Next Article in Journal
Methodology for the Surveillance the Voltage Supply in Public Buildings Using the ITIC Curve and Python Programming
Previous Article in Journal
Explainable Machine Learning for Financial Distress Prediction: Evidence from Vietnam
 
 
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Data Descriptor

Dataset: Coleoptera (Insecta) Collected from Beer Traps in “Smolny” National Park (Russia)

1
Joint Directorate of the Mordovia State Nature Reserve and National Park “Smolny”, 430005 Saransk, Russia
2
Prisursky State Nature Reserve, 428034 Cheboksary, Russia
3
Papanin Institute for Biology of Inland Waters, Russian Academy of Sciences, 152742 Borok, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Data 2022, 7(11), 161; https://doi.org/10.3390/data7110161
Received: 15 October 2022 / Revised: 12 November 2022 / Accepted: 14 November 2022 / Published: 15 November 2022

Abstract

:
Monitoring Coleoptera diversity in protected areas is part of the global ecological monitoring of the state of ecosystems. The purpose of this research is to describe the biodiversity of Coleoptera studied with the help of baits based on fermented substrate in the European part of Russia (Smolny National Park). The research was conducted April–August 2018–2022. Samples were collected in traps of our own design. Beer or wine with the addition of sugar, honey, or jam was used for bait. A total of 194 traps were installed. The dataset contains 1254 occurrences. A total of 9226 Coleoptera specimens have been studied. The dataset contains information about 134 species from 24 Coleoptera families. The largest number of species that have been found in traps belongs to the family Cerambycidae (30 species), Nitidulidae (14 species), Elateridae (12 species), and Curculionidae and Coccinellidae (10 species each). The number of individuals in the traps of these families was distributed as follows: Cerambycidae—1018 specimens; Nitidulidae—5359; Staphylinidae—241; Elateridae—33; Curculionidae—148; and Coccinellidae—19. The 10 dominant species accounted for 90.7% of all detected specimens in the traps. The maximum species diversity and abundance of Coleoptera was obtained in 2021. With the installation of the largest number of traps in 2022 and more diverse biotopes (64 traps), a smaller number of species was caught compared to 2021. New populations of such species have been found from rare Coleoptera: Calosoma sycophanta, Elater ferrugineus, Osmoderma barnabita, Protaetia speciosissima, and Protaetia fieberi.
Dataset License: Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 License

1. Summary

Bait traps are relatively simple sampling methods. These methods for attracting insects are quite easy to perform and very effective in terms of the amount of data obtained compared to the time spent [1]. In recent years, the attraction of insects with baits based on the fermentation of beer, vinegar, and wine with the addition of molasses, sugar, honey, molasses, and other sweet substances, as well as fruits, has been actively used. This method is based on the attractiveness of a bait (for example, a food source simulating fermented juice) poured into a jar, plastic bottle, or plastic cylindrical container [2,3,4,5,6]. The fermentation used to attract and act as pheromone traps often consists of rotten fruit mixed with beer and brown sugar [7]. Many insects have receptors that perceive a variety of carbohydrates, primarily sugar [8]. Sugar plays an important role in insect life as a valuable food resource [9]. Additionally, during fermentation, many other volatile organic substances are released, which can also attract insects [10]. For example, volatile substances from yeast fermentation, such as ethanol, attract beetles because chemicals can be a signal of the presence of food sources, such as sugar and/or ethanol. During fermentation, yeast secretes metabolites that are potential food sources for insects [11].
The traps with the process of active fermentation of sugars attract a variety of insect groups; for example, Lepidoptera [12,13], Hymenoptera [14,15,16], Neuroptera [17], or Diptera [18,19,20]. At the same time, such traps are most actively used to study the biodiversity of Coleoptera, as well as to study the distribution in the space of forest ecosystems of individuals and species of this group of insects [4,5,21,22]. Since different species appear in traps in different habitats, they can be placed in open woodlands, on the edges, at different heights [22,23,24]. Traps with baits are convenient to place and use in protected areas, since the maintenance of such traps is easier in these areas, which people visit rarely, and the risk of vandalism is reduced. In addition, the species diversity and abundance of insects in protected areas are usually much higher than adjacent territories [25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33], which affects the effectiveness of such traps for full-scale faunal studies.
The purpose of this work is to describe a set of present data on the use of bait traps for studying Coleoptera biodiversity in “Smolny” National Park, recently published in GBIF as the Darwin Core Archive [34].

2. Data Description

2.1. Data Set Name

Each observation includes information such as the location (latitude/longitude), the date of observation, the symbol of the trap, the exposure time of the trap (the number of days that the trap was set), the species composition of Coleoptera in this trap, and the name of the observer. The coordinates were determined on the spot using a GPS device or after research using Google Maps (Table 1). A total of 9226 specimens were studied.

2.2. Figures, Tables and Schemes

The dataset presents data on 134 Coleoptera species from 24 families studied in the course of our research (Figure 1). The largest number of species that has been found in traps belongs to the families Cerambycidae (30 species), Nitidulidae (14 species), Elateridae (12 species) and Curculionidae and Coccinellidae (10 species each). At the same time, many families were represented in traps by only 1–2 species (Scirtidae, Buprestidae, Cleridae, Monotomidae, Laemophloeidae, Oedemeridae, Scraptiidae, Chrysomelidae and Anthribidae). Despite the significant species diversity of Cerambycidae, the number of this family in traps was insignificant (only 1018 specimens). Other families with large species diversity (Elateridae, Curculionidae, Coccinellidae, and Staphylinidae) were also represented by a small number of specimens: respectively, 33, 148, 19 and 241. At the same time, the number of individuals of the Nitidulidae family was the largest and amounted to 5359 (58.1% of the total number of individuals of all species).
Glischrochilus grandis (Tournier, 1872) (Nitidulidae), Protaetia marmorata (Fabricius, 1792) (Scarabaeidae), Cryptarcha strigata (Fabricius, 1787) (Nitidulidae), Soronia grisea (Linnaeus, 1758) (Nitidulidae), Leptura thoracica Creutzer, 1799 (Cerambycidae), Leptura quadrifasciata Linnaeus, 1758 (Cerambycidae), Quedius dilatatus (Fabricius, 1787) (Staphylinidae), Rhagium mordax (DeGeer, 1775) (Cerambycidae), Glischrochilus hortensis (Geoffroy, 1785) (Nitidulidae) and Protaetia fieberi (Kraatz, 1880) (Scarabaeidae) were the dominant species in beer traps for 2018–2022 (Figure 2). In total, they accounted for 90.7% of all collected instances. This is a conditional allocation of species whose numerical abundance and occurrence were the greatest in five-year studies. Glischrochilus grandis was the most numerous species (35.2% of the total) and the third most common species (52.1%). Protaetia marmorata in traps was second in number (23.2%) and first in occurrence (80.4%). Cryptarcha strigata was third in number in 5 years of research (13.2%) and was second in occurrence (69.1%). Thus, most species were rarely found in traps (no more than 8% of the number of traps) with a small number of individuals (no more than 1% of the total number of individuals).
The maximum species diversity and abundance of Coleoptera was obtained in 2021. At the same time, when installing the largest number of traps in 2022 and in more diverse biotopes (64 traps), a smaller number of species was caught compared to 2021. As studies have shown (Figure 3), an increase in the number of traps in each subsequent year of the study has a certain effect on the identification of species new to the fauna, but up to a certain limit. We described a similar example above when comparing 2021 and 2022. Previously [35], it was indicated that in the fourth year of research in the Mordovia State Nature Reserve, the number of new species not previously caught decreased by five times (the number of trap exposures decreased only 2.6 times). Previously [36], it was suggested that two-year studies would be sufficient to study the biodiversity of a certain biotope, a limited forest area or a small region. For the best study of biodiversity, it is desirable not only to increase the number of traps from year to year or to place them in large numbers annually, but also to diversify the collection sites of samples.
The very rare species included in the Red Data Book of the Russian Federation [37] must be also noted. The following species were found in our studies: Calosoma sycophanta (Linnaeus, 1758), Elater ferrugineus Linnaeus, 1758, Osmoderma barnabita Motschulsky, 1845, Protaetia speciosissima (Scopoli, 1786) and Protaetia fieberi. If the first species is clearly a random find, then the remaining species are actively attracted with the help of beer traps. It should be noted that Osmoderma barnabita and Elater ferrugineus have not been previously recorded in “Smolny” National Park, and only with the help of beer traps was it possible to find populations of these species.

3. Methods

3.1. Study Area

“Smolny” National Park is located in the northeastern part of the Republic of Mordovia between 45°04′ and 45°37′ E, 54°43′ and 54°53′ N (European Russia) (Figure 4). The maximum length from west to east is 35 km; from north to south, it is 18 km. The area is 36,500 hectares. The park is located in landscapes of mixed forests on the left bank of the Alatyr River (Volga River basin). The southern part of the park is a lower and flat area, with wide watershed spaces. It occupies the hills to the north of the Alatyr River, as well as small areas of the floodplain and almost all the near-red depressions. Here, the minimum marks of the park are 95 m above sea level. The main territory has heights of 100–160 m above sea level. The northern part of the park is more elevated, with absolute marks of 214–217 m above sea level. There are a lot of ravines. The climate is moderately continental. The average annual air temperature is −4–3.5 °C; precipitation is 440–550 mm. The predominant soils are sod-podzolic. Vegetation is represented by forests dominated by pine and birch. Pine forests predominate in the southern part and were planted after continuous logging at the end of the XX century. Birch trees also grow in the southern part. The northern part of the park is dominated by linden, oak, birch and aspen. These trees grow on the site of deforestation and are secondary forests [38].

3.2. Design of Research, Identification and Taxonomic Position of Samples

Each trap was a large plastic 5-liter container with a window cut out in it on one side. The distance from the bottom was 10 cm. With the help of a load, a rope with a tied trap was thrown onto a tree branch at a height of 2 to 10 m from the soil surface. At a height of 1.5 m, the trap was tied to a tree branch without special loads. Tripods were also used in open stations (meadows, clearings in the forest, clearings under power lines). A trap there was suspended at a level of 1.5 m. Beer or dry wine with added sugar, honey or jam was used as bait. Such a mixture was fermented for a day. Traps suggested by I. Jalas [39] were also used; they were placed in the crowns of various trees at heights from 2 to 8 m. Occurrence is the ratio of the number of samples in which a species (subspecies) is present to the total number of samples, expressed in %. Exposure time is the period between the hanging of the trap and the removal of the material for analysis, expressed in days. The collected material was studied by L.V. Egorov.
The classification of beetle families is given according to the publications [40,41]. At the same time, we have taken into account changes in names from the Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera [42,43,44,45,46,47,48], as well as for Cucujoidea from the publication of Robertson et al. [49], for Curculionoidea—from the publication of Alonso-Zarazaga et al. [50]. To clarify the nomenclature, the above publications were used, as well as the Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera [51,52]. The years of description of some beetle species are specified according to Bousquet [53].

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.B.R.; methodology, A.B.R. and M.N.E.; software, O.N.A.; validation, A.B.R.; formal analysis, A.B.R. and L.V.E.; investigation, A.B.R. and M.N.E.; resources, A.B.R. and L.V.E.; data curation, O.N.A.; writing—original draft preparation, A.B.R. and L.V.E.; writing—review and editing, L.V.E.; visualization, A.B.R.; supervision, A.B.R.; project administration, A.B.R.; funding acquisition, A.B.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Russian Science Foundation, grant number 22-14-00026.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are available from GBIF (https://doi.org/10.15468/uv5qbr) under CC BY 4.0 license.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Allemand, R.; Aberlenc, H.-P. Une méthode efficace d’echantillonage de l’entomofaune des frondaisons: Le piège attractif aérien. Bull. Société Entomol. Suisse 1991, 64, 293–305. [Google Scholar]
  2. MacRae, T.C.; Rice, M.E. Distributional and biological observations on North American Cerambycidae (Coleoptera). Coleopt. Bull. 2007, 61, 227–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ruchin, A.B.; Egorov, L.V. On the use of wine vinegar as an attractant in crown traps. Proc. Mordovia State Nat. Reserve 2021, 29, 3–12. [Google Scholar]
  4. Ruchin, A.B.; Egorov, L.V.; Khapugin, A.A. Seasonal activity of Coleoptera attracted by fermental crown traps in forest ecosystems of Central Russia. Ecol. Quest. 2021, 32, 37–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. De Zan, L.R.; Bardiani, M.; Antonini, G.; Campanaro, A.; Chiari, S.; Mancini, E.; Maura, M.; Sabatelli, S.; Solano, E.; Zauli, A.; et al. Guidelines for the monitoring of Cerambyx cerdo. Nat. Conserv. 2017, 20, 129–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ruchin, A.B.; Egorov, L.V.; Khapugin, A.A.; Vikhrev, N.E.; Esin, M.N. The use of simple crown traps for the insects collection. Nat. Conserv. Res. 2020, 5, 87–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Iqbal, M.F.; Feng, Y.L. Species diversity of different insect families trapped under beer-based volatile fermentation. BMC Chem. 2020, 14, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Engsontia, P.; Sangket, U.; Chotigeat, W.; Satasook, C. Molecular Evolution of the odorant and gustatory receptor genes in lepidopteran insects: Implications for their adaptation and speciation. J. Mol. Evol. 2014, 79, 21–39. [Google Scholar]
  9. Kent, L.; Robertson, H. Evolution of the sugar receptors in insects. BMC Evol. Biol. 2009, 9, 41. [Google Scholar]
  10. Stensmyr, M.C.; Larsson, M.C.; Bice, S.; Hansson, B.S. Detection of fruit- and flower-emitted volatiles by olfactory receptor neurons in the polyphagous fruit chafer Pachnoda marginata (Coleoptera: Cetoniinae). J. Comp. Physiol. A 2001, 187, 509–519. [Google Scholar]
  11. Madden, A.A.; Epps, M.J.; Fukami, T.; Irwin, R.E.; Sheppard, J.; Sorger, D.M.; Dunn, R.R. The ecology of insect-yeast 572 relationships and its relevance to human industry. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2018, 285, 20172733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Barlow, J.; Overal, W.L.; Araujo, I.S.; Gardner, T.A.; Peres, C.A. The value of primary, secondary and plantation forests for fruitfeeding butterflies in the Brazilian Amazon. J. Appl. Ecol. 2007, 44, 1001–1012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Jakubikova, L.; Kadlec, T. Butterfly bait traps versus zigzag walks: What is the better way to monitor common and threatened butterflies in non-tropical regions? J. Insect Conserv. 2015, 19, 911–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Sorvari, J. Yellow does not improve the efficiency of traps for capturing wasps of the genera Vespula and Dolichovespula (Hymenoptera: Vespidae). Eur. J. Entomol. 2019, 116, 240–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Popkova, T.V.; Zryanin, V.A.; Ruchin, A.B. The ant fauna (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) of the Mordovia State Nature Reserve, Russia. Nat. Conserv. Res. 2021, 6, 45–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Demichelis, S.; Manino, A.; Minuto, G.; Mariotti, M.; Porporato, M. Social wasp trapping in North West Italy: Comparison of different bait-traps and first detection of Vespa velutina. Bull. Insectology 2014, 67, 307–317. [Google Scholar]
  17. Duelli, P.; Moretti, M.; Tonolla, D.; Barbalat, S. Scented traps yield two large lacewing species (Neuroptera, Chrysopidae) new to Switzerland. Bull. Société Entomol. Suisse 2006, 79, 25–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. MacGowan, I.; Vikhrev, N.E.; Krivosheina, M.G.; Ruchin, A.B.; Esin, M.N. New records of Diptera from the Republic of Mordovia, Russia. Far East. Entomol. 2021, 423, 9–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Dvořák, L. Window gnats (Diptera: Anisopodidae) from beer traps in the vicinity of Mariánské lázně with the first records of Sylvicola zetterstedti (Edwards, 1923) from the Czech Republic. Bull. Société Entomol. Suisse 2014, 87, 41–48. [Google Scholar]
  20. Dvořák, L.; Dvořáková, K.; Oboňa, J.; Ruchin, A.B. Selected Diptera families caught with beer traps in the Republic of Mordovia (Russia). Nat. Conserv. Res. 2020, 5, 65–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Tezcan, S.; Can, P. A note on bait trap collected Longhorn beetles Cerambycidae of western Turkey. Munis Entomol. Zool. 2009, 4, 25–28. [Google Scholar]
  22. MacRae, T.C. Beetle Collecting 101: Fermenting Bait Traps for Collecting Longhorned Beetles. 2015. Available online: https://beetlesinthebush.com/2015/12/28/beetle-collecting-101-fermenting-bait-traps-for-collecting-longhorned-beetles/ (accessed on 20 September 2022).
  23. Ruchin, A.B.; Egorov, L.V.; MacGowan, I.; Makarkin, V.N.; Antropov, A.V.; Gornostaev, N.G.; Khapugin, A.A.; Dvořák, L.; Esin, M.N. Post-fire insect fauna explored by crown fermental traps in forests of the European Russia. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 21334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Ruchin, A.B.; Egorov, L.V. Vertical stratification of beetles in deciduous forest communities in the Centre of European Russia. Diversity 2021, 13, 508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Bondarenko, A.S.; Zamotajlov, A.S.; Belyi, A.I.; Khomitskiy, E.E. Fauna and ecological characteristics of ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) of the Nature Sanctuaries «Prichernomorskiy» and «Tuapsinskiy» (Russia). Nat. Conserv. Res. 2020, 5, 66–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Avtaeva, T.A.; Sukhodolskaya, R.A.; Brygadyrenko, V.V. Modeling the bioclimatic range of Pterostichus melanarius (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in conditions of global climate change. Biosyst. Divers. 2021, 29, 140–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Egorov, L.V.; Ruchin, A.B.; Semenov, V.B.; Semionenkov, O.I.; Semishin, G.B. Checklist of the Coleoptera of Mordovia State Nature Reserve, Russia. ZooKeys 2020, 962, 13–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Sundukov, Y.u.N.; Makarov, K.V. The ground beetles of the tribus Trechini (Carabidae) on the Southern Kuril Islands. Nat. Conserv. Res. 2021, 6, 15–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Parhomenko, O.; Langraf, V.; Petrovičová, K.; Komlyk, V.; Brygadyrenko, V. Morphometric variability of ground beetles Bembidion minimum (Coleoptera, Carabidae): Who should change more, males or females? Nat. Conserv. Res. 2022, 7, 42–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Gray, C.L.; Hill, S.L.L.; Newbold, T.; Hudson, L.N.; Börger, L.; Contu, S.; Hoskins, A.J.; Ferrier, S.; Purvis, A.; Scharlemann, J.P.W. Local biodiversity is higher inside than outside terrestrial protected areas worldwide. Nat. Commun. 2016, 7, 12306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Fathima, S.; Pirya, S.; Meeran, M.; Arivoli, S.; Tennyson, S. Assessment of insect diversity in paddy fields of Uthamapalayam, Theni district, Tamil Nadu, India. J. Wildl. Biodivers. 2021, 5, 88–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Glotov, S.V.; Hushtan, K.V. Rove beetles of the subfamily Aleocharinae (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae) from the Hutsulshchyna National Nature Park. Biosyst. Divers. 2020, 28, 364–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Zouaimia, A.; Adjami, Y.; Zebsa, R.; Youcefi, A.; Bensakhri, Z.; Bensouilah, S.; Amari, H.; Ouakid, M.-L.; Houhamdi, M.; Mahdjoub, H.; et al. Phenology of the regionally Critically Endangered dragonfly Urothemis edwardsii in the National Park of El Kala, Northeast of Algeria. Nat. Conserv. Res. 2022, 7, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ruchin, A.; Egorov, L.; Artaev, O.; Esin, M. Coleoptera of the National Park «Smolny» (Russia): Study Using Fermental Traps; Version 1.2; Joint Directorate of the Mordovia State Nature Reserve and National Park “Smolny”: Saransk, Mordovia; Sampling event dataset. [CrossRef]
  35. Ruchin, A.; Egorov, L.; Esin, M.; Artaev, O. Coleoptera of the Mordovia State Nature Reserve: Study Using Fermental Traps; Version 1.5; Joint Directorate of the Mordovia State Nature Reserve and National Park “Smolny”: Saransk, Mordovia; Sampling event dataset. [CrossRef]
  36. Ruchin, A.B.; Egorov, L.V.; Khapugin, A.A. Usage of fermental traps for studying the species diversity of Coleoptera. Insects 2021, 12, 407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Red Data Book of Russian Federation; Volume Animals; International Union for Conservation of Nature: Gland, Switzerland, 1964; p. 1128.
  38. Kirillov, A.A.; Kirillova, N.Y. Helminth fauna of reptiles in the National Park «Smolny», Russia. Nat. Conserv. Res. 2021, 6, 9–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Jalas, I. Eine leichtgebaute, leichttransportable Lichtreuse zum Fangen von Schmetterlingen. Ann. Entomol. Fenn. 1960, 26, 44–50. [Google Scholar]
  40. Cai, C.; Tihelka, E.; Giacomelli, M.; Lawrence, J.F.; Ślipiński, A.; Kundrata, R.; Yamamoto, S.; Thayer, M.K.; Newton, A.F.; Leschen, R.A.B.; et al. Integrated phylogenomics and fossil data illuminate the evolution of beetles. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2022, 9, 211771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. McKenna, D.D.; Shin, S.; Ahrens, D.; Balke, M.; Beza-Beza, C.; Clarke, D.J.; Donath, A.; Escalona, H.E.; Friedrichh, F.; Letsch, H.; et al. The evolution and genomic basis of beetle diversity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019, 116, 24729–24737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Löbl, I.; Smetana, A. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera; Volume 7: Curculionoidea I; Apollo Books: Stenstrup, Denmark, 2011; p. 373. [Google Scholar]
  43. Löbl, I.; Smetana, A. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera; Volume 8: Curculionoidea II; Apollo Books: Stenstrup, Denmark, 2013; p. 707. [Google Scholar]
  44. Löbl, I.; Löbl, D. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera—Revised and Updated Version; Hydrophiloidea–Staphylinoidea; Brill: Leiden, The Netherlands; Boston, MA, USA, 2015; Volume 2/1, p. 1702. [Google Scholar]
  45. Löbl, I.; Löbl, D. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera—Revised and Updated Version; Scarabaeoidea–Scirtoidea–Dascilloidea–Buprestoidea–Byrrhoidea; Brill: Leiden, The Netherlands; Boston, MA, USA, 2016; Volume 3, p. 983. [Google Scholar]
  46. Löbl, I.; Löbl, D. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera—Revised and Updated Version; Archostemata–Adephaga–Myxophaga; Brill: Leiden, The Netherlands; Boston, MA, USA, 2017; Volume 1, p. 1443. [Google Scholar]
  47. Iwan, D.; Löbl, I. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera—Revised and Updated Version; Tenebrionoidea; Brill: Leiden, The Netherlands; Boston, MA, USA, 2020; Volume 5, p. 945. [Google Scholar]
  48. Danilevsky, M. (Ed.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera—Updated and Revised Second Edition; Chrysomeloidea I (Vesperidae, Disteniidae, Cerambycidae); Brill: Leiden, The Netherlands; Boston, MA, USA, 2020; Volume 6/1, p. 712. [Google Scholar]
  49. Robertson, J.; Ślipiński, A.; Moulton, M.; Shockley, F.W.; Giorgi, A.; Lord, N.P.; McKenna, D.D.; Tomaszewska, W.; Forrester, J.; Miller, K.B.; et al. Phylogeny and classification of Cucujoidea and the recognition of a new superfamily Coccinelloidea (Coleoptera: Cucujiformia). Syst. Entomol. 2015, 40, 745–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Alonso-Zarazaga, M.A.; Barrios, H.; Borovec, R.; Bouchard, P.; Caldara, R.; Colonnelli, E.; Gültekin, L.; Hlaváč, P.; Korotyaev, B.; Lyal, C.H.C.; et al. Cooperative Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera Curculionoidea. Monogr. Electrón. SEA 2017, 8, 1–729. [Google Scholar]
  51. Löbl, I.; Smetana, A. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera; Volume 4: Elateroidea–Derodontoidea–Bostrichoidea–Lymexyloidea–Cleroidea–Cucujoidea; Apollo Books: Stenstrup, Denmark, 2007; p. 935. [Google Scholar]
  52. Löbl, I.; Smetana, A. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera; Volume 6: Chrysomeloidae; Apollo Books: Stenstrup, Denmark, 2010; p. 924. [Google Scholar]
  53. Bousquet, Y. Litteratura Coleopterologica (1758–1900): A guide to selected books related to the taxonomy of Coleoptera with publication dates and notes. ZooKeys 2016, 583, 1–776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. The number of specimens and biodiversity of Coleoptera families represented in beer traps in Smolny National Park (total data for 2018–2022).
Figure 1. The number of specimens and biodiversity of Coleoptera families represented in beer traps in Smolny National Park (total data for 2018–2022).
Data 07 00161 g001
Figure 2. Coleoptera species, dominating in numbers in beer traps.
Figure 2. Coleoptera species, dominating in numbers in beer traps.
Data 07 00161 g002
Figure 3. The dependence of the number of species caught on the number of traps by year in the “Smolny” National Park.
Figure 3. The dependence of the number of species caught on the number of traps by year in the “Smolny” National Park.
Data 07 00161 g003
Figure 4. Study area and the area of obtaining information for the dataset.
Figure 4. Study area and the area of obtaining information for the dataset.
Data 07 00161 g004
Table 1. Description of the data in the dataset.
Table 1. Description of the data in the dataset.
Column LabelColumn Description
eventIDAn identifier for the set of information associated with an Event (occurs in one place in one time).
occurrenceIDAn identifier for the Occurrence (as opposed to a particular digital record of the occurrence).
basisOfRecordThe specific nature of the data record: HumanObservation
scientificNameThe full scientific name including the genus name and the lowest level oftaxonomic rank with the authority
kingdomThe full scientific name of the kingdom in which the taxon is classified
taxonRankThe taxonomic rank of the most specific name in the scientificName.
decimalLatitudeThe geographic latitude of location in decimal degree
decimalLongitudeThe geographic longitude of location in decimal degrees
geodeticDatumThe ellipsoid, geodetic datum, or spatial reference system (SRS) upon which the geographic coordinates given in decimalLatitude and decimalLongitude as based.
countryThe name of the country in which the Location occurs
countryCodeThe standard code for the country in which the Location occurs.
individualCountThe number of individuals represented present at the time of the Occurrence.
eventDateThe date when material from the trap was collected or the range of dates during which the trap collected material
yearThe integer day of the month on which the Event occurred.
monthThe ordinal month in which the Event occurred.
dayThe integer day of the month on which the Event occurred
samplingProtocolThe names of, references to, or descriptions of the methods or protocols used during an Event.
sampleSizeValueA numeric value for a measurement of the size (time duration, length, area, or volume) of a sample in a sampling event.
sampleSizeUnitThe unit of measurement of the size (time duration, length, area, or volume) of a sample in a sampling event.
samplingEffortThe amount of effort expended during an Event.
recordedByA person, group, or organization responsible for recording the original Occurrence.
identifiedByA list of names of people who assigned the Taxon to the subject
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ruchin, A.B.; Egorov, L.V.; Artaev, O.N.; Esin, M.N. Dataset: Coleoptera (Insecta) Collected from Beer Traps in “Smolny” National Park (Russia). Data 2022, 7, 161. https://doi.org/10.3390/data7110161

AMA Style

Ruchin AB, Egorov LV, Artaev ON, Esin MN. Dataset: Coleoptera (Insecta) Collected from Beer Traps in “Smolny” National Park (Russia). Data. 2022; 7(11):161. https://doi.org/10.3390/data7110161

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ruchin, Alexander B., Leonid V. Egorov, Oleg N. Artaev, and Mikhail N. Esin. 2022. "Dataset: Coleoptera (Insecta) Collected from Beer Traps in “Smolny” National Park (Russia)" Data 7, no. 11: 161. https://doi.org/10.3390/data7110161

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop