Quantifying Corticolous Arthropods Using Sticky Traps
January 19th, 2020
We describe a semi-quantitative approach of measuring characteristics of corticolous (bark-dwelling) arthropod communities. We placed commercially manufactured sticky traps on tree boles to estimate abundance, total length (a surrogate to biomass), richness, and Shannon diversity for comparison among tree species.
This protocol can be used to estimate short and long term community structure of corticolous arthropods. This technique is useful for capturing both flying and crawling arthropods and facilitates easy laboratory analysis. To begin this procedure measure the diameter of a tree at breast height.
Use a bark shaver to begin removing the bark at this height in each cardinal direction in an area the size of the pre-manufactured sticky trap. Continue shaving until the area is smooth enough to staple the sticky trap onto the tree with minimal space underneath that arthropods could crawl into. Next use a dark colored permanent market to label the back of the trap with the date, trap number, location, and any other pertinent information.
To trap both flying and crawling arthropods open and remove the sides and cover up the sticky trap by cutting the cardboard along the edge of the sticky material. To exclude flying arthropods from landing directly on the trap open the trap as directed on the box. Place one trap on each previously shaved location so that the openings are oriented vertically to maximize the capture of arthropods crawling up and down the tree boles.
For traps with the tops removed to capture both flying and crawling arthropods orient the traps so that the end where the opening was is oriented vertically to maintain trapping consistency. Then staple the traps to the tree by placing one staple at each corner and one staple in the center bottom and one in the center top of the trap starting with the bottom right corner and working clockwise. Take care to ensure that the entire bottom and top of each trap is flush against the tree to minimize arthropods crawling underneath.
Leave the traps in place for the desired amount of time making sure to leave all traps for the same amount of time. After the desired amount of time has passed cover the entire trap except for the staples with polymer cellulose film. Remove each trap by taking a large flat screwdriver and prying each staple partially from the tree.
Then use large needle-nose pliers or a similar grasping tool to pull the staples from the tree. Alternatively to exclude flying arthropods close the trap following the directions on the back of the box. Place the traps in a rigid box to transport them back to the laboratory for analysis.
If traps are to be stored for more than 12 hours place them in a freezer to preserve their contents. Using a dissection scope examine the contents of a trap recording the number of individuals to the desired taxonomic level. Use the recorded data to estimate richness, diversity indices, or abundance.
If estimated biomass is desired measure the length and width of the arthropods to the nearest millimeter and use published length and width biomass regressions to estimate biomass. Subtract the total width of the traps from the measured diameter for each tree to estimate trapping effort for each tree. As the samples from multiple traps on the same tree are not independent either sum all of the samples from the same tree or include an individual tree as a random variable in all analysis to avoid pseudo-replication.
Based on the mixed model results the model that included tree species best explained variation and total arthropod length, abundance, and diversity. Neither of the independent variables explained substantial variation in richness, although the models that included tree species trapping effort were competitive with the null model. In addition proportion of the tree trapped appears to have no influence on abundance, total length, and Shannon diversity with only minimal influence on richness.
The standard error of the main for total arthropod length varied from four percent of the mean in tulip poplar to 17%in sugar maple. Abundance had similar levels of variation within species where the standard error of the mean is seven percent in tulip poplar and 18%in sugar maple. Conversely variability in arthropod richness and diversity was much lower within species of tree.
In that the standard error of the mean of richness ranged from four percent of the mean for pignut hickory to nine percent of the mean in American beach. While diversity ranged from four percent of the mean in American beach to seven percent of the mean in tulip poplar. When shaving the bark from the tree be certain to shave the area as smooth as possible and minimize any gaps between the tree and the edge of the trap.
View the full transcript and gain access to thousands of scientific videos
Overview
This protocol outlines a semi-quantitative method for assessing corticolous arthropod communities using sticky traps. It allows for the estimation of abundance, total length, richness, and diversity across different tree species.
Key Study Components
Area of Science
- Ecology
- Entomology
- Community Structure
Background
- Corticolous arthropods inhabit the bark of trees.
- Understanding their community structure is essential for ecological studies.
- Sticky traps are effective for capturing various arthropod species.
- This method can provide insights into biodiversity and ecosystem health.
Purpose of Study
- To measure characteristics of bark-dwelling arthropod communities.
- To compare arthropod communities among different tree species.
- To develop a standardized method for community assessment.
Methods Used
- Measure tree diameter at breast height.
- Remove bark in a specified area to attach sticky traps.
- Label traps with relevant information for tracking.
- Collect and analyze trapped arthropods in the laboratory.
Main Results
- Estimates of arthropod abundance and diversity were obtained.
- Richness varied significantly among different tree species.
- The method proved effective for both flying and crawling arthropods.
- Data can inform ecological management and conservation efforts.
Conclusions
- The semi-quantitative approach is reliable for studying arthropod communities.
- Sticky traps are a practical tool for ecological research.
- This method can enhance understanding of biodiversity in forest ecosystems.
Frequently Asked Questions
Executive Industry Relevance
This method provides a standardized, reproducible approach for quantifying arthropod community metrics in ecological research, supporting target validation in environmental risk assessment and biomarker discovery pipelines. By enabling precise measurement of abundance, biomass surrogates, richness, and diversity across tree species, it facilitates mechanistic de-risking in studies linking arthropod activity to ecosystem health indicators. The technique’s compatibility with mixed-model analysis and low standard error (<20% of mean) enhances predictive confidence in cross-species comparisons, informing portfolio decisions in agrochemical and biopesticide development.
Strategic Applications in Biopharma R&D
Early Discovery & Target Validation
- Scientific Value: Enables interrogation of ecological hypotheses regarding arthropod community structure as a function of tree species, supporting target validation in environmental toxicology.
- Operational Value: Provides quantitative outputs (abundance, total length, richness, Shannon diversity) with measurable precision, reducing variability in early-stage screening.
Screening & Assay Development
- Scientific Value: Generates standardized, comparable datasets across tree species, enabling assay readiness for arthropod-based bioindicators.
- Operational Value: Uses commercially manufactured sticky traps, ensuring logistical simplicity, reproducibility, and scalability for high-throughput environmental monitoring.
Translational & Preclinical Research
- Scientific Value: Supports translational biomarker development by linking arthropod community shifts to environmental stressors, enabling risk-adjusted advancement decisions.
- Operational Value: Facilitates continuity from discovery to preclinical validation through consistent sampling design and minimal pseudo-replication via mixed-model adjustments.
Pipeline & Workflow Integration
The method integrates into environmental toxicology workflows from hypothesis testing through lead identification, providing quantitative community metrics that inform mechanistic understanding of compound effects on non-target arthropods.
- Discovery Biology: Supports hypothesis testing on arthropod community responses to tree species, enabling pathway clarification in ecotoxicological mechanisms.
- Screening: Delivers reproducible, quantitative outputs (total length as biomass surrogate, abundance, diversity) essential for comparing treatment effects across environmental conditions.
- Analytics: Enables statistical comparison via mixed models, accounting for trapping effort and tree as random variable, ensuring valid cross-species inferences.
- Translational Research: Connects arthropod metrics to ecosystem health indicators, supporting biomarker alignment in environmental risk assessment.
- Enterprise Reuse: Establishes a reusable platform for standardized arthropod sampling across forest ecosystems, reducing methodological variability in multi-site studies.
Operational & Enterprise Impact
- Scientific Value: Increases predictive confidence in arthropod community assessments, reducing mechanistic ambiguity in environmental impact studies.
- Operational Value: Ensures standardization, reproducibility, and scalability through use of pre-manufactured traps and consistent bark preparation.
- Strategic Value: Improves go/no-go decisions in agrochemical development by quantifying non-target arthropod effects with measurable precision.
- Portfolio Impact: Enables risk-based prioritization of compounds using arthropod community metrics as early-warning indicators of ecological disruption.
Implementation Considerations
- Requires expertise in entomological sampling, tree identification, and microscopic arthropod identification.
- Needs dissection scope, measuring tools, stapling equipment, and polymer cellulose film for trap preservation.
- Demands cross-team standardization in trap deployment duration, bark shaving consistency, and data analysis protocols.
- Requires adjustment for pseudo-replication when multiple traps are used per tree, either by summing samples or including tree as random variable.
- Limited to arthropods interacting with tree boles; does not capture canopy or soil-dwelling species without methodological adaptation.
