The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Trap Spacing and Transect Design for Dung Beetle Biodiversity Studies1
Abstract
Standardized sampling methods are essential for comparing species diversity and abundance patterns across different studies and sites. Although dung beetles are widely used as a focal taxon in biodiversity studies, nothing appears to be known about the effective sampling area of dung‐baited traps. Mark‐recapture experiments using Canthon acutus showed that at least 50 m between traps should minimize trap interference, and that wind affects trap detectability. Consequently, we propose a standardized dung beetle sampling design.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Extinction order and altered community structure rapidly disrupt ecosystem functioning
Larsen, T. H., Williams, N. M., & Kremen, C. (2005) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00749.x · Cited by 695
Self-citationEdwards, D. P., Larsen, T. H., Docherty, T. D. S., Ansell, F. A., Hsu, W. W., Derhé, M. A., Hamer, K. C., & Wilcove, D. S. (2011) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.1062 · Cited by 360
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Larsen, T. H., & Forsyth, A.
- Venue
- Biotropica
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-05-18
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 322-325
- ISSN
- 0006-3606 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-7429
- OpenAlex
- W1970037450
- Cited by
- 354
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Trap Spacing and Transect Design for Dung Beetle Biodiversity Studies1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1744-7429.2005.00042.x
- The paper
- Larsen, T. H., & Forsyth, A. (2005). Trap Spacing and Transect Design for Dung Beetle Biodiversity Studies1. Biotropica. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7429.2005.00042.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
