Arthropods in epiphytes: a diversity component that is not effectively sampled by canopy fogging

Abstract

Insecticide fogging is often used to document arthropod species richnessin forest canopies, but this technique may not effectively sample invertebratesthat are concealed within a variety of microhabitats. We quantified the effectsof fogging on invertebrates in canopy epiphyte mats of a Costa Rican cloudforest by extracting arthropods from 18 paired pre- and post-fogging samples.Mean abundance and morphospecies richness of living arthropods were respectivelyreduced by 33 and 30% in epiphyte material after fogging, but most organismssurvived the treatment. Relative abundances of major taxa were unaffected byfogging. Herbivores were less abundant after fogging than other trophic groups,and the median body length of non-mite arthropods present in epiphytes wassignificantly smaller after fogging. Examination of seven post-fogging samplesshowed that many arthropods killed by insecticide remained trapped within theepiphyte material. These results provide the first quantitative assessment of aspecific component of arboreal arthropod biodiversity that is missed by thefogging technique.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Adis J., Lubin Y.D. and Montgomery G.G. 1984. Arthropods from the canopy of inundated and terra firme forests near Manaus, Brazil, with critical considerations on the Pyrethrum-fogging technique. Studies on Neotropical Fauna and the Environment 19: 223–236.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Basset Y. 1997. Species abundance and body size relationships in insect herbivores associated with New Guinea forest trees, with particular reference to insect host-specificity. In: Stork N.E., Adis J. and Didham R.K. (eds), Canopy Arthropods. Chapman & Hall, London, pp. 237–264.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Booth R.G. and Usher M.B. 1984. Arthropod communities in a maritime Antarctic moss-turf habitat: effects of the physical and chemical environment. Journal of Animal Ecology 53: 879–893.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Borror D.J., Triplehorn C.A. and Johnson N.F. 1989. An Introduction to the Study of Insects. Saunders College Publishing, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Clark K.L. and Nadkarni N.M. 2000. Epiphytic histosols. In: Nadkarni N.M. and Wheelwright N.T. (eds), Monteverde: Ecology and Conservation of a Tropical Cloud Forest. Oxford University Press, New York p. 34.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Clark K.L., Nadkarni N.M. and Gholz H.L. 1998. Growth, net production, litter decomposition, and net nitrogen accumulation by epiphytic bryophytes in a tropical montane forest. Biotropica 30: 12–23.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Colwell R. and Coddington J. 1994. Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London series B 345: 101–118.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Coxson D. and Nadkarni N.M. 1995. Ecological roles of epiphytes in nutrient cycles of forest ecosystems. In: Lowman M.D. and Nadkarni N.M. (eds), Forest Canopies. Academic Press, San Diego, California, pp. 495–543.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Erwin T.L. 1983. Tropical forest canopies: the last biotic frontier. Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America 1983: 14–19.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Erwin T.L. 1995. Measuring arthropod biodiversity in the tropical forest canopy. In: Lowman M.D. and Nadkarni N.M. (eds), Forest Canopies. Academic Press, San Diego, California, pp. 109–127.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Erwin T.L. and Scott J.C. 1980. Seasonal and size patterns, trophic structure, and richness of Coleoptera in the tropical arboreal ecosystem: the fauna of the tree Luehea seemannii Triana and Planch in the Canal Zone of Panama. The Coleopterists Bulletin 34: 305–322.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Floren A. and Linsenmair K.E. 2000. Do ant mosaics exist in pristine lowland rain forests? Oecologia 123: 129–137.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gentry A.H. and Dodson C. 1987. Contribution of nontrees to species richness of a tropical rain forest. Biotropica 19: 149–156.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Gering J.C. and Crist T.O. 2000. Patterns of beetle (Coleoptera) diversity in crowns of representative tree species in an old-growth temperate deciduous forest. Selbyana 21: 38–47.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gradstein S.R. 2000. Bryophytes. In: Nadkarni N.M. and Wheelwright N.T. (eds), Monteverde: Ecology and Conservation of a Tropical Cloud Forest. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 78–79.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Haber W.A. 2000. Plants and vegetation. In: Nadkarni N.M. and Wheelwright N.T. (eds), Monteverde: Ecology and Conservation of a Tropical Cloud Forest. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 39–70.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Haber W.A., Zuchowski W. and Bello E. 1996. An introduction to cloud forest trees: Monteverde, Costa Rica. La Nacion, San Jose, Costa Rica.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Nadkarni N.M. 1981. Canopy roots: convergent evolution in rainforest nutrient cycles. Science 214: 1023–1024.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Nadkarni N.M. and Longino J.T. 1990. Invertebrates in canopy and ground organic matter in a neotropical montane forest, Costa Rica. Biotropica 22: 286–289.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Nadkarni N.M. and Wheelwright N.T. (eds) 2000. Monteverde: Ecology and Conservation of a Tropical Cloud Forest. Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Nadkarni N.M., Lawton R.O., Clark K.L., Matelson T.J. and Schaefer D. 2000. Ecosystem ecology and forest dynamics. In: Nadkarni N.M. and Wheelwright N.T. (eds), Monteverde: Ecology and Conservation of a Tropical Cloud Forest. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 303–350.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Nadkarni N.M., Matelson T.J. and Haber W.A. 1995. Structural characteristics and floristic composition of a neotropical cloud forest, Monteverde, Costa Rica. Journal of Tropical Ecology 11: 481–495.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Oliver I. and Beattie A.J. 1996. Invertebrate morphospecies as surrogates for species: a case study. Conservation Biology 10: 99–109.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Perry D.R. 1978. A method of access into the crowns of emergent and canopy trees. Biotropica 10: 155–157.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Rodgers D.J. and Kitching R.L. 1998. Vertical stratification of rainforest collembolan (Collembola: Insecta) assemblages: description of ecological patterns and hypotheses concerning their generation. Ecography 21: 392–400.

    Google Scholar 

  26. SAS Institute 1999. SAS OnlineDoc. Version 8. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Sokal R.R. and Rohlf F.J. 1995. Biometry. W.H. Freeman & Co., New York.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Stork N.E. and Hammond P.M. 1997. Sampling arthropods from tree-crowns by fogging with knockdown insecticides: lessons from studies of oak tree beetle assemblages in Richmond Park (UK). In: Stork N.E., Adis J. and Didham R.K. (eds), Canopy Arthropods. Chapman & Hall, London, pp. 3–26.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Stork N.E., Adis J. and Didham R.K. 1997. Canopy Arthropods. Chapman & Hall, London.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Usher M.B. and Booth R.G. 1984. Arthropod communities in a maritime Antarctic moss-turf habitat: three-dimensional distribution of mites and Collembola. Journal of Animal Ecology 53: 427–441.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Usher M.B. and Booth R.G. 1986. Arthropod communities in a maritime Antarctic moss-turf habitat: multiple scales of pattern in the mites and Collembola. Journal of Animal Ecology 55: 155–170.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Vance E.D. and Nadkarni N.M. 1990. Microbial biomass and activity in canopy organic matter and the forest floor of a tropical cloud forest. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 22: 677–684.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Walter D.E. and Behan-Pelletier V. 1999. Mites in forest canopies: filling the size distribution shortfall? Annual Review of Entomology 44: 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Winchester N.N., Behan-Pelletier V. and Ring R.A. 1999. Arboreal specificity, diversity and abundance of canopy-dwelling oribatid mites (Acari: Oribatida). Pedobiologia 43: 391–400.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Yanoviak S.P. and Nadkarni N.M. 2001. Arthropod diversity in epiphytic bryophytes of a neotropical cloud forest. In: Ganeshaiah K.N., Shaanker R.U. and Bawa K.S. (eds), Tropical Ecosystems: Structure, Diversity and Human Welfare. Proceedings of the International Conference on Tropical Ecosystems, Bangalore, India, 15–18 July 2001. Oxford-IBH, New Delhi, India, pp. 416–419.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yanoviak, S.P., Nadkarni, N.M. & Gering, J.C. Arthropods in epiphytes: a diversity component that is not effectively sampled by canopy fogging. Biodiversity and Conservation 12, 731–741 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022472912747

Download citation

  • Arthropods
  • Canopy
  • Cloud forest
  • Fogging
  • Neotropics