EDP Foz Tua: Arthropoda – Environmental Impact Assessment [2006-2008]

Study Extent

The data was collected within 7 sections of the river Tua valley (Northeast Portugal. Europe), encompassing 11 sampling sites. (Northeast Portugal. Europe). The areas in the region of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, within the municipalities of Alijó, Carrazeda de Ansiães, and Vila Flor.

Sampling

Sampling methods for Lepidoptera The majority of the data was obtained from nocturnal sampling using 125 w mercury vapour bulbs suspended from a tripod over a white sheet on the ground or on a stand placed in the middle of the sheet. Three such lights were run from a single generator, using lengths of electric cable to separate the lights as far as possible, allowing sampling from different microhabitats. Egg boxes placed on the sheets provided hiding places for moths, reducing the number of moths that are active around the light at any one moment and making examination of the catch easier. Moths were identified visually, using a lens for the smaller species, but if not recognised or when known to be unidentifiable in the field, samples were collected in glass tubes or boxes and later killed in a freezer. These samples were pinned and taken home for later identification, often requiring dissection of genitalia. Nocturnal sessions began about 30 minutes after sunset and continued until the rate at which new species were appearing rendered further sampling unprofitable. In cooler more humid localities this was earlier than in dry warm sites, where sampling sometimes continued till the first signs of returning daylight. During these hours, the three sheets were visited and examined nearly continually, with only short breaks, mainly to look at the wine ropes. Wine ropes were also used at night. These are pieces of clothes line soaked in a solution of white sugar in red wine. Usually five were used, hung on small branches of trees or bushes soon after sunset, and then inspected periodically during the night. They were sited where they would not be directly affected by the mercury vapour lights, either at some distance away from the lights or sometimes between two lights if these were sufficiently far apart. Results from this sampling technique are notoriously unpredictable, but usually some species are attracted that have not been attracted to the lights. Some diurnal sampling was also carried out, but the time spent on this was much less than on the night work and the methods used less efficacious. A small number of species were captured with a net during the day. Larvae were collected when found, and the food-plants noted. These were reared through to adults for identification purposes, but this was not always successful. A few species were identified from leaf mines or characteristic spinnings made by their larvae. In some cases this can be done even if the larva is no longer present. In the data, counts are provided for each species. Using the sampling techniques given above, counting every individual of every species at the lights is not practicable with the number of species often far exceeding 100. Instead, during the following morning, estimates from memory were made for each species. Obviously this is not rigorously exact, but it does give an approximation of relative numbers. Using this method, occasional checks can be made, by attempting to count all individuals of one or two species and comparing this with an estimated number. From this it is evident that low numbers are reasonably accurate (thus an estimated 5 might actually be 4 or 6 for example) but more abundant species are consistently underestimated.

Method steps

1. To be completed.

The taxonomic coverage of this dataset spans 4 classes, 13 orders, 115 families, and 724 species. The class Insecta accounts for 99% of both the specimens (N=2103) and the species. About 80% of the specimens and 77% of the species are Lepidoptera. The Coleoptera ranks second, with 8% of specimens and 12% of species. The five most represented families were all Lepidoptera (Geometridae, Noctuidae, Crambidae, Pyralidae, Erebidae, Gelechiidae), and accounted for about half the specimens and 44% of the species. A total of 56 families were represented each by five or less specimens.

1. Animalia
   rank: kingdom
2. Arthropoda
   rank: phylum
3. Insecta
   rank: class
4. Malacostraca
   rank: class
5. Chilopoda
   rank: class
6. Arachnida
   rank: class
7. Lepidoptera
   common name: Butterflies and Moths rank: order
8. Coleoptera
   common name: Beetles rank: order
9. Dermaptera
   common name: Earwigs rank: order
10. Hemiptera
    common name: True Bugs rank: order
11. Orthoptera
    common name: Grasshoppers and crickets rank: order
12. Decapoda
    rank: order
13. Diptera
    common name: True Flies rank: order
14. Hymenoptera
    common name: Sawflies, Wasps, Bees, and Ants rank: order
15. Scutigeromorpha
    common name: House Centipedes rank: order
16. Mantodea
    common name: Mantises rank: order
17. Odonata
    common name: Dragonflies and Damselflies rank: order
18. Solifugae
    common name: Solifuges rank: order
19. Araneae
    common name: Spiders rank: order
20. Acrididae
    rank: family
21. Aeshnidae
    rank: family
22. Alucitidae
    rank: family
23. Alydidae
    rank: family
24. Amorphoscelididae
    rank: family
25. Aphodiidae
    rank: family
26. Araneidae
    rank: family
27. Autostichidae
    rank: family
28. Bedelliidae
    rank: family
29. Berytidae
    rank: family
30. Blastobasidae
    rank: family
31. Brachodidae
    rank: family
32. Brentidae
    rank: family
33. Cambaridae
    rank: family
34. Cantharidae
    rank: family
35. Carabidae
    rank: family
36. Carcinidae
    rank: family
37. Cerambycidae
    rank: family
38. Cercopidae
    rank: family
39. Cetoniidae
    rank: family
40. Choreutidae
    rank: family
41. Chrysomelidae
    rank: family
42. Cicadellidae
    rank: family
43. Cleridae
    rank: family
44. Coccinellidae
    rank: family
45. Coenagrionidae
    rank: family
46. Coleophoridae
    rank: family
47. Coreidae
    rank: family
48. Cosmopterigidae
    rank: family
49. Cossidae
    rank: family
50. Crambidae
    rank: family
51. Daesidae
    rank: family
52. Depressariidae
    rank: family
53. Douglasiidae
    rank: family
54. Drepanidae
    rank: family
55. Dynastidae
    rank: family
56. Elachistidae
    rank: family
57. Empusidae
    rank: family
58. Epermeniidae
    rank: family
59. Erebidae
    rank: family
60. Euteliidae
    rank: family
61. Forficulidae
    rank: family
62. Gelechiidae
    rank: family
63. Geometridae
    rank: family
64. Glyphipterigidae
    rank: family
65. Gomphidae
    rank: family
66. Gracillariidae
    rank: family
67. Gryllidae
    rank: family
68. Hesperiidae
    rank: family
69. Heterogynidae
    rank: family
70. Hydrometridae
    rank: family
71. Labiduridae
    rank: family
72. Laemophloeidae
    rank: family
73. Lampyridae
    rank: family
74. Lasiocampidae
    rank: family
75. Libellulidae
    rank: family
76. Lucanidae
    rank: family
77. Lycaenidae
    rank: family
78. Lygaeidae
    rank: family
79. Lyonetiidae
    rank: family
80. Mantidae
    rank: family
81. Melolonthidae
    rank: family
82. Membracidae
    rank: family
83. Momphidae
    rank: family
84. Monotomidae
    rank: family
85. Mycetophagidae
    rank: family
86. Mycteridae
    rank: family
87. Nabidae
    rank: family
88. Nepidae
    rank: family
89. Nepticulidae
    rank: family
90. Noctuidae
    rank: family
91. Nolidae
    rank: family
92. Notodontidae
    rank: family
93. Nymphalidae
    rank: family
94. Oecophoridae
    rank: family
95. Oedemeridae
    rank: family
96. Opostegidae
    rank: family
97. Papilionidae
    rank: family
98. Pentatomidae
    rank: family
99. Phaneropteridae
    rank: family
100. Pieridae
     rank: family
101. Platycnemididae
     rank: family
102. Plutellidae
     rank: family
103. Prionoceridae
     rank: family
104. Psychidae
     rank: family
105. Pterolonchidae
     rank: family
106. Pterophoridae
     rank: family
107. Pyralidae
     rank: family
108. Pyrrhocoridae
     rank: family
109. Reduviidae
     rank: family
110. Rhopalidae
     rank: family
111. Rhynchitidae
     rank: family
112. Rutelidae
     rank: family
113. Saturniidae
     rank: family
114. Scoliidae
     rank: family
115. Scutelleridae
     rank: family
116. Scutigeridae
     rank: family
117. Scydmaenidae
     rank: family
118. Scythrididae
     rank: family
119. Silphidae
     rank: family
120. Silvanidae
     rank: family
121. Sphingidae
     rank: family
122. Spongiphoridae
     rank: family
123. Stenocephalidae
     rank: family
124. Syrphidae
     rank: family
125. Tenebrionidae
     rank: family
126. Tetrigidae
     rank: family
127. Tettigoniidae
     rank: family
128. Thomisidae
     rank: family
129. Tineidae
     rank: family
130. Tischeriidae
     rank: family
131. Tortricidae
     rank: family
132. Vespidae
     rank: family
133. Yponomeutidae
     rank: family
134. Zopheridae
     rank: family

The data was collected at 7 sections of the river Tua valley. (Northeast Portugal, Europe). The areas in the region of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, within the municipalities of Alijó, Carrazeda de Ansiães, and Vila Flor.