Journal of Insect Conservation

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 119–123 | Cite as

The importance of streamside sandbars to ground beetle (Coleoptera, Carabidae) communities in a deciduous forest

Short Communication
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

We used pitfall traps to sample ground beetles on sandbars along a small woodland stream and in the adjacent floodplain forest (Oglethorpe Co., GA, USA). We captured a total of 1,477 ground beetles representing 41 species. Twenty-two species were exclusive to sandbars, while eight were found only in the forested habitat. Ground beetles were captured in significantly greater numbers from sandbars, especially Brachinus janthinipennis and Omophron americanum. The B. janthinipennis record represents a new state record for the species. This study demonstrates that many unique species can be found in specialized microhabitats and emphasizes the need for biodiversity assessment surveys to include a wide range of these microhabitats within a survey area. In addition, it appears that many generalist forest species might use sandbars seasonally to exploit available resources.

Keywords

Carabidae Ground beetles Psammophilous Riparian beetles Sandbars 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Mike Cody for valuable field assistance and thank Harry Lee Jr. for his expertise in identifying several ground beetle species for this study. We also thank Jim Hanula for helpful comments on earlier versions of the manuscript.

References

  1. Arndt E, Aydin N, Aydin G (2005) Tourism impairs tiger beetle (Cicindeldae) populations—a case study in a Mediterranean beach habitat. J Insect Sci 9:201–206Google Scholar
  2. Bates AJ, Sadler JP, Perry JN, Fowles AP (2007) The microspatial distribution of beetles (Coleoptera) on exposed riverine sediments (ERS). Eur J Entomol 104:479–487Google Scholar
  3. Batzer DP (2004) Movements of upland invertebrates into drying seasonal woodland ponds in northern Minnesota, USA. Wetlands 24:904–907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bonn A, Hagen K, Wohlgemuth-von Reiche D (2002) The significance of flood regimes for carabid beetle and spider communities in riparian habitats-a comparison of three major rivers in Germany. Riv Res Appl 18:43–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boscaini A, Franceschini A, Maiolini B (2000) River ecotones: carabid beetles as a tool for quality assessment. Hydrobiology 422–423:173–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brinson MM (1990) Riverine forests. In: Lugo AE, Brown S, Brinson MM (eds) Forested wetlands. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, pp 87–141Google Scholar
  7. Cederholm CJ, Kunze MD, Murota T, Sibatani A (1999) Pacific salmon carcasses: essential contributions of nutrients and energy for aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Fisheries 24:6–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ceigler JC (2000) Ground beetles and wrinkled bark beetles of South Carolina (Coleoptera: Geadephaga: Carabidae and Rhysodidae). Biota of South Carolina, vol 1. Clemson University, Clemson, S.C., 149ppGoogle Scholar
  9. Erwin TL (1970b) A reclassification of bombardier beetles and a taxonomic revision of the North and Middle American species (Carabidae: Brachinida). Quaestiones Entomol 6:4–215Google Scholar
  10. Framenau V, Manderbach R, Baehr M (2002) Riparian gravel banks of upland and lowland rivers in Victoria (south-east Australia): arthropod community structure and life-history patterns along a longitudinal gradient. Aust J Zool 50:103–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gunther J, Assmann T (2005) Restoration ecology meets carabidology: effects of floodplain restitution on ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae). Biodivers Conserv 14:1583–1606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hering D (1998) Riparian beetles (Coleoptera) along a small stream in the Oregon coast range and their interactions with the aquatic environment. Coleopt Bull 52:161–170Google Scholar
  13. Hering D, Plachter H (1997) Riparian ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) preying on aquatic invertebrates: a feeding strategy in alpine floodplains. Oecologia 111:261–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Joyce CB, Wade M (eds) (1998) European wet grasslands: biodiversity, management and restoration. Wiley & Sons, New York, 340ppGoogle Scholar
  15. Junk WJ (2000) Mechanisms of development and maintenance of biodiversity in neotropical floodplains. In: Gopal B, Junk WJ, Davis JA (eds) Biodiversity in wetlands: assessment, function and conservation. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, The Netherlands, pp 119–139Google Scholar
  16. Junk WJ, Bayley PB, Sparks RE (1989) The flood pulse concept in river floodplain systems. In: Dodge DP (ed) Proceedings of the international large river symposium, 14–21 September 1986. Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, Ottawa, ON, Canada, pp 110–127Google Scholar
  17. Knisley CB, Fenster MS (2005) Apparent extinction of the tiger beetle, Cicindela hirticollis abrupta (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Cicindelinae). Coleopt Bull 59:451–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kremen C, Colwell RK, Erwin TL, Murphey DD, Noss RF, Sanjayan MA (1993) Terrestrial arthropod assemblages: their use in conservation planning. Conserv Biol 7:796–808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. LaBonte JR (1998) Terrestrial riparian arthropod investigations in the big beaver creek research natural area, North Cascades National Park Service Complex, 1995–1996: Part II, Coleoptera. Technical Report NPS/NRNOCA/NRTR/98-02Google Scholar
  20. Larochelle A, Lariviere MC (2003) A natural history of the ground-beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) of America north of Mexico. Pensoft Publishers, Bulgaria, 583pGoogle Scholar
  21. Manderbach R, Hering D (2001) Typology of riparian ground beetle communities (Coleoptera, Carabidae, Bembidion spec.) in Central Europe and adjacent areas. Arch Hydrobiol 152:583–608Google Scholar
  22. Paetzold A, Schubert CJ, Tockner K (2005) Aquatic terrestrial linkages along a braided-river: riparian arthropods feeding on aquatic insects. Ecosystems 8:748–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Plachter H, Reich M (1998) The significance of disturbance for populations and ecosystems in natural floodplains. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on river restoration, Tokyo, Japan, 26–27 May 1998Google Scholar
  24. Refseth D (1980) Ecological analysis of carabid communities-potential use in biological classification for nature conservation. Biol Conserv 17:131–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Robinson CT, Tockner K, Ward JV (2002) The fauna of dynamic riverine landscapes. Fresh Biol 47:661–677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sustek Z (1994) Classification of the carabid assemblages in the floodplain forest in Moravia and Slovakia. In: Dresender K (ed) Carabid beetles: ecology and evolution. Kluwer, The Netherlands, pp 371–376Google Scholar
  27. Thiele HU (1977) Carabid beetles in their environments: a study on habitat by adaptation in physiology and behavior. Springer, Berlin, 369pGoogle Scholar
  28. Thompson LC, Allen RT (1992) Site preparation affects ground beetles in a clearcut bottomland hardwood forest in southeastern Arkansas. In: Proceedings of the 7th biennial southern silvicultural research conference, Mobile, AL, 17–19 November 1992, pp 57–64Google Scholar
  29. Tockner K, Malard F, Ward JV (2000a) An extension of the flood pulse concept. Hydrol Proc 14:2861–2883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ulyshen MD, Hanula JL, Horn S (2005) Using malaise traps to sample ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Can Entomol 137:251–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ulyshen MD, Hanula JL, Horn S, Kilgo J, Moorman CE (2006) The response of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) to selection cutting in a South Carolina bottomland hardwood forest. Biodivers Conserv 15:261–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ward JV, Tockner K, Schiemer F (1999) Biodiversity of floodplain river ecosystems: ecotones and connectivity. Regulated Rivers: Res Manage 15:125–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.USDA Forest ServiceAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations