Monday, December 11, 2006 - 8:35 AM
0317

Comparing passive trap methods for monitoring native bees in Maryland and Delaware

Catherine Stragar, cec@udel.edu1, Dewey Caron, dmcaron@udel.edu1, and Sam Droege2. (1) University of Delaware, Entomology and Wildlife Ecology, 250 Townsend Hall, Newark, DE, (2) USGS, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, BARC-EAST Bldg 308 room 124, 10300 Bart. Ave, Beltsville, MD

We are sampling naturally occurring, non-Apis bees in three different sites and employing three different sampling methods. We are comparing how three different methods caught bees within three different communities. The community composition differences in each site let us test the trap for how that method caught different bees. The three different sites are, Cucurbit fields in Sussex County Delaware, the Nanticoke Wildlife Management Area in Sussex Delaware, and Wye Island Natural Resources Management Area in Queen Anne's County Maryland.The three methods we will use for collecting bees are, hand netting, bee bowls and Springstar blue vane traps. We will compare bee bowls and Springstar blue vane traps, both of these are passive, visually attractive, bee trapping methods, to determine the similarity of the community composition and species abundance within each sample method. On each site a block design contains a 50 meter transect of bee bowls and a 50 meter transect of Springstar blue vane traps. One half hour of hand netting also occurs on each transect. Methods will be compared within each site. All samples from each site on each trial date will be pooled to determine seasonal species composition, species richness, and relative abundance for each species. Methods will be assessed for how well they monitor species composition, species richness and relative abundance for each species.


Species 1: Hymenoptera Apidae