ArticleEcology and evolution2026
Fogging and Flight Interception Traps-The Evaluation of Two Methods to Collect Canopy Arthropods.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2026. 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
The forest canopy is a crucial habitat for a wide variety of species. However, it remains difficult to assess due to significant methodological challenges and uncertainties. Flight intercept traps (FITs) and insecticidal knockdown (FOGGING) are among the most widely used techniques for sampling canopy arthropods, yet systematic comparisons of their taxonomic and ecological coverage remain scarce. We sampled arthropods over 3 months in nine forest plots in the Schorfheide-Chorin Biosphere Reserve, Germany, using both methods on two dominant tree species. A single FIT covered only a small portion of the crown and yielded on average ~100 individuals per month, dominated by Diptera, with a June peak of Coleoptera. In contrast, FOGGING targets entire tree crowns, capturing 1000 individuals on average, providing a broader and more balanced representation of arthropod communities across orders throughout the season. When Coleoptera was used as the target taxon, FOGGING achieved substantially higher sample coverage across families, genera and species than FITs, which primarily collected highly mobile taxa (e.g., Elateridae) and xylobionts (e.g.,
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.