ArticlePeerJ2025
Diversity and efficacy of insect sampling methods in an urban tropical dry forest of the Colombian Caribbean.
Article in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tropical dry forests (TDFs) are among the most threatened ecosystems in Colombia and globally. Characterized by distinct dry and wet seasons, TDFs support a rich diversity of flora and fauna and offer crucial ecosystem services, despite facing significant threats such as deforestation, urbanization and climate change. This study provides a comprehensive assessment of insect diversity within an urban TDF area in Puerto Colombia, Atlántico and in the Colombian Caribbean, by comparing three traditional sampling methods: Malaise traps, pitfall traps, and canopy fogging. In total, 3,135 insects were collected, representing 413 morphospecies across various trophic guilds. Our findings indicate that Malaise traps were the most effective in capturing a diverse range of species, followed by pitfall traps, while canopy fogging yielded the lowest species richness. Each method captured unique species, demonstrating that these methods are complementary in capturing the full spectrum of insect diversity in TDFs. Additionally, our study contributes valuable data on the taxonomic and functional diversity of insects in this continuously threatened ecosystem, underscoring the need for conservation efforts in urban and peri-urban TDFs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.