Hammond H E James, García-Tejero Sergio, Pohl Greg R, Langor David W, Spence John R
Natural Resources Canada: Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre, 5320 - 122 Street, Edmonton, AB, T6H 3S5, Canada Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forestry Centre Edmonton Canada.
Departamento de Biodiversidad y Gestión Ambiental, Universidad de León, Campus de Vegazana, 24195, León, Spain Universidad de Leon Leon Spain.
Zookeys. 2021 Jun 16;1044:951-991. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.1044.65776. eCollection 2021.
Epigaeic beetle assemblages were surveyed using continuous pitfall trapping during the summers of 1992 and 1993 in six widely geographically distributed locations in Alberta's aspen-mixedwood forests prior to initial forest harvest. Species composition and turnover (β-diversity) were evaluated on several spatial scales ranging from Natural Regions (distance between samples 120-420 km) to pitfall traps (40-60 m). A total of 19,885 ground beetles (Carabidae) representing 40 species and 12,669 rove beetles (non-AleocharinaeStaphylinidae) representing 78 species was collected. Beetle catch, species richness, and diversity differed significantly among the six locations, as did the identity of dominant species. Beetle species composition differed significantly between the Boreal Forest and Foothills Natural Regions for both taxa. Staphylinidae β-diversity differed significantly between Natural Regions, whereas Carabidae β-diversity differed among locations. Climate variables such as number of frost-free days, dry periods, and mean summer temperatures were identified as significant factors influencing beetle assemblages at coarse spatial scales, whereas over- and understory vegetation cover, litter depth, shade, slope, and stand age influenced beetle assemblages at finer spatial scales. Significant interannual variation in assemblage structure was noted for both taxa. Because composition of epigaeic beetle assemblages differed across spatial scales, forest management strategies based only on generalized understanding of a single location will be ineffective as conservation measures. In addition, site history and geographic variation significantly affect species distributions of these two beetle families across the landscape. Thus, we underscore Terry Erwin's suggestion that biodiversity assessments focused on species assemblages at different spatial scales provide a sound approach for understanding biodiversity change and enhancing conservation of arthropod biodiversity.
1992年和1993年夏季，在艾伯塔省白杨混交林最初采伐之前，于该省六个地理分布广泛的地点，通过连续陷阱诱捕法对地表甲虫群落进行了调查。在从自然区域（样本间距离120 - 420千米）到陷阱（40 - 60米）的几个空间尺度上，对物种组成和周转率（β多样性）进行了评估。共收集到19885只步甲（步甲科），分属40个物种，以及12669只隐翅虫（非隐翅虫亚科隐翅虫科），分属78个物种。六个地点的甲虫捕获量、物种丰富度和多样性存在显著差异，优势物种的身份也有所不同。两个类群的甲虫物种组成在北方森林和山麓自然区域之间均存在显著差异。隐翅虫科的β多样性在不同自然区域间存在显著差异，而步甲科的β多样性在不同地点间存在差异。无霜天数、干旱期和夏季平均温度等气候变量被确定为在较大空间尺度上影响甲虫群落的重要因素，而林冠层和林下植被覆盖度、凋落物深度、遮荫、坡度和林分年龄在较小空间尺度上影响甲虫群落。两个类群的群落结构均存在显著的年际变化。由于地表甲虫群落的组成在不同空间尺度上存在差异，仅基于对单个地点的一般了解制定的森林管理策略作为保护措施将是无效的。此外，立地历史和地理变异显著影响这两个甲虫科在整个景观中的物种分布。因此，我们强调特里·欧文的建议，即专注于不同空间尺度上物种群落的生物多样性评估为理解生物多样性变化和加强节肢动物生物多样性保护提供了一种合理的方法。
