Eurajoki Olkiluoto Study on Species of Ground Beetles and Ants 2008

Working Report 2009-18

Jarkko Santaharju Sirkka-Liisa Helminen

Rauno Yrjölä

February 2009

POSIVA OY Olkiluoto FI-27160 EURAJOKI, FINLAND Tel +358-2-8372 31 Fax +358-2-8372 3709 Working Report 2009-18

Eurajoki Olkiluoto Study on Species of Ground Beetles and Ants 2008

Jarkko Santaharju

Sirkka-Liisa Helminen

Rauno Yrjölä

Environmental Research Yrjölä Ltd

February 2009

Base maps: ©National Land Survey, permission 41/MML/09

Working Reports contain information on work in progress or pending completion.

The conclusions and viewpoints presented in the report are those of author(s) and do not necessarily coincide with those of Posiva. Eurajoki Olkiluoto study on species of ground beetles and ants 2008

ABSTRACT

The species of ants and Ground beetles at Olkiluoto in Eurajoki were studied in the summer of 2008 during two trapping periods: in June and August. The research goal was to clarify the species on Olkiluoto island of the earlier mentioned groups, at least at the family level, and to collect samples for further examination by Posiva. The trapping areas were selected at Olkiluoto in Posiva test monitoring sectors, a part of the trapping areas was the same as the earlier study.

Species of ants, depending on their particular species, are a very dominating group of insects. The ants are the most important predators, scavengers and soil movers in Fin- nish forests. It looks as if the biomass of ants may be more than 10% of the biomass of all animals in certain areas of Finnish forests. In Finland there are about 60 species of ants that have been observed. They have been divided into four sub-groups, which are Myrmicinae, Formicinae, Ponerinae and Dolichoderinae.

In Finland there are close to 300 species of ground beetles (Carabidae), which are divided into dozens of different families. The species, to a great extent, consist mostly of predatory insects that prey on microbes in field layers, but a part of them are specialized in feeding on flora. Ground beetles are usually divided into three groups according to their choice of habitat: Species that favour open biotopes, species that favour forests, and generalist species that can thrive in a variety of environments. Ground beetles also reflect changes in their living environment, and possibly they can be significant as so- called bio-indicators.

Pitfall traps were used as the method of research. The preservative fluid used was ethanol (50%) with dishwashing liquid to remove surface tension. The points were located in various different biotopes in fields, meadows and forests. The data collected was defined as a minimum for the family level of Ground beetles and for ants to the species or species pairs.

The species of Ground beetles and ants found in the pitfall trap study represented a quite usual range of species for southern Finland and no rare or endangered species were detected amongst the individuals defined to their particular species. The number of individual ants appeared to be higher in biotopes that were predominantly forested with conifers but as far as the amount of species was concerned, the dispersion between different biotopes was great. The amounts of species and individuals concerning the ground beetles were higher in open field-and meadow habitats. The differences in sizes amongst the ground beetles are remarkable. The weight of a large individual Carabus hortensis is the same as the weight of several individuals of smaller species together. These species, together with Pterostichus niger & Patrobus atrorufus, make up the majority of the communities of ground beetles in Olkiluoto, both in numbers and in weight.

Keywords: ant, beetle, Olkiluoto, Eurajoki, Posiva

Eurajoen Olkiluodon maakiitäjäis- ja muurahaistutkimus 2008

TIIVISTELMÄ

Eurajoen Olkiluodon muurahais- ja maakiitäjäislajistoa selvitettiin kesällä 2008 kahden pyyntijakson aikana: kesäkuussa ja elokuussa. Tutkimuksen tavoitteena oli selvittää Olkiluodon saaren lajistoa edellä mainituista ryhmistä vähintään sukutasolla ja samalla kerättiin näytteitä Posivan jatkotutkimuksiin. Tutkimuksen pyyntialueet valittiin Olki- luodon alueella olevista Posivan seuranta-koealueista, osa pyyntialueista oli samoja kuin aiemmassa tutkimuksessa.

Muurahaislajit, lajista riippuen, ovat hyvin dominoiva hyönteisryhmä. Suomen metsissä muurahaiset ovat tärkeimpiä saalistajia, haaskaeläimiä ja maa-aineksen siirtäjiä. Näyt- täisi siltä, että muurahaisten biomassa saattaa olla jopa yli 10 % eläinten biomassasta tietyissä osissa Suomen metsiä. Muurahaislajeja on Suomessa tavattu n. 60 ja lajit on jaettu neljään alaheimoon, jotka ovat Myrmicinae, Formicinae, Ponerinae ja Dolicho- derinae.

Maakiitäjäislajeja (Carabidae) on Suomessa lähemmäs 300 lajia, jotka on jaettu kym- meniin eri sukuihin. Lajit ovat suurelta osin kenttäkerroksessa pieneliöitä saalistavia petoja, mutta osa on erikoistunut myös kasviperäiseen ravintoon. Maakiitäjäiset jaetaan usein kolmeen ryhmään habitaatinvalinnan perusteella: avointen biotooppien lajeihin, metsälajeihin ja generalisteihin, jotka voivat käyttää monia eri elinympäristöjä. Maakii- täjäiset myös heijastavat muutoksia niiden elinympäristössä ja niillä voi mahdollisesti olla merkitystä niin sanottuina bioindikaattoreina.

Tutkimusmenetelmänä käytettiin kuoppapyydyksiä. Tutkimuspisteet sijaitsivat vaihte- levissa biotoopeissa, niin pelloilla, niityillä, kuin metsissäkin. Kerätty aineisto määritet- tiin vähintään sukutasolle maakiitäjäisten osalta ja muurahaisten osalta lajiin tai lajipa- riin asti.

Kuoppapyydyksistä tavatut maakiitäjäis- ja muurahaislajit edustivat melko tavallista Etelä-suomalaista lajistoa, eikä lajilleen määritetyistä yksilöistä löytynyt harvinaisia tai uhanalaisia lajeja. Muurahaisten yksilömäärät näyttäisivät olevan korkeimpia havupuu- valtaisissa biotoopeissa, mutta lajimäärien kohdalla hajonta eri biotooppien välillä on suurta. Maakiitäjäisten laji- ja yksilömäärät olivat korkeimpia avoimissa pelto- ja niitty- habitaateissa. Maakiitäjäislajien kokoerot ovat huomattavia, ja suurikokoinen Carabus hortensis yksilö on painoltaan samankokoinen kuin useampi pienempien lajien yksilö yhteensä. Se, sekä Pterostichus niger ja Patrobus atrorufus muodostivat pääosan Olki- luodon maakiitäjäisyhteisöstä, sekä yksilömäärältä että painoltaan

Asiasanat: muurahainen, maakiitäjäinen, Olkiluoto, Eurajoki, Posiva

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT

TIIVISTELMÄ

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 2 2. ECOLOGY OF THE STUDIED SPECIES OF INSECTS ...... 3 2.1 Ants (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) ...... 3 2.2 Ground Beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) ...... 3 3. MATERIAL & METHODS ...... 4 4. AREA OF RESEARCH ...... 6 5. RESULTS ...... 10 6. REVIEW OF THE RESULTS ...... 11 7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...... 16 REFERENCES ...... 17 APPENDICES...... 19 Appendix 1: Olkiluoto ant species summer 2008 ...... 19 Appendix 2: Olkiluoto ant species according to trapping spots summer 2008 ..... 20 Appendix 3: Amount of ground beetles on different test dates ...... 23 Appendix 4: Amount of Ground beetles according to trapping spots on different ... test dates ...... 24

1. INTRODUCTION

Posiva commissioned the study on ant and ground beetles and the study was carried out by the Environmental Research Yrjölä ltd. Jani Helin carried out the supervision of the project on behalf of the client. Jari Siltanen provided his much appreciated assistance on the field.

2. ECOLOGY OF THE STUDIED SPECIES OF INSECTS

2.1 Ants (Hymenoptera, Formicidae)

Species of ants, depending on their particular species, are a very dominating group of insects. Part of the ant family is equipped with a venom sting located in the abdomen (e.g. Myrmica), when others secrete acid from the abdomen into the wound inflicted with their jaws (e.g. Formica). The ants are the most important predators, scavengers and soil movers in Finnish forests. It looks as if the biomass of ants may be more than 10% of the biomass of all animals in certain areas of Finnish forests. (Hölldobler & Wilson 1994).

All species of ants are social insects i.e. they live in communities. Different species of ants defend their territory with a varied degree of intensity. Some species defend themselves only when their nest is attacked, whereas others strongly dominate the whole extensive surrounding areas. The ants prey on larvae and other small insects, but can also feed on one another. (Hölldobler & Wilson 1990).

In Finland there are about 60 species of ants that have been observed. They have been divided into four sub-groups, which are Myrmicinae, Formicinae, Ponerinae and Dolichoderinae. The largest families are Myrmica, Formica, Lasius. Myrmica build their nest on the ground or under rocks, as well as in rotting trees, whereas Formica build typical ant mounds. Some species build their nest under the ground. Lasius build their nest almost always under the ground (Czechowski et al. 2002).

2.2 Ground Beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae)

In Finland there are close to 300 species of ground beetles (Carabidae), which are divided into dozens of different families. The species, to a great extent, consist mostly of predatory insects that prey on microbes in field layers, but a part of them are specialized in feeding on flora. Most of the species are nocturnal. Ground beetles are very different in size. The smallest species are about 2 mm long, whereas the biggest species are close to 3 mm in length. There are also remarkable variations in size within the species. The big ground beetle species, such as within the Carabus family, may live in adulthood for over two years. Ground beetle species also have typical times when they appear and, for example, species that appear in spring are seldom to be seen at any other time of the year. On the other hand, certain species are on the move throughout the season when the ground is unfrozen (Lindroth 1985, 1986).

Ground beetles are usually divided into three groups according to their choice of habitat: Species that favour open biotopes, species that favour forests, and generalist species that can thrive in a variety of environments (i.a. Niemelä & Halme 1992). Ground beetles also reflect changes in their living environment (Lindroth 1985, 1986), and possibly they can be significant as so-called bio-indicators (Haila & Kouki 1994).

3. MATERIAL & METHODS

Pitfall traps were used as the method of research. The preservative fluid used was ethanol (50%) with dishwashing liquid to remove surface tension. The pitfall traps were made from 2 dl plastic cups with lids fixed in such a way that they would not restrict the entry of ants but would prevent the intrusion of rainwater and rubbish. The traps were dug into the earth so that the trap rims were at the same level as the surrounding earth. Due to its ease of application, the pitfall trap method is recognised as being a most effective way in collecting larger amounts of invertebrates, although the variety of undergrowth does create some dispersion to the results of the trap samplings to a certain extent. (W.J. Sutherland 1996).

The pitfall traps were located in the terrain in ten different sites, selected beforehand, so that the traps in each spot were nine in number, arranged in three trap groups positioned ten metres from each other, within the FET observation area employed in monitoring forests (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Insect trap settings on Forest Extensive Monitoring Plots. Trap clusters (FP1-3) were placed in spots where samples were not taken in connection with other studies. The Figure illustrates the locations of the samplings that have been carried out by the Forest Research Institute on these sites.

The points were located in various different biotopes in fields, meadows and forests. (Table 1) Sampling points were part of the 2003 Forest Extensive Monitoring Plot (FET) that was set up for monitoring the forests in Olkiluoto. The FET network is made up of 100x100 metre square grids that cover virtually the whole area of Olkiluoto and currently include more than 500 sample areas. Utilising the existing Forest Extensive Monitoring Plot, the findings of the research can be combined with other findings on research that has been carried out in the testing area. Out of the 2005 survey, four of the test sectors were also used in this research (Ranta et al. 2005), and the sample areas in Table 1 were transferred to the nearest FET plot. Jarkko Santaharju, Sirkka-Liisa Helminen and Rauno Yrjölä took part in both the setting and checking the pitfall traps.

Table 1. Depiction of the environment sample area, Posiva test sector codes, and potential comparison with the 2005 survey.

Test area Biotope Code (Ranta et al. 2005) FET930230 Alder stands FET930266 Birch stands FET930267 Spruce stands FET918269 Meadow FET918271 Pine stands FET916263 Spruce stands FAL13 FET914263 Coniferous forest FAL14 FET912276 Birch stands FAL15 FET912277 Alder stands FAL16 FET910272 Field

The traps were set in the ground for two trapping periods: 9.6. – 23.6. & 14.8. – 28.8. During the periods, the traps were inspected four times (16. & 23.6. & 21. & 28.8.). The trap fluid was changed at the same time as the inspection of the traps.

The data collected was defined as a minimum for the family level of Ground beetles and for ants to the species or species pairs [not including the rufa-group Formica sensu stricto ant heap ants (excluding F. truncorum, which is easy to define)]. Both species groups were weighed in accordance with the definitions for drying on paper for a period of 20 min. The samples were preserved in test tubes containing a solution of 70% ethanol and then delivered to Posiva for further examination. The definitions were prepared by Jarkko Santaharju.

Other species of insects and spiders that were detected in the pit traps were also preserved in ethanol and were stored for further examination by Posiva.

4. AREA OF RESEARCH

Map of the research sector indicating location of pit traps is illustrated in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Olkiluoto land use & location of sample areas. Layout Posiva Oy. © Maanmittauslaitos 41/MML/09.

Figure 3. Positioning pitfall traps on hayfield. Holes for traps made with the aid of an iron bar.

Figure 4. Group of three pitfall traps on hayfield. Cups have plastic lids with a gap left underneath to allow insect access. Lids protect the cups from rainwater.

Figure 5. Stands of alder to the south of Olkiluoto.

Figure 6. Partly cleared mixed forest in the middle of Olkiluoto island.

Figure 7. Stands of spruce in the middle of Olkiluoto island.

Figure 8. Thinned stands of birch on the northern edge of Olkiluoto.

5. RESULTS

The species found in the study of ground beetles and ants and the number of individuals per spot at Olkiluoto are presented in Appendix 1. The combined weight of each species group per trapping phases is presented in the column next to the first species. The individual weights of ants and smaller Ground beetles in particular, were virtually impossible to measure due to their miniscule weight.

As far as some of the ants are concerned, the numbers of specimens preserved in test tubes are an educated guess, due to the large amounts of individual specimens in the samples. On the other hand, because particularly a part of the smallest ants had disintegrated, both in the trapping and conservation processes, and some parts were difficult to precisely deduce the exact number of individuals.

6. REVIEW OF THE RESULTS

The species of Ground beetles and ants found in the pitfall trap study represented a quite usual range of species for southern Finland and no rare or endangered species were detected amongst the individuals defined to their particular species.

The results cannot be directly compared with the earlier ground beetle study in the area (Ympäristötutkimus Oy Metsätähti 2005), as it was limited in the species and numbers of individual specimens.

Figure 9. Ant species/amount of groups according to biotope.

Figure 10. Individual numbers of ants according to biotope.

The number of individual ants appeared to be higher in biotopes that were predominantly forested with conifers but as far as the amount of species was concerned, the dispersion between different biotopes was great.

Figure 11. Ground species/ amount of groups according to biotope

Figure 12. Number of individual Ground beetles according to biotope.

The amounts of species and individuals concerning the ground beetles were higher in open field-and meadow habitats.

By comparing the numbers of individual ground beetles and ants with each other we can notice from the results, that if there are many ground beetles in a biotope, there are less ants. This can be due to two factors: either the groups favour different biotopes or they compete with each other over the same resources. Most probably they are influenced by both factors.

Species of ants have adapted to various environments and alternatively part of the species conquer new areas rapidly whilst the others counter succession at a later stage. In Finland, for example, Vepsäläinen et al. (2000), examined the changes in the species of ants, following the ditching of bogs. The species varied according to the drying process of the bogs and, for example, the Myrmica ruginodis, which one often finds in Olkiluoto in abundance, is the species of flourishing forest areas. According to the Vepsäläinen’s et al.studies, this species became the predominant species when the forest growth advanced.

Most likely, the same kind of mechanism affects the appearance of species of ants in the Olkiluoto sector, when the flora changes from meadow to woodland. For example, the large Camponotus herculeanus is a boreal spruce forest species that makes its nest in rotten trees, and seldom in living stands of trees. Punttila et al. (1994) have found this species and Myrmica rubra in patches of boreal forests. Also in Olkiluoto, Camponotus herculeanus was almost the only species of shaded spruce forests. In southern Finland, commercial forestry and the level of development in forests have been found to exert a noticeable effect on ant species (Kilpeläinen et al. 2008).

Geographical location also has a great influence on species. For example Myrmica lobicornis is a common species of the mountains of Central Europe (Colingwood 1979), but in Finland the species can be found in normal forest environments.

The activity of ant communities is associated with the appearance of their species. For example, part of the families of the Formica species can use other species of ants as slaves. In Finland, for instance, the Formica rufa -group ants can overthrow colonies of Formica fusca. Formica fusca is the most common enslaved species. Several studies, (e.g. Vepsäläinen et al. 2000, Punttila et al.1994) mention, that Formica-ants have a strong influence on the appearance of other species of ants. In addition, parts of ant species exploit aphides, so that also the appearance of aphides influences the arrival of ants to the area.

Formica truncorum Lasius niger/platythorax Formica fusca/lemani

Myrmica ruginodis Myrmica rubra Myrmica lobicornis

Figure 13. Selection of observed species of ants in the study. Figures have been taken of preserved specimens.

In the same fashion as ants, certain species of ground beetles have also adapted to certain kinds of habitat and part of the species are generalists. Some grounds are species that favour open terrain, some favour borders and some favour larger tracts of forests. Some species that prefer undivided tracts of terrain for their habitat are affected by the fragmentation of the terrain. For example, in studies carried out in Sweden it was found that Leistus terminatus clearly declined when 50x50 m tracts were artificially made in the forest. However, the species thrived in larger tracts of forest (Abildsnes & Tømmeros 2000).

The sparser the trees are in a forest, the more abundant the generalist species appear in commercial forests. Open terrain species take over an area rapidly when a forest has been felled and gradually through counter succession, the forest species return to the area (e.g. Koivula & Niemelä 2002).

The differences in sizes amongst the ground beetles are remarkable. The weight of a large individual Carabus hortensis is the same as the weight of several individuals of smaller species together. These species, together with Pterostichus niger & Patrobus atrorufus, make up the majority of the communities of ground beetles in Olkiluoto, both in numbers and in weight.

Carabus hortensis Pterostichus niger Pterostichus cupreus

Oxypselaphus obscurus Leistus terminatus Patrobus atrorufus

Figure 14. Selection of observed species of ground beetles in the study. Figures have been taken of preserved specimens.

7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We extend our thanks to everyone who assisted in the study and, in particular, to the Posiva staff who helped in the field and in mapping out the trapping spots.

REFERENCES

Abildsnes, J. & Tømmeros, B.Å. 2000: Impacts of experimental habitat fragmentation on ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in a boreal spruce forest. – Annales Zoologici Fennici 37: 201-212.

Collingwood, C.A. 1979: The Formicidae (Hymenoptera) of Fennoscandia and Danmark. – Scandinavian Science Press ltd.

Czechowski, W., Radchenko, A. & Czechowska, W. 2002: The ants (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) of Poland. Museum and Institute of Zoology PAS, Warszawa. 200s.

Haila, Y. & Kouki, J. 1994: The phenomenon of biodiversity in conservation biology. – Annales Zoologici Fennici 31: 5-18.

Hölldobler B. & Wilson E. O. 1990: The Ants. Harvad University Press, Cambridge, Mass. 732 s.

Hölldobler, B. & Wilson, E. O. 1994: Journey to the Ants: a Story of Scientific Exploration. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Kilpeläinen, J., Punttila, P., Finér, L., Niemelä, P., Domisch, T., Jurgensen, M.F., Neuvonen, S., Ohashi, M., Risch, A.C. & Sundström, L. 2008: Distribution of ant species and mounds (Formica) in different-aged managed spruce stands in eastern Finland. – Journal of Applied Entomology 132 (4): 315-325.

Koivula, M. J. 2008: Etelä- ja Keski-Suomen tavallisimpia metsien ja peltojen maakiitäjäislajeja. Jyväskylän yliopisto.

Koivula, M. & Niemelä, J. 2002: Boreal carabid beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in managed spruce forests – a summary of Finnish case studies. – Silva Fennica 36: 423- 436.

Lindroth, C. H. 1985: The Carabidae (Coleoptera) of fennoscandia and Denmark, Part 1. –Fauna Entomol. Scand.

Lindroth, C. H. 1986: The Carabidae (Coleoptera) of fennoscandia and Denmark, Part 2. –Fauna Entomol. Scand.

Niemelä, J. & Halme, E. 1992: Habitat assosiations of carabid beetles in fields and forests on the Åland islands, SW Finland –Ecography 15: 3-11.

Punttila, P. Haila, Y., Niemelä, J. & Pajunen, T. 1994: Ant communities in fragments of old-growth taiga and managed surroundings. – Annales Zoologici Fennici 31: 131-144.

Ranta, P., Pöyri, V. & Vihervaara, P. 2005: Small Mammal, Bat and Carabid Beetle Inventories and Update of Game Statistics for the Olkiluoto Site in 2004. Posiva Oy, Posiva Working Report WR-2005-19.

Sutherland, W. J. 1996: Ecological Census techniques, a handbook. Cambridge University Press.

Vepsäläinen, K., Savolainen, R., Tiainen, J. & Vilén, J. 2000: Successional changes of ant assemblages: from virgin and ditched bogs to forests. - Annales Zoologici Fennici 37:135-149.

APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Olkiluoto ant species summer 2008

Trap area (All)

Traps set date Combined Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 total Camponotus herculeanus 40 44 56 24 164 Formica fusca/lemani 23 19 5 4 51 Formica s. str. 69 62 12 13 156 Formica sanguinea 152 49 74 13 288 Formica truncorum 1 1 2 1 5 Lasius mixtus 1 1 2 Lasius niger/platythorax 46 46 3 7 102 Leptothorax acervorum 1 1 2 Myrmica lobicornis 31 24 8 5 68 Myrmica rubra 105 83 70 90 348 Myrmica rubra/ruginodis 3 3 Myrmica ruginodis 756 481 273 145 1655 Myrmica sulcinodis 1 1 Combined total 1227 809 505 304 2845 Species/groups 13

Appendix 2: Olkiluoto ant species according to trapping spots summer 2008

Trap area FET930230

Trap set date Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 Combined total Formica s. str. 1 1 Myrmica ruginodis 154 82 25 22 283 Combined total 155 82 25 22 284 Species/groups 2

Trap area FET930266

Trap set date Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 Combined total Camponotus herculeanus 5 4 9 4 22 Formica fusca/lemani 17 7 1 2 27 Formica s. str. 4 7 11 Lasius niger/platythorax 15 7 2 24 Myrmica ruginodis 90 107 50 47 294 Combined total 131 132 60 55 378 Species/groups 5

Trap area FET930267

Trap set date Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 Combined total Camponotus herculeanus 18 26 18 10 72 Formica fusca/lemani 2 3 3 8 Formica s. str. 4 2 2 1 9 Lasius niger/platythorax 2 2 Leptothorax acervorum 1 1 Myrmica ruginodis 199 112 33 20 364 Combined total 225 143 56 32 456 Species/groups 6

Trap area FET918269

Trap set date Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 Combined total Camponotus herculeanus 3 3 Formica fusca/lemani 2 2 4 Formica s. str. 4 4 2 10 Lasius niger/platythorax 1 1 Myrmica ruginodis 2 2 4 Combined total 8 7 3 4 22 Species/groups 5

Trap area FET918271

Trap set date Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 Combined total Camponotus herculeanus 1 1 Formica fusca/lemani 1 1 Formica s. str. 10 6 1 1 18 Myrmica lobicornis 17 10 1 2 30 Myrmica ruginodis 169 50 137 28 384 Combined total 197 67 139 31 434 Species/groups 5

Trap area FET916263

Trap set date Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 Combined total Camponotus herculeanus 14 8 13 4 39 Formica fusca/lemani 1 2 1 1 5 Formica s. str. 10 9 1 3 23 Formica sanguinea 1 1 Lasius niger/platythorax 1 1 Myrmica lobicornis 1 1 Myrmica rubra 1 1 Myrmica ruginodis 40 36 4 9 89 Combined total 65 56 21 18 160 Species/groups 8

Trap area FET914263

Trap set date Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 Combined total Camponotus herculeanus 3 5 11 6 25 Formica fusca/lemani 3 1 4 Formica s. str. 1 2 2 5 Formica sanguinea 151 49 73 13 286 Lasius mixtus 1 1 Lasius niger/platythorax 4 3 1 1 9 Leptothorax acervorum 1 1 Myrmica lobicornis 14 13 7 2 36 Myrmica ruginodis 96 92 22 17 227 Myrmica sulcinodis 1 1 Combined total 269 166 118 42 595 Species/groups 10

Trap area FET912276

Trap set date Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 Combined total Formica fusca/lemani 1 1 Formica s. str. 26 29 1 1 57 Formica truncorum 2 1 3 Myrmica rubra 67 59 10 8 144 Myrmica rubra/ruginodis 1 1 Myrmica ruginodis 3 1 4 Combined total 97 90 13 10 210 Species/groups 6

Trap area FET912277

Trap set date Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 Combined total Formica s. str. 4 3 4 2 13 Formica truncorum 1 1 2 Lasius niger/platythorax 1 1 Myrmica rubra 38 24 58 74 194 Myrmica ruginodis 2 2 4 Combined total 45 29 64 76 214 Species/groups 5

Trap area FET910272

Trap set date Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 Combined total Formica fusca/lemani 1 1 Formica s. str. 6 1 1 1 9 Formica sanguinea 1 1 Lasius mixtus 1 1 Lasius niger/platythorax 25 34 1 4 64 Myrmica lobicornis 1 1 Myrmica rubra 2 7 9 Myrmica rubra/ruginodis 2 2 Myrmica ruginodis 1 1 2 Combined total 35 37 4 14 90 Species/groups 9

Appendix 3: Amount of ground beetles on different test dates

Trap area (all)

Trap set date Combined Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 total Agonum sexpunctatum 1 1 Agonum sp. 5 13 2 2 22 Amara sp. 55 47 9 31 142 Bembidion quadrimaculatum 3 3 Bembidion sp. 10 3 12 19 44 Calathus melanocephalus 2 2 Calathus micropterus 41 31 10 2 84 Carabus granulatus 2 2 Carabus hortensis 16 33 60 41 150 Carabus nemoralis 3 7 10 Clivina fossor 2 2 Dyschirius globosus 1 1 2 Harpalus affinis 4 10 14 Harpalus quadripunctatus 2 3 5 Harpalus rufipes 21 41 3 3 68 Leistus ferrugineus 1 1 2 Leistus terminatus 2 2 4 Loricera pilicornis 6 5 1 12 Notiophilus sp. 3 1 9 4 17 Oxypselaphus obscurus 9 14 23 Patrobus atrorufus 1 8 126 70 205 Pterostichus cupreus 77 100 12 73 262 Pterostichus cupreus/versicolor 1 1 Pterostichus diligens 8 18 26 Pterostichus minor 1 1 Pterostichus niger 6 17 36 16 75 Pterostichus oblongopunctatus 15 28 1 44 Pterostichus sp. 1 2 3 Pterostichus strenuus 9 7 16 Pterostichus versicolor 1 1 Trechus discus 1 1 Trechus sp. 3 3 33 40 79 Trichocellus placidus 2 2 Combined total 299 397 321 308 1325 Species/group 33

Appendix 4: Amount of Ground beetles according to trapping spots on different test dates

Trap area FET930230

Trap set date Combined Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 total Agonum sp. 2 2 Bembidion sp. 1 1 Calathus micropterus 11 7 1 19 Carabus hortensis 4 8 6 4 22 Carabus nemoralis 1 1 Harpalus quadripunctatus 2 2 Loricera pilicornis 1 1 Notiophilus sp. 2 2 Oxypselaphus obscurus 5 5 10 Pterostichus niger 1 1 3 1 6 Pterostichus oblongopunctatus 2 4 6 Pterostichus strenuus 2 1 3 Combined total 27 31 10 7 75 Species/group 12

Trap area FET930266

Trap set date Combined Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 total Agonum sp. 3 1 2 6 Calathus micropterus 9 6 1 16 Carabus hortensis 1 4 13 11 29 Harpalus quadripunctatus 1 1 Pterostichus niger 8 8 Pterostichus oblongopunctatus 1 2 3 Pterostichus strenuus 2 1 3 Trechus sp. 4 9 13 Combined total 17 14 28 20 79 Species/group 8

Trap area FET930267

Trap set date Combined Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 total Calathus micropterus 7 10 2 19 Carabus hortensis 3 5 7 6 21 Notiophilus sp. 3 2 5 Pterostichus niger 1 2 1 4 Pterostichus oblongopunctatus 2 10 12 Trechus sp. 2 1 3 Combined total 12 26 16 10 64 Species/group 6

Trap area FET918269

Trap set date Combined Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 total Amara sp. 44 23 3 2 72 Bembidion sp. 1 10 17 28 Carabus hortensis 2 1 3 Clivina fossor 2 2 Dyschirius globosus 1 1 Harpalus affinis 4 10 14 Harpalus quadripunctatus 1 1 Harpalus rufipes 21 41 3 1 66 Leistus ferrugineus 1 1 2 Loricera pilicornis 2 2 4 Patrobus atrorufus 12 20 32 Pterostichus cupreus 38 72 8 39 157 Pterostichus cupreus/versicolor 1 1 Pterostichus diligens 1 1 Pterostichus niger 4 6 12 2 24 Pterostichus sp. 1 1 Pterostichus strenuus 1 1 Pterostichus versicolor 1 1 Trechus sp. 1 2 3 6 Combined total 115 161 55 86 417 Species/group 19

Trap area FET918271

Trap set date Combined Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 total Calathus micropterus 2 1 2 1 6 Carabus hortensis 3 5 7 3 18 Leistus terminatus 1 1 2 Pterostichus oblongopunctatus 3 6 1 10 Trechus sp. 8 11 19 Combined total 8 13 19 15 55 Species/group 5

Trap area FET916263

Trap set date Combined Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 total Calathus micropterus 3 5 2 10 Carabus hortensis 5 9 24 15 53 Notiophilus sp. 6 2 8 Oxypselaphus obscurus 1 1 Pterostichus niger 1 2 1 4 Pterostichus oblongopunctatus 1 5 6 Trechus sp. 6 5 11 Combined total 9 21 40 23 93 Species/group 7

Trap area FET914263

Trap set date Combined Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 total Agonum sp. 3 3 Amara sp. 1 1 Calathus micropterus 3 2 2 1 8 Carabus hortensis 1 1 Harpalus quadripunctatus 1 1 Oxypselaphus obscurus 3 3 Pterostichus diligens 2 3 5 Pterostichus niger 2 2 Pterostichus oblongopunctatus 5 5 Pterostichus strenuus 1 1 2 Trechus sp. 2 2 Combined total 11 13 7 2 33 Species/group 11

Trap area FET912276

Trap set date Combined Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 total Agonum sp. 1 2 3 Calathus micropterus 6 6 Carabus hortensis 2 1 3 Leistus terminatus 1 1 Oxypselaphus obscurus 1 1 Patrobus atrorufus 111 48 159 Pterostichus diligens 4 12 16 Pterostichus niger 4 1 5 Pterostichus strenuus 1 1 Trechus discus 1 1 Trechus sp. 2 4 6 Combined total 11 18 116 57 202 Species/group 11

Trap area FET912277

Trap set date Combined Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 total Agonum sp. 2 6 8 Carabus granulatus 1 1 Carabus nemoralis 3 6 9 Leistus terminatus 1 1 Loricera pilicornis 4 3 7 Notiophilus sp. 1 1 Oxypselaphus obscurus 4 4 8 Patrobus atrorufus 1 8 3 2 14 Pterostichus niger 4 2 3 9 Pterostichus sp. 1 1 Pterostichus strenuus 3 3 6 Trechus sp. 3 9 12 Trichocellus placidus 2 2 Combined total 18 38 8 15 79 Species/group 13

Trap area FET910272

Trap set date Combined Species 9.6.2008 16.6.2008 14.8.2008 21.8.2008 total Agonum sexpunctatum 1 1 Amara sp. 11 24 6 28 69 Bembidion quadrimaculatum 3 3 Bembidion sp. 10 2 2 1 15 Calathus melanocephalus 2 2 Carabus granulatus 1 1 Dyschirius globosus 1 1 Harpalus rufipes 2 2 Notiophilus sp. 1 1 Pterostichus cupreus 39 28 4 34 105 Pterostichus diligens 2 2 4 Pterostichus minor 1 1 Pterostichus niger 1 5 7 13 Pterostichus oblongopunctatus 1 1 2 Pterostichus sp. 1 1 Trechus sp. 2 1 3 1 7 Combined total 71 62 22 73 228 Species/group 16