A comparison of four sampling techniques for assessing species richness of adult odonates at riverbanks
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Members of the insect order Odonata are known as good ecological indicators. Many are sensitive to habitat modifications and are easily monitored for use in environmental assessment studies. Rapid assessments rely on efficient sampling techniques. However, there is limited information available on sampling techniques for adult odonates, and protocols require evaluation. To do this, we standardized counting methods during sampling of odonates from August to November 2016 at the Mula River, Pune, India. We used four counting techniques; full-width belt transect (FWBT), full-circle point count (FCPC), half-width belt transect (HWBT), and half-circle point count (HCPC). For HWBT and HCPC areas facing the river were sampled, and for each technique we took multiple temporal replicates. We compared species detected per unit time, species detected per unit area, new species detected per unit time, and new species detected per unit area. Additionally, we compared species estimates. With HCPC we detected the maximum number of species and new species per unit area, whereas FWBT returned maximum coverage of recorded species. We recommend our proposed techniques be considered in the future across various habitats to decide the most suitable sampling strategy for the different habitats or situations.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors own the copyright to the articles published in JoTT. This is indicated explicitly in each publication. The authors grant permission to the publisher Wildlife Information Liaison Development (WILD) Society to publish the article in the Journal of Threatened Taxa. The authors recognize WILD as the original publisher, and to sell hard copies of the Journal and article to any buyer. JoTT is registered under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY), which allows authors to retain copyright ownership. Under this license the authors allow anyone to download, cite, use the data, modify, reprint, copy and distribute provided the authors and source of publication are credited through appropriate citations (e.g., Son et al. (2016). Bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) of the southeastern Truong Son Mountains, Quang Ngai Province, Vietnam. Journal of Threatened Taxa 8(7): 8953–8969. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.2785.8.7.8953-8969). Users of the data do not require specific permission from the authors or the publisher.
References
Almeida, M.V.O. de, Â.P. Pinto, A. do Lago Carvalho, D.M. Takiya (2013).
When rare is just a matter of sampling: unexpected dominance of clubtail
dragonflies (Odonata, Gomphidae through different collecting methods at Parque Nacional da Serra do Cipó, Minas Gerais State, Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Entomologia 57(4): 417–423. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0085-56262013005000042
Angold, P.G., J.P. Sadler, M.O. Hill, A. Pullin, S. Rushton, K. Austin & K. Thompson (2006). Biodiversity in urban habitat patches. Science of the Total Environment 360(1–3): 196–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2005.08.035
Bolund, P. & S. Hunhammar (1999). Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecological Economics 29(2): 293–301.
Bried, J.T. & G.N. Ervin (2006). Abundance patterns of dragonflies along a
wetland buffer. Wetlands 26: 878–883. https://doi.org/10.1672/0277-5212(2006)26[878:APODAA]2.0.CO;2
Bried, J.T., B.J. Hager, P.D. Hunt, J.N. Fox, H.J. Jensen & K.M. Vowels (2012). Bias of reduced-effort community surveys for adult Odonata of lentic
waters. Insect Conservation and Diversity 5: 213–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-4598.2011.00156.x
Chao, A. (1984). Non-parametric estimation of the number of classes in a population. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 11(4): 265–270.
Chao, A. (1987). Estimating the population size for capture-recapture data with unequal catchability. Biometrics 43(4): 783–791.
Chovanec, A., M. Schindler, J. Waringer & R. Wimmer (2015). The Dragonfly Association Index (Insecta: Odonata) — a tool for the type‐specific assessment of lowland rivers. River Research and Applications 31(5): 627–638. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.2760
Colwell, R.K. & J.A. Coddington (1994). Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 345(1311): 101–118. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1994.0091
Corbet, P.S. (1962). A Biology of Dragonflies. Witherby, London, 247 pp.
Córdoba-Aguilar, A. & M. Rocha-Ortega (2019). Damselfly (Odonata: Calopterygidae) population decline in an urbanizing watershed. Journal of Insect Science 19(3): 30. https://doi.org/10.1093/jisesa/iez063
da Silva-Méndez, G., S. Riso, M.O. Lorenzo-Carballa & A. Cordero-Rivera (2022). Sampling larvae, exuviae or adults of Odonata for ecological studies: a test of methods in permanent rivers in the Iberian Peninsula. Odonatologica 51(1–2): 63–81. https://doi.org/10.5281/odon.v51i1-2.a4
Hammer, Ø., D.A.T. Harper & P.D. Ryan (2008). PAST- palaeontological statistics, ver. 1.89. Paleontological Museum, University of Oslo, Noruega.
Johnson, P.T., J.T. Hoverman, V.J. McKenzie, A.R. Blaustein & K.L. Richgels (2013). Urbanization and wetland communities: applying metacommunity theory to understand the local and landscape effects. Journal of Applied Ecology 50(1): 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12022
Subramanian, K.A. (2005). Dragonflies and damselflies of Peninsular India-A field guide. E-Book of Project Lifescape. Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science and Indian Academy of Sciences, Bangalore, India, 118 pp.
Koparde, P. (2016). Damsels in distress–seasons, habitat structure and water pollution changes damselfly diversity and assemblage in urban wetlands. Animal Biology 66(3–4): 305–319. https://doi.org/10.1163/15707563-00002506
Kulkarni, A. & K.A. Subramanian (2013). Habitat and seasonal distribution of Odonata (Insecta) of Mula and Mutha river basins, Maharashtra, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 5(7): 4084–4095. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o3253.4084-95
Kumar, A. & V. Khanna (1983). A review of the taxonomy and ecology of Odonata larvae from India. Oriental Insects 17(1): 127–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/00305316.1983.10433694
Kutcher, T.E. & J.T. Bried (2014). Adult Odonata conservatism as an indicator of freshwater wetland condition. Ecological Indicators 38: 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.10.028
McAleece, N., P.J.D. Lambshead, G.L.J. Paterson & J.D. Gage (1997). Biodiversity Pro: free statistics software for ecology. The Natural History Museum and the Scottish Association for Marine Science, UK.
McKinney, M.L. (2008). Effects of urbanization on species richness: a review of plants and animals. Urban Ecosystems 11(2):161–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-007-0045-4
Monteiro-Júnior, C.S., L. Juen & N. Hamada (2014). Effects of urbanization on stream habitats and associated adult dragonfly and damselfly communities in central Brazilian Amazonia. Landscape & Urban Planning 127: 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.03.006
Oertli, B. (2008). The use of dragonflies in the assessment and monitoring of aquatic habitats, pp.79–95. In: Dragonflies and Damselflies: Model Organisms for Ecological and Evolutionary Research. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Oppel, S. (2006). Using distance sampling to quantify Odonata density in tropical rainforests. International Journal of Odonatology 9(1): 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/13887890.2006.9748265
Panzer, R., D. Stillwaugh, D. Taron & M. Manner (2005). Dragonfly Monitoring Guidelines for the Chicago Region. 19 pp.
Patten, M.A., J.T. Bried, B.D. Smith Patten (2015). Survey data matter:
predicted niche of adult vs breeding Odonata. Freshwater Science 34,
–1122. https://doi.org/10.1086/682676
R Core Team (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org/.
Simaika, J.P. & M.J. Samways (2011). Comparative assessment of indices of freshwater habitat conditions using different invertebrate taxon sets. Ecological Indicators 11(2): 370–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.06.005
Simaika, J.P. & M.J. Samways (2012). Using dragonflies to monitor and prioritize lotic systems: a South African perspective. Organisms Diversity & Evolution 12(3): 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13127-012-0104-4
Smallshire, D. & T. Beynon (2010). Dragonfly Monitoring Scheme Manual. British Dragonfly Society, 12 pp.
Stoks , R. & A. Córdoba-Aguilar (2012). Evolutionary ecology of Odonata: a complex life cycle perspective. Annual Review of Entomology 57: 249–265. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-120710-100557
Suhling, F., G. Sahlén, S. Gorb, V. Kalkman, K.D.B. Dijkstra & van Tol J. (2015). Order Odonata, pp. 893–932. In: Thorp, J., & C. Rogers (Eds.). Thorp and Covich’s Freshwater Invertebrates – Volume I (Fourth Edition). Academic Press, London.
Sutherland, W.J. (Eds.) (2006). Ecological Census Techniques: A Handbook. Second Edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 432 pp.
Valente-Neto, F., F. de Oliveira Roque, M.E. Rodrigues, L. Juen & C.M. Swan (2016). Toward a practical use of Neotropical odonates as bioindicators: testing congruence across taxonomic resolution and life stages. Ecological Indicators 61(2): 952–959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.10.052