist species decrease with increased disturbance while smallgeneralist species with good dispersal ability increase. Some species are notaffected by moderate disturbance. There is, however, not enough research todetermine how suitable carabids are for biodiversity studies, or how well theyrepresent the response of other species. We conclude that carabids are usefulbioindicators, but as crucial understanding of their relationship with otherspecies is incomplete, they should be used with caution.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abensperg T.M., Smith G.T., Arnold G.W. and Steven D.E. 1996. The effects of habitat fragmentation and livestock-grazing on animal communities in remnants of gimlet Eucalyptus salubris woodland in the Western Australian wheatbelt. I. Arthropods. Journal of Applied Ecology 33: 1281–1303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abildsnes J. and Tømmeros B. Å. 2000. Impacts of experimental habitat fragmentation on ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in a boreal spruce forest. Annales Zoologici Fennici 37: 201–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen A.N. 1999. My indicator or yours? Making the selection? Journal of Insect Conservation 3: 61–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashworth A.C. 1996. The response of arctic carabids (Coleoptera) to climate change based on the fossil record of the Quaternary Period. Annales Zoologici Fennici 33: 125–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atlegrim O., Sjoberg K. and Ball J.P. 1997. Forestry effects on a boreal ground beetle community in spring: selective logging and clear-cutting compared. Entomologica Fennica 8: 19–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basedow T.H. 1990. Effects of insecticides on Carabidae and the significance of these effects for agriculture and species number. In: Stork N.E. (ed.), The Role of Ground Beetles in Ecological and Environmental Studies. Intercept, Andover, UK, pp. 115–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beccaloni G.W. and Gaston K.J. 1995. Predicting species richness of neotropical forest butterflies – Ithomiinae (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae) as indicators. Biological Conservation 71: 77–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blake S., Foster G.N., Fischer G.E.J. and Ligertwood G.L. 1996. Effects of management practices on the ground beetle faunas of newly established wildflower meadows in southern Scotland. Annales Zoologici Fennici 33: 139–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bridgham S.D. 1988. Chronic effects of 2,29-dichlorobiphenyl on reproduction, mortality, growth and respiration of Daphia pulicaria. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 17: 731–740.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown K.S. 1997. Diversity, disturbance, and sustainable use of Neotropical forests: insects as indicators for conservation monitoring. Journal of Insect Conservation 1: 25–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke D. and Goulet H. 1998. Landscape and area effects on beetle assmblages in Ontario. Ecography 21: 472–479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butterfield J. 1996. Carabid life-cycle strategies and climate change: a study on an altitude transect. Ecological Entomology 21: 9–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark T.E. and Samways M.J. 1997. Sampling arthropod diversity for urban ecological landscaping in a species-rich southern hemisphere botanic garden. Journal of Insect Conservation 1: 221–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colwell R.K. and Coddington J.A. 1994. Estimating terrrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B 345: 101–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies K.F. and Margules C.R. 1998. Effects of habitat fragmentation on carabid beetles: experimental evidence. Journal of Animal Ecology 67: 460–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Vries H.H. 1994. Size of habitat and presence of ground beetle species. In: Desender K., Dufrêne M. and Maelfait J.P. (eds), Carabid Beetles. Ecology and Evolution. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, pp. 253–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • den Boer P.J. 1990a. The survival value of dispersal in terrestrial arthropods. Biological Conservation 54: 175–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • den Boer P.J. 1990b. Density limits and survival of local populations in 64 carabid species with different powers of dispersal. Journal of Evolutionary Ecology 3: 19–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desender K. and Turin H. 1989. Loss of habitats and changes in the composition of the ground and tiger beetle fauna in four west European countries since 1950 (Coleoptera: Carabidae, Cicindelidae). Biological Conservation 48: 277–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desender K., Dufrêne M. and Maelfait J.P. 1994a. Long-term dynamics of carabid beetles in Belgium: a preliminary analysis on the influence of changing climate and land use by means of a database covering more than a century. In: Desender K., Dufrêne M. and Maelfait J.P. (eds), Carabid Beetles. Ecology and Evolution. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, pp. 247–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desender K., Dufrêne M. and Maelfait J.P. 1994b. Carabid Beetles. Ecology and Evolution. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Didham R.K. 1997. An overview of invertebrate responses to forest fragmentation. In: Watt A.D., Stork N.E. and Hunter M.D. (eds), Forest and Insects. Chapman & Hall, London, pp. 303–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duelli P. and Obrist M.K. 1998. In search of the best correlates for local organismal biodiversity in cultivated areas. Biodiversity and Conservation 7: 297–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dufrene M. and Legendre P. 1997. Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecological Monographs 67: 345–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erwin T.L. 1988. The tropical forest canopy – the heart of biotic diversity. In: Wilson E.O. (ed.), Biodiversity. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, pp. 123–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eversham B.C., Roy D.B. and Telfer M.G. 1996. Urban, industrial and other manmade sites as analogues of natural habitats for Carabidae. Annales Zoologici Fennici 33: 148–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eyre M.D. and Luff M.L. 1990. A preliminary classification of European grassland habitats using carabid beetles. In: Stork N.E. (ed.), The Role of Ground Beetles in Ecological and Environmental Studies. Intercept, Andover, UK, pp. 227–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eyre M., Lott D.A. and Garside A. 1996. Assessing the potential for environmental monitoring using ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) with riverside and Scottish data. Annales Zoologici Fennici 33: 157–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenslade P. 1997. Are Collembola useful as indicators of the conservation value of native grasslands. Pedobiologia 41: 215–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haila Y. 1999. Islands and fragments. In: Hunter M.L. Jr. (ed.), Maintaining Biodiversity in Forest Ecosystems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 234–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haila Y., Hanski I.K., Niemelä J., Punttila P., Raivio S. and Tukia H. 1994. Forestry and the boreal fauna: matching management with natural forest dynamics. Annales Zoologici Fennici 31: 187–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halme E. and Niemelä J. 1993. Carabid beetles in fragments of coniferous forest. Annales Zoologici Fennici 30: 17–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hance T. 1990. Relationship between crop types, ground beetle phenology and aphid predation in agroecosystems. In: Stork N.E. (ed.), The Role of Ground Beetles in Ecological and Environmental Studies. Intercept, Andover, UK, pp. 55–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harcourt C. and Thornback J. 1990. Lemurs of Madagascar and the Comores. IUCN Red Data Book, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.

    Google Scholar 

  • He F., Legendre P., Bellehumeur C. and LaFrankie J.V. 1994. Diversity pattern and spatial scale: a study of a tropical rain forest of Malaysia. Environmental and Ecological Statistics 1: 265–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heliölä J., Koivula M. and Niemelä J. 2001. Distribution of carabid beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) across a boreal forest-clearcut ecotone. Conservation Biology 15: 370–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janzen D.H. and Shoener T.W. 1968. Differences in insect abundance and diversity between wetter and drier sites during a tropical dry season. Ecology 49: 96–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonsson B.G. and Jonsell M. 1999. Exploring potential biodiversity indicators in boreal forests. Biodiversity and Conservation 8: 1417–1433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koivula M. 2002. Alternative harvesting methods and boreal carabid beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae). Forest Ecology and Management 167: 103–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koivula M., Kukkonen J. and Niemelä J. 2002. Boreal carabid-beetle (Coleoptera, Carabidae) assemblages along the clear-cut originated succession gradient. Biodiversity and Conservation 11: 1269–1288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koivula M., Punttila P., Haila Y. and Niemelä J. 1999. Leaf litter and the small-scale distribution of carabid beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in the boreal forest. Ecography 22: 424–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotze D.J. and Samways M.J. 1999. Invertebrate conservation at the interface between the grassland matrix and natural Afromontane forest fragments. Biodiversity and Conservation 8: 1339–1363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kremen C. 1992. Assessing the indicator properties of species assemblages for natural areas monitoring. Ecological Applications 2: 203–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kremen C., Colwell R.K., Erwin T.L., Murphy D.D., Noss R.F. and Sanjayan M.A. 1993. Terrestrial arthropod assemblages: their use in conservation planning. Conservation Biology 7: 796–808.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kremen C., Merenlander A.M. and Murphy D.D. 1994. Ecological monitoring: a vital need for integrated conservation and development programs in the tropics. Conservation Biology 8: 388–397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landres P.B., Verner J. and Thomas J.W. 1988. Ecological uses of vertebrate indicator species: a critique. Conservation Biology 2: 316–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langrand O. 1990. Guide to the Birds of Madagascar. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawton J.H., Bignell D.E., Bolton B., Bloemers G.F., Eggleton P., Hammond P.M. et al. 1998. Biodiversity inventories, indicator taxa and effects of habitat modification in tropical forests. Nature 391: 72–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer D.B., Margules C.R. and Botkin D.B. 2000. Indicators of biodiversity for ecologically sustainable forest management. Conservation Biology 14: 941–950.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luff M.L. 1975. Some features influencing the efficiency of pitfall traps. Oecology (Berlin) 19: 345–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luff M.L. 1990. Spatial and temporal stability of ground beetle communities in a grass / arable mosaic. In: Stork N.E. (ed.), The Role of Ground Beetles in Ecological and Environmental Studies. Intercept, Andover, UK, pp. 191–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luff M.L. 1996. Use of carabids as environmental indicators in grasslands and cereals. Annales Zoologici Fennici 35: 185–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lövei G.L. and Sunderland K.D. 1996. Ecology and behavior of ground beetles (Coleoptera: ground beetleae). Annual Review of Entomology 41: 231–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maelfait J.-P. and Desender K. 1990. Possibilities of short-term ground beetle sampling for site assessment studies. In: Stork N.E. (ed.), The Role of Ground Beetles in Ecological and Environmental Studies. Intercept, Andover, UK, pp. 217–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • May R.M. 1992. How many species inhabit the earth? Scientific American 267: 42–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGeoch M. 1998. The selection, testing and application of terrestrial insects as bioindicators. Biological Reviews 73: 181–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mossakowski D., Främbs H. and Baro A. 1990. Carabid beetles as indicators of habitat destruction caused by military tanks. In: Stork N.E. (ed.), The Role of Ground Beetles in Ecological and Environmental Studies. Intercept, Andover, UK, pp. 237–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • New T.R. 1998. The role of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Ground beetleae) in monitoring programmes in Australia. Annales Zoologici Fennici 35: 163–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J. 1990. Spatial distribution of carabid beetles in the southern finnish taiga: the question of scale. In: Stork N.E. (ed.), The Role of Ground Beetles in Ecological and Environmental Studies. Intercept, Andover, UK, pp. 143–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J. 1993a. Interspecific competition in ground-beetle assemblages (Carabidae): what have we learned? Oikos 66: 325–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J. 1993b. Mystery of the missing species: species-abundance distribution of boreal ground beetles. Annales Zoologici Fennici 30: 169–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J. (ed.) 1996. Population Biology and Conservation of Carabid Beetles. Annales Zoologici Fennici 33: 1–241 (entire issue).

  • Niemelä J. 2000. Biodiversity monitoring for decision-making. Annales Zoologici Fennici 37: 307–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J. 2001. Carabid beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) and habitat fragmentation: a review. European Journal of Entomology 98: 127–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J. and Baur B. 1998. Threatened species in a vanishing habitat: plants and invertebrates in calcareous grasslands in the Swiss Jura mountains. Biodiversity and Conservation 7: 1407–1416.

    Google Scholar 

  • iemelä J., Haila Y., Halme E., Lahti T., Pajunen T. and Punttila P. 1988. The distribution of carabid beetles in fragments of old coniferous taiga and adjacent managed forest. Annales Zoologici Fennici 25: 107–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J., Haila Y. and Punttila P. 1996. The importance of small-scale heterogeneity in boreal forests: variation in diversity in forest-floor invertebrates across the succession gradient. Ecography 19: 352–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J., Halme E. and Haila Y. 1990. Balancing sampling effort in pitfall trapping of carabid beetles. Entomologica Fennica 1: 233–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J., Kotze J., Ashworth A., Brandmayr P., Desender K., New T. et al. 2000. The search for common anthropogenic impacts on biodiversity: a global network. Journal of Insect Conservation 4: 3–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J., Langor D. and Spence J.R. 1993. Effects of clear-cut harvesting on boreal ground-beetle assemblages (Coleoptera: Ground beetleae) in western Canada. Conservation Biology 7: 551–561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J., Spence J.R. and Spence D.H. 1992. Habitat associations and seasonal activity of ground-beetles (Coleoptera, Ground beetleae) in Central Alberta. The Canadian Entomologist 124: 521–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss R.F. 1990. Indicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical approach. Conservation Biology 4: 355–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver I. and Beattie A.J. 1996. Designing a cost-effective invertebrate survey. A test of methods for rapid assessment of biodiversity. Ecological Applications 6: 594–607.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson D.L. 1994. Selecting indicator taxa for the quantitative assessment of biodiversity. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B 345: 75–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson D.L. and Cassola F. 1992. World-wide species richness patterns of tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae): indicator taxon for biodiversity and conservation studies. Conservation Biology 6: 376–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimm S.L. and Gilpin M.E. 1989. Theoretical issues in conservation biology. In: Roughgarden J., May R.M. and Lewin S.A. (eds), Perspectives in Ecological Theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, pp. 287–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prendergast J.R. 1997. Species richness covariance in higher taxa: empirical tests of the biodiversity indicator concept. Ecography 20: 210–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prendergast J.R., Quinn R.M., Lawton J.H., Eversham B.D. and Gibbons D.W. 1993. Rare species, the coincidende of diversity hotspots and conservation strategies. Nature 365: 335–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rassi P., Alanen A., Kanerva T. and Mannerkoski I. 2000. Suomen lajien uhanalaisuus 2000. Ympäristöministeriö, Helsinki, Finland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raven P.H. and Wilson E.O. 1992. A fifty-year plan for biodiversity surveys. Science 258: 1099–1100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg D.M., Danks H.V. and Lehmkuhl D.M. 1986. Importance of insects in environmental impact assessment. Environmental Management 10: 773–783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth M. 1993. Investigations on lead in the soil invertebrates of a forest ecosystem. Pedobiology 37: 270–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rushton S.P., Eyre M.D. and Luff M.L. 1990. The effects of management on the occurrence of some ground beetle species in grassland. In: Stork N.E. (ed.), The Role of Ground Beetles in Ecological and Environmental Studies. Intercept, Andover, UK, pp. 209–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rushton S.P., Luff M.L. and Eyre M.D. 1989. Effect of pasture improvement and management on the ground beetle and spider communitites of upland grasslands. Journal of Applied Ecology 26: 489–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rykken J.J., Capen D.E. and Mahabir S.P. 1997. Ground beetles as indicators of land type diversity in the green mountains of Vermont. Conservation Biology 11: 522–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders D.A., Hobb R.J. and Margules C.R. 1991. Biological consequences of ecosystem fragmentation: a review. Conservation Biology 5: 18–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spellerberg I.F. 1993. Monitoring Ecological Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence J.R. and Niemelä J.K. 1994. Sampling ground beetle assemblages with pitfall traps: the madness and the method. The Canadian Entomologist 126: 881–894.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence J.R., Langor D.W., Niemela J., Carcamo H.A. and Currie C.C. 1996. Northern forestry and ground beetles: the case for concern about old-growth species. Annales Zoologici Fennici 33: 173–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stork N.E. 1987. Adaptations of arboreal ground beetles to life in trees. Acta Phytopathologica et Entomologica Hungarica 22: 273–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiele H.-U. 1977. Carabid Beetles in their Environments. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Usher M.B., Field J. and Bedford S. 1993. Biogeography and diversity of ground-dwelling arthropods in farm woodlands. Biodiversity Letters 1: 54–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venn S. 2000. The effects of urbanization on boreal forest ecosystems, M.Sc. Thesis, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weaver J.C. 1995. Indicator species and scale of observation. Conservation Biology 9: 939–942.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rainio, J., Niemelä, J. Ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) as bioindicators. Biodiversity and Conservation 12, 487–506 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022412617568

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022412617568

Navigation