The interaction of arthropods with the environment and the management of their populations is a focus of the ecological agenda. Spatial autocorrelation and under-sampling may generate bias and, when they are ignored, it is hard to determine if results can in any way be trusted. Arthropod communities were studied during two seasons and using two methods: window and panel traps, in an area of ancient temperate lowland woodland of Zebracka (Czech Republic). The composition of arthropod communities was studied focusing on four site level variables (canopy openness, diameter in the breast height and height of tree, and water distance) and finally analysed using two approaches: with and without effects of spatial autocorrelation. I found that the proportion of variance explained by space cannot be ignored (≈20% in both years). Potential bias in analyses of the response of arthropods to site level variables without including spatial co-variables is well illustrated by redundancy analyses. Inclusion of space led to more accurate results, as water distance and tree diameter were significant, showing approximately the same ratio of explained variance and direction in both seasons. Results without spatial co-variables were much more disordered and were difficult to explain. This study showed that neglecting the effects of spatial autocorrelation could lead to wrong conclusions in site level studies and, furthermore, that inclusion of space may lead to more accurate and unambiguous outcomes. Rarefactions showed that lower sampling intensity, when appropriately designed, can produce sufficient results without exploitation of the environment.

Department of Forest Protection and Entomology Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences Czech University of Life Sciences Prague Prague Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Samways M (2007) Insect conservation: a synthetic management approach. Annual Review of Entomology 52: 465–487. PubMed

Gotelli NJ, Colwell RK (2001) Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecology Letters 4: 379–391.

Diniz-Filho JAF, Bini LM, Hawkins B (2002) Spatial autocorrelation and red herrings in geographical ecology. Global Ecology and Biogeography 12: 53–64.

Buse J, Schröder B, Assmann T (2007) Modelling habitat and spatial distribution of an endangered longhorn beetle – a case study for saproxylic insect conservation. Biological Conservation 137: 372–381.

Horak J, Chumanova E, Hilszczanski J (2012) Saproxylic beetle thrives on the openness in management: a case study on the ecological requirements of Cucujus cinnaberinus from Central Europe. Insect Conservation and Diversity 5: 403–413.

Götmark F, Von Proschwitz T, Franc N (2008) Are small sedentary species affected by habitat fragmentation? Local vs. landscape factors predicting species richness and composition of land molluscs in Swedish conservation forests. Journal of Biogeography 35: 1062–1076.

WallisDeVries MF (2004) A quantitative conservation approach for the endangered butterfly Maculinea alcon . Conservation Biology 18: 489–499.

Barbaro L, Rossi JP, Vetillard F, Nezan J, Jactel H (2007) The spatial distribution of birds and carabid beetles in pine plantation forests: the role of landscape composition and structure. Journal of Biogeography 34: 652–664.

Legendre P (1993) Spatial autocorrelation: trouble or new paradigm? Ecology 74: 1659–1673.

Mauricio Bini L, Diniz-Filho JAF, Rangel TF, Akre TS, Albaladejo RG, et al. (2009) Coefficient shifts in geographical ecology: an empirical evaluation of spatial and non-spatial regression. Ecography 32: 193–204.

Dutilleul P, Legendre P (1993) Spatial heterogeneity against heteroscedasticity: an ecological paradigm versus a statistical concept. Oikos 66: 152–171.

Vinatier F, Tixier P, Duyck P–F, Lescourret F (2011) Factors and mechanisms explaining spatial heterogeneity: a review of methods for insect populations. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 2: 11–22.

Tscharntke T, Steffan-Dewenter I, Kruess A, Thies C (2002) Characteristics of insect populations on habitat fragments: a mini review. Ecological Research 17: 229–239.

Dormann CF, McPherson JM, Araujo MB, Bivand R, Bolliger J, et al. (2007) Methods to account for spatial autocorrelation in the analysis of species distributional data: a review. Ecography 30: 609–628.

Tobler WR (1970) A computer movie simulating urban growth in the Detroit region. Economical Geography 46: 234–240.

Hawkins BA (2012) Eight (and a half) deadly sins of spatial analysis. Journal of Biogeography 39: 1–9.

Kühn I (2007) Incorporating spatial autocorrelation may invert observed patterns. Diversity and Distributions 13: 66–69.

Horak J, Vodka S, Pavlicek J, Boza P (2013) Unexpected visitors: flightless beetles in window traps. Journal of Insect Conservation 17: 441–449.

Horak J, Rebl K (2013) The species richness of click beetles in ancient pasture woodland benefits from a high level of sun exposure. Journal of Insect Conservation 17: 307–318.

Safar J (2003) Olomoucko. Chráněná území ČR VI. AOPK ČR Praha, EkoCentrum Brno.

Hradilek Z, Duchoslav M (2007) Flóra a vegetace Národní přírodní rezervace Žebračka u Přerova. Přírodopisný Časopis Slezského Muzea Opava (A) 56: 193–226.

Horak J (2011) Response of saproxylic beetles to tree species composition in a secondary urban forest area. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 10: 213–222.

Francese JA, Oliver JB, Fraser I, Lance DR, Youssef N, et al. (2008) Influence of trap placement and design on capture of the emerald ash borer (Coleoptera: Buprestidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 101: 1831–1837. PubMed

Frazer GW, Canham CD, Lertzman KP (1999) Gap Light Analyzer (GLA): imaging software to extract canopy structure and gap light transmission indices from true-colour fisheye photographs, users manual and program documentation. Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, and the Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Millbrook, New York.

Chao A (1984) Non-parametric estimation of the number of classes in a population. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 11: 265–270.

Colwell RK (2006) EstimateS: Statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 8. Available: http://viceroy.eeb.uconn.edu/estimates. Accessed 2010 May 5.

R Development Core Team (2008) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.

ter Braak CJF, Smilauer P (2002) CANOCO reference manual and CanoDraw for Windows user’s guide: Software for Canonical Community Ordination (version 4.5). Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, NY, USA.

Leps J, Smilauer P (2003) Multivariate analysis of ecological data using CANOCO. Cambridge University Press, UK.

Borcard D, Legendre P, Drapeau P (1992) Partialling out the spatial component of ecological variation. Ecology 73: 1045–1055.

Peres-Neto PR, Legendre P, Dray S, Borcard D (2006) Variation partitioning of species data matrices: estimation and comparison of fractions. Ecology 87: 2614–2625. PubMed

Borcard D, Legendre P, Avois-Jacquet C, Tuomisto H (2004) Dissecting the spatial structure of ecological data at multiple scales. Ecology 85: 1826–1832.

Weibull AC, Ostman O, Granqvist A (2003) Species richness in agroecosystems: the effect of landscape, habitat and farm management. Biodiversity and Conservation 12: 1335–1355.

El-Sayed AM, Suckling DM, Wearing CH, Byers JA (2006) Potential of mass trapping for long-term pest management and eradication of invasive species. Journal of Economical Entomology 99: 1550–1564. PubMed

Liebhold AM, Tobin PC (2008) Population ecology of insect invasions and their management. Annual Review of Entomology 53: 387–408. PubMed

Økland B (1996) A comparison of three methods of trapping saproxylic beetles. European Journal of Entomology 93: 195–209.

Basset Y (1988) A composite interception trap for sampling arthropods in tree canopies. Journal of Australian Entomological Society 27: 213–219.

Erwin TL (1982) Tropical forests: their richness in Coleoptera and other arthropod species. Coleopterists Bulletin 36: 74.

Fric Z, Konvicka M (2007) Dispersal kernels of butterflies: Power-law functions are invariant to marking frequency. Basic and Applied Ecology 8: 377–386.

Collins MD, Simberloff D (2009) Rarefaction and non random spatial dispersion patterns. Environmental and Ecological Statistics 16: 89–103.

Hosking GP (1979) Trap comparison in the capture of flying coleopteran. New Zealand Entomologist 7: 87–92.

Lassau SA, Hochuli DF (2005) Wasp community responses to habitat complexity in Sidney sandstone forests. Australian Ecology 30: 179–187.

Peltanova A, Dvorak L, Horak J (2012) Land snail community of fruit trees or what can be found in tree trunk window traps. Acta Musei richnovensis 19: 12–16.

Økland RH (1999) On the variation explained by ordination and constrained ordination axes. Journal of Vegetation Science 10: 131–136.

Koenig WD (1999) Spatial autocorrelation of ecological phenomena. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 14: 22–26. PubMed

Frutos A, Olea PP, Vera R (2007) Analyzing and modelling spatial distribution of summering lesser kestrel: the role of spatial autocorrelation. Ecological Modelling 200: 33–.

Heikkinen RK, Luoto M, Virkkala R, Rainio K (2004) Effects of habitat cover, landscape structure and spatial variables on the abundance of birds in an agricultural-forest mosaic. Journal of Applied Ecology 41: 824–835.

Titeux N, Dufrene M, Jacob JP, Paquay M, Defourny P (2004) Multivariate analysis of a fine-scale breeding bird atlas using a geographical information system and partial canonical correspondence analysis: environmental and spatial effects. Journal of Biogeography 31: 1841–1856.

Legendre P, Legendre L (1998) Numerical ecology. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

Landis DA, Wratten SD, Gurr GM (2000) Habitat management to conserve natural enemies of arthropod pests in agriculture. Annual Review of Entomology 45: 175–201. PubMed

Southwood TRE (1962) Migration of terrestrial arthropods in relation to habitat. Biological Reviews of Cambridge Philosophical Society 37: 171–214.

Grove SJ (2002) Saproxylic insect ecology and the sustainable management of forests. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 33: 1–23.

The influence of mature oak stands and spruce plantations on soil-dwelling click beetles in lowland plantation forests

Fragmented habitats of traditional fruit orchards are important for dead wood-dependent beetles associated with open canopy deciduous woodlands