Journal
INSECTS
Volume 9, Issue 4, Pages -Publisher
MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/insects9040186
Keywords
BioSCAN; California; iNaturalist; Lepidoptera; Los Angeles; Malaise trap; Pollard walk
Categories
Funding
- Natural History Museum of Los Angeles (NHMLA)
- Seaver Institute
- NHMLA
- La Kretz center of the University of California, Los Angeles
Ask authors/readers for more resources
By 2030, ten percent of earth's landmass will be occupied by cities. Urban environments can be home to many plants and animals, but surveying and estimating biodiversity in these spaces is complicated by a heterogeneous built environment where access and landscaping are highly variable due to human activity. Citizen science approaches may be the best way to assess urban biodiversity, but little is known about their relative effectiveness and efficiency. Here, we compare three techniques for acquiring data on butterfly (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera) species richness: trained volunteer Pollard walks, Malaise trapping with expert identification, and crowd-sourced iNaturalist observations. A total of 30 butterfly species were observed; 27 (90%) were recorded by Pollard walk observers, 18 (60%) were found in Malaise traps, and 22 (73%) were reported by iNaturalist observers. Pollard walks reported the highest butterfly species richness, followed by iNaturalist and then Malaise traps during the four-month time period. Pollard walks also had significantly higher species diversity than Malaise traps.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available