Yves Basset Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Panama, PA (bassety@si.edu)

Gianfranco Curletti Museum of Carmagnola, Carmagnola, IT1Héctor Barrios University of Panama, Panama, PA

2Lukas Cizek Czech Academy of Sciences, Ceske Budejovice, CZ Henri-Pierre Aberlenc CIRAD, Montpellier, FR

Maurice Leponce Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels, BE3Anovel Barba University of Panama, Panama, PA

The IBISCA sticky trap programme

and focal taxa:

Auchenorrhyncha and Agrilus

(Hemiptera, Coleoptera)

Museo di Carmagnola

1

2

3

Estimates the flight activity of smaller insectsFor each of 9 sites in 2003:25 traps set in the understorey25 traps set in the upper canopy3 transects of traps set at 0, 1.3, 7, 14, 21, 28m and top (upper canopy)

Traps run for 5 daysReplication of two sites (crane) in March, May and October 2004

Total: 993 traps and 54,779 individuals collected

Sorted by higher categories (families) with focal taxa extracted

Measurements of light and canopy openness near each trap in situ (SRT)

The sticky trap programmeUpper canopyUnderstorey

0 20 40 60 80 100

0m

1.3m

7m

14m

21m

28m

35m

Hei

ght

Mean (s.e.) no. individuals per trap

Upper canopy: 86.3±3.7

Litter: 70.3±7.6

Understorey:33.1±1.1

Mid-canopy: 38.2±2.5

Litter comparable to upper canopyin terms of abundance

Hiatus between the upper canopy andthe lower foliage

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

0m

1.3m

7m

14m

21m

28m

Hei

ght

Mean no. ind. collected

Flight-intercept traps

Patterns of stratification differ betweentaxonomical and ecological groups

For example:

Predatory flies, sap-sucking bugs,scavenging flies and wood-boring beetlesshow different patterns

0

5

10

Dol

icho

podi

dae

Psy

lloid

ea

Pho

ridae

Sco

lytin

ae

Mea

n no

. ind

ivid

uals

per

trap

Litter

Understorey

Canopy

Upper canopy

26.8 ±7.99

(se)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

Incident light below trap (lux)

Sum

ind.

col

lect

ed p

er tr

ap

Positive correlation betweenarthropod abundance and light,

rs = 0.273, P < 0.001

Relationships with canopy opennessand leaf density not assessed yet

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0.68 0.685 0.69 0.695 0.7 0.705 0.71 0.715 0.72 0.725

Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (Landsat)

Mea

n no

. ind

. col

lect

ed p

er tr

ap

Relationships with remotesensing data not assessed yet

Planthoppers (Fulgoroidea)

Leafhoppers (Membracoidea)

Treehoppers (Membracoidea)

Froghoppers (Cercopoidea)

Cicadas (Cicadoidea)

Jumping plant lices (Psylloidea)

Not considered here: scales, whiteflies and aphids

Zammara

Enchophora

Distribution patterns of homopteran bugs(all sap-suckers)

Biolleyana

Challenge:To account for differentsampling efforts amongsampling methods andhabitats

Total 15,245 homopterans

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

Stic

ky tr

aps

Mal

aise

Fogg

ing

Ligh

t tra

ps

Flig

ht in

terc

ept t

raps

Gro

und

FIT

Pitfa

ll tra

ps

Bea

ting

Win

kler

Ber

lese

No.

of i

ndiv

idua

ls c

olle

cted

LitterUnderstoreyCanopyUpper canopy

Collecting effort by method (no. ind.)

Faunal composition per habitat: homopteran familiesDorisiana

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Aca

nalo

niid

ae

Ach

ilidae

Ach

ilixiid

ae

Cix

iidae

Cla

stop

terid

ae

Del

phac

idae

Der

bida

e

Dic

tyop

harid

ae

Fla

tidae

Ful

gorid

ae

Issi

dae

Kin

narid

ae

Nog

odin

idae

Tro

pidu

chid

ae

Ful

goro

idea

nym

phs

Aet

alio

nida

e

Cic

adel

lidae

Mem

brac

idae

Mem

brac

idae

nym

phs

Aph

roph

orid

ae

Cer

copi

dae

Cer

copo

idea

nym

phs

Cic

adid

ae

Tib

icin

idae

Car

sida

ridae

Pha

copt

eron

idae

Psy

llidae

Trio

zida

e

Psy

lloid

ea

Psy

lloid

ea n

ymph

s

Ale

yrod

idae

Aph

idid

ae

Coc

coid

ea

Hom

opte

ra u

nkno

wn

No.

of i

ndiv

idua

ls c

olle

cted

Litter

Understorey

Canopy

Upper canopy

FulgoroideaMembracoidea

Cercopoidea

CicadoideaPsylloidea Others

Cixiidae, Derbidae,Tropiduchidae: UND

Cicadellidae: UND+UPC

Membracidae: UPC Psyllidae: UPC

Aleyrodidae: UPC

Total Litter Understorey Canopy Upper canopyNo. individuals 15245 745 5334 3772 5394

Total 447 species

As of March 2005:

72% of spp. identified to genus29% of spp. identified to species

Collections:NMNH, WashingtonNHM, LondonMNHN, Paris

No. species

Cicadellidae 158 Typhlocybinae 50 Cicadellinae 36 Scarinae 23 Deltocephalinae 14

Derbidae 73 Membracidae 56 Achilidae 28 Cixiidae 18Delphacidae 17Flatidae 16Psyllidae 15 Etc.

Fidicina

Litter Understorey Canopy Upper canopySpp. 30 244 205 187Ind. 427 4879 1827 3200

Species richness

Estimates of species richness(Chao1)Lit 126 spp.Und 355 spp.Can 302 spp.Upp Can 289 spp.

Rarefaction per 1,000 ind.(Coleman)Und 147 spp.Can 194 spp.Upp Can 146 spp.0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500

Cumulative no. of individuals

Mea

n no

. of s

peci

es Understorey

Litter

Canopy

Upper Canopy

Randomized species accumulation curves per habitat

CCA of well-representedhomopteran species(n = 66, 20 ind.) ordered by sites

Athestia

-1.5 +2.0

-1.5

+1.5

Distance

NDVIBasal Area

Plant Species

Illumination

B2

R1

B1

C3

I1

C2C1

R3R2

Total inertia = 1.508Sum eigenvalues CCA = 1.050(69% of variance, p = 0.03)Axis 1 & 2 = 60% (42%) of CCA

Result similar with sticky trapsfor first replication(better calibrating but loss of information)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Specialist Strata +Site

Specialist Strata -Generalist Site

Generalist Strata- Specialist Site

Generalist Strata+ Site

No.

of s

peci

es

0

100

200

300

400

500

0 3 6 9 12

No. of sites

No.

of i

nd. c

olle

cted

per

spe

cies

r = 0.43, p < 0.001

Correlation between siteoccupancy and population size

Extreme specialists uncommonWhen specialization occurs,more likely to be related to strata(habitat) than site

But need to refine analyses(habitat definition)

Criteria:• 97 spp. with ind. 12• Specialists: 90% of population concentrated in one strata/site• No. of states identical: 3 strata (L+UND), sites grouped into 3 larger sites (location)

No. of extreme specialists: 9 (9%)

No. of strata specialists: 30 (31%)

No. of site specialists: 12 (12%)

No. of extreme generalists: 37 (38%)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Several strata+ sites

All strata,several sites

Severalstrata, all

sites

All strata +sites

No.

of s

peci

es

Summary of species distribution

• Xylophagous insects

• Among largest living genera with 2,500 living species

• 1,200 known species in the Neotropics

• Actually 58 spp. known for Panama

Agrilus n. sp.

Comments on the genus Agrilus Curtis, 1825

• Rearing of xylophagous larvae• Lure traps for bees• Berlese-Tullgren• Winkler extractors• Beating tray• Hand collecting/netting• Pitfall traps• Windows traps (ground and aerial)• Sticky traps• Light traps• Malaise traps• Fogging

Collecting methods used(efficient results in red)

Agrilus n. sp.

% ind. collected per collecting method

19%

75%

2%

4%

fogging

sticky trap

window trap

hand-collecting

Agrilus jenningsi

% METHODS

3125414110TOT

 11   A. n. sp. 12

1   1 A. n. sp. 11

4   4 A. n. sp. 10

3   3 A. n. sp. 9

2   2 A. n. sp. 8

 1 1  A. n. sp. 7

1   1 A. n. sp. 6

1 1   A. n. sp. 5

1   1 A. n. sp. 4

 191 126A. n. sp. 3

22  22A. n. sp. 2

12  12A. n. sp. 1

1 1   A. crapulellus

5   5 A. viridicephalus

1   1 A. turrialbensis

3   3 A. raventazonus

1   1 A. jenningsi

1   1 A. confusus

3   3 A. basilaris

soilcanopyhand coll.window

trapsticky trapfoggingsp.

Captures

Tab. 1

26%

63%

11%

specie già note

n. sp.

sp. 1°segnalazione

56 specimensbelonging to 19 species

3125414110TOT

 11   A. n. sp. 12

1   1 A. n. sp. 11

4   4 A. n. sp. 10

3   3 A. n. sp. 9

2   2 A. n. sp. 8

 1 1  A. n. sp. 7

1   1 A. n. sp. 6

1 1   A. n. sp. 5

1   1 A. n. sp. 4

 191 126A. n. sp. 3

22  22A. n. sp. 2

12  12A. n. sp. 1

1 1   A. crapulellus

5   5 A. viridicephalus

1   1 A. turrialbensis

3   3 A. raventazonus

1   1 A. jenningsi

1   1 A. confusus

3   3 A. basilaris

soilcanopyhand coll.window

trapsticky trapfoggingsp.

Tab. 3

02468

1012141618

sp suolo

sp canopy

Understorey/canopy

14.36std error

58.37interpolated

1sp in 5 exx.

2sp in 4 exx.

4sp in 3 exx.

1sp in 2 exx.

10sp in 1 ex.

19tot sp observed

Agrilus basilaris

No. of species expected withthe Burnham & Overton method

• Each collecting method is biased towards particular group/species,

with concomitant problems in the analysis of spatial patterns• More activity at the level of the litter and upper canopy• Gap in arthropod activity between the upper canopy and lower foliage• Patterns of stratification differ among taxonomical and ecological

groups• Incident light along the vertical profile is a good predictor of

arthropod abundance (but there may be better variables)

Conclusions - Sticky traps

• Stratification is obvious at the level of families, subfamilies and species• More species collected in the understorey, rarefaction similar for

understorey and upper canopy; mid-canopy enriched• Fungal/root feeders > understorey, meristem feeders > upper canopy• Distance (floristic composition, NDVI?) and illumination of sites

important, not the number of plant species per se• Extreme specialists not common, specialization more towards

strata than site

Conclusions - homopteran bugs

Conclusions - Agrilus

Tree-fall gap in S. Lorenzo

Agrilus n. sp.

• Needs for specialized techniques

for some groups, such as Agrilus• Agrilus fauna very poorly known

in Panama• The Agrilus fauna of the canopy is

poorer than expected• The Agrilus fauna in the understorey is

richer than the canopy, both in specimens

and in species • Importance of tree-fall gaps

for biodiversity

Part of IBISCA participants during the field replication of May 2004

Acknowledgements: our sponsors, the IBISCA team and taxonomic help:D. Burckhardt, S. McKamey, L. O’Brien, C. Simon & M. Webb