The National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) will monitor ground beetle populations across a network of broadly distributed sites because beetles are prevalent in food webs, are sensitive to abiotic factors, and have an established role as indicator species of habitat and climatic shifts. We describe the design of ground beetle population sampling in the context of NEON's long-term, continentalscale monitoring program, emphasizing the sampling design, priorities, and collection methods. Freely available NEON ground beetle data and associated field and laboratory samples will increase scientific understanding of how biological communities are responding to land-use and climate change. © 2017 Hoekman et al.

Conservation of biological diversity under the natural disturbance model of boreal forest management relies on the assumption that natural mosaics of stand composition and structure can be adequately recreated through forest management activities. Maintaining compositional and structural features that provide adequate habitat for species within managed stands is the basis of coarse-filter conservation strategies. Here we test the effect of stand composition and stand structure on the epigaeic arthropod fauna from four boreal mixedwood cover types in western Canada. We observed differences in epigaeic community composition and species-specific associations among each of the four cover types. Differences in the carabid fauna between cover types were defined by relative abundance of carabid species associated specifically with moss cover, forb cover, and of coarse woody material, rather than unique, stand-specific species compositions of the overstory. Cover-type differences were less apparent among the comparatively species-rich spider assemblages largely because of their low abundance in undisturbed stands. For the effective conservation of all species, our results suggest that coarse-filter management of mixedwood boreal forests must incorporate structural features beyond overstory canopy composition. Our analyses also suggest that activities directed at managing the amount of coarse woody material on the ground and understory plant composition, perhaps through variable retention harvesting, is a logical first step. © 2004 NRC.

In western Canada, some forestry companies are attempting to incorporate conservation of biodiversity as a new management priority. Here we provide a review of management strategies currently implemented through a survey of companies in this region. Representatives from fourteen companies were asked to complete 30 questions designed to assess six broad issues, all of which are important for integrating biodiversity protection with timber production. Differences in provincial legislation were a major factor contributing to the prioritization of biodiversity objectives. All companies stressed that a variety of stand age classes and compositions was important for maintaining biodiversity. Green tree retention was a common approach proposed by all companies. Definitions of green tree retention varied significantly among companies, ranging from residual material left following standard clearcutting to merchantable trees selected specifically to foster wildlife and biodiversity. Most companies have proposed some monitoring aimed at biodiversity, although most plans target habitat structural features rather than directly monitoring species. © 2003 NRC.

Cost-effective and ecologically sensitive monitoring techniques are required to assess effects of anthropogenic disturbances on biodiversity. Pitfall trapping is widely used in biodiversity monitoring programs to measure the diversity of organisms active within leaf-litter. We compared catch rates and species richness of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae), rove beetles (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae), and spiders (Araneae) across five different diameters of pitfall traps (4.5, 6.5, 11, 15, and 20 cm) and three sizes of rain covers (64, 79.2, and 225 cm²) to determine optimal trap size for studying litter-dwelling arthropod biodiversity. In general, larger pitfall traps collected more individuals, and more species, of all three taxa. Further tests on data standardized to trap circumference showed that catch rates are not directly proportional to trap size, and even the smallest traps collected a disproportionately high number of certain taxa. When catch rate data were standardized by trap circumference smaller traps collected more small-bodied carabid and staphylinid species and large traps collected more wolf spiders (Lycosidae) than smaller traps. Roof size had no effect on species richness or catch rate of beetles or spiders. For the purposes of ecological monitoring, using more small pitfall traps would be the most efficient sampling technique to characterize the dominant epigaeic arthropod fauna; small traps collect few nontarget vertebrates, and sorting the samples involves generally less processing time. From a conservation perspective, however, including several large pitfall traps in the sampling regime would help detect rare species.