Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details

Mammalia

Editor-in-Chief: Denys, Christiane


IMPACT FACTOR 2015: 0.538
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.786

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.482
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.555
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2015: 0.723

99,00 € / $149.00 / £75.00*

Online
ISSN
1864-1547
See all formats and pricing

 


Select Volume and Issue

Issues

30,00 € / $42.00 / £23.00

Get Access to Full Text

Differential trapping success for small mammals using pitfall and standard cage traps in a woodland savannah region of southwestern Brazil

1 / Rodrigo P. Nápoli2 / Wellington Hannibal3

1Laboratory of Mammal and Bird Ecology, Departamento de Biologia, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Camobi, Santa Maria, RS, 97.110-970, Brazil

2Bioconsult, R. Major Virgolino Esmanhotto, 160/301B, Vista Alegre, Curitiba, PR, 80.820-370, Brazil

3Programa de Pós-Graduação em Biodiversidade Animal, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Camobi, Santa Maria, RS, 97.110-970, Brazil

Citation Information: mammalia. Volume 75, Issue 1, Pages 45–52, ISSN (Online) 1864-1547, ISSN (Print) 0025-1461, DOI: 10.1515/mamm.2010.069, December 2010

Publication History

Published Online:
2010-12-21

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of different trapping methodologies for sampling small mammals, consisting of trap type (pitfall, Sherman, and wire traps) and position (ground and understorey) in the Cerrado biome of Brazil. Five fragments of woodland savannah were selected for the study. We captured a total of 364 individuals of 14 species of small mammals. Pitfall traps sampled all 14 species (100%), whereas ground cage traps sampled 8 species (57%), and arboreal traps sampled 5 species (36%). The sampling methodologies gave significantly different results, particularly between pitfall and cage traps, and between ground and arboreal cage traps. However, the comparison between Sherman and wire traps indicated no significant difference, although abundance has been higher for wire cages. Our study confirms the high success rate for pitfall traps now in the Cerrado biome and suggests combinations of trapping methodologies for surveying mammalian diversity.

Keywords: Cerrado biome; Cryptonanus agricolai; Monodelphis kunsi; Thylamys macrurus; Sherman trap efficacy

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Rita Gomes Rocha, Juliana Justino, Yuri Luiz Reis Leite, and Leonora Pires Costa
Systematics and Biodiversity, 2015, Volume 13, Number 4, Page 403
[2]
John D. Harder, Joy K. Kotheimer, and Ian M. Hamilton
Northeastern Naturalist, 2014, Volume 21, Number 2, Page 210
[3]
Paula S. Martin, Carla Gheler-Costa, Paula C. Lopes, Luís M. Rosalino, and Luciano M. Verdade
Forest Ecology and Management, 2012, Volume 282, Page 185
[4]
R. Napoli and N. Caceres
Community Ecology, 2012, Volume 13, Number 1, Page 11
[5]
G. Melo, J. Sponchiado, A. Machado, and N. Cáceres
Community Ecology, 2011, Volume 12, Number 1, Page 58

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.