English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of different trapping methodologies for sampling small mammals, consisting of trap type (pitfall, Sherman, and wire traps) and position (ground and understorey) in the Cerrado biome of Brazil. Five fragments of woodland savannah were selected for the study. We captured a total of 364 individuals of 14 species of small mammals. Pitfall traps sampled all 14 species (100%), whereas ground cage traps sampled 8 species (57%), and arboreal traps sampled 5 species (36%). The sampling methodologies gave significantly different results, particularly between pitfall and cage traps, and between ground and arboreal cage traps. However, the comparison between Sherman and wire traps indicated no significant difference, although abundance has been higher for wire cages. Our study confirms the high success rate for pitfall traps now in the Cerrado biome and suggests combinations of trapping methodologies for surveying mammalian diversity.

Differential trapping success for small mammals using pitfall and standard cage traps in a woodland savannah region of southwestern Brazil