Suction samplers for grassland invertebrates: comparison of numbers caught using Vortis ™ and G-vac devices

Eman Zentane, Henry Quenu, Robert I. Graham, Andrew Cherrill

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal Article

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

1. The efficiency of Vortis™ and a modified garden leaf-blower/vacuum ‘G-vac’ sampler were compared by sampling invertebrates using standardised sample areas and suction times at three grassland sites. The G-vac caught more individuals of Araneae, Auchenorrhyncha, Thysanoptera and Hymenoptera than the Vortis. Numbers of Diptera did not differ between devices, but the Vortis™ captured greater numbers of Coleoptera.
2. Estimated air velocity within the collecting nozzle was greater for the G-vac and its mode of application resulted in greater disturbance of the grass sward than with the Vortis™. These differences may have contributed to the larger captures of certain taxa by the G-vac.
3. It is concluded that G-vacs can be applied with confidence as a credible alternative to the bespoke Vortis™, and particularly for taxa which are most frequently sampled using suction samplers.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)470-474
Number of pages5
JournalInsect Conservation and Diversity
Volume9
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2016
Externally publishedYes

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • Blo-Vac
  • D-vac
  • G-vac
  • Vortis ™
  • grassland insects
  • vacuum sample

Cite this