This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles
$119.00 per year
only $9.92 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Data availability
All curated data used for analyses in this study are available on GitHub (https://github.com/mcrossley3/insectLTER).
Code availability
R code used to curate and analyse data in this study is available on GitHub (https://github.com/mcrossley3/insectLTER).
References
Welti, E. A. R. et al. Studies of insect temporal trends must account for the complex sampling histories inherent to many long-term monitoring efforts. Nat. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01424-0 (2021).
Crossley, M. S. et al. No net insect abundance and diversity declines across US Long Term Ecological Research sites. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1368–1376 (2020).
Desquilbet, M., Cornillon, P.-A., Gaume, L. & Bonmatin, J.-M. Adequate statistical modelling and data selection are essential when analysing abundance and diversity trends. Nat. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01427-x (2021).
Didham, R. K. et al. Interpreting insect declines: seven challenges and a way forward. Insect Conserv. Divers. 13, 103–114 (2020).
Welti, E. A. R., Roeder, K. A., de Beurs, K. M., Joern, A. & Kaspari, M. Nutrient dilution and climate cycles underlie declines in a dominant insect herbivore. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 7271–7275 (2020).
Martinat, P. J. & Allen, D. C. Saddled prominent outbreaks in North America. North. J. Appl. For. 5, 88–91 (1988).
Ives, A. R., Abbott, K. C. & Ziebarth, N. L. Analysis of ecological time series with ARMA(p,q) models. Ecology 91, 858–871 (2010).
White, E. R. Minimum time required to detect population trends: the need for long-term monitoring programs. BioScience 69, 26–39 (2019).
Ives, A. R. For testing the significance of regression coefficients, go ahead and log-transform count data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 6, 828–835 (2015).
O’Hara, R. B. & Kotze, D. J. Do not log-transform count data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 1, 118–122 (2010).
van Klink, R. et al. Meta-analysis reveals declines in terrestrial but increases in freshwater insect abundances. Science 368, 417–420 (2020).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
M.S.C., W.E.S. and M.D.M. conceived of the idea of this study. M.S.C. conducted formal analysis. All authors contributed to the writing of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Peer review information Nature Ecology & Evolution thanks Nick Isaac, Manu Saunders and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended data
Extended Data Fig. 1 Effort-standardized time trends in arthropod abundance among LTER subsites.
a, Violin plots showing the distribution of abundance trends per taxon averaged among subsites, where abundances were standardized by sampling effort and separated by subsite prior to trend estimation, and trends with < 4 data points were excluded. This analysis differs from that depicted in Fig. 1c,d in that trends associated with experimental treatments in the Cedar Creek sweep nets and North Temperate Lakes crayfish datasets were excluded from analysis. b, Average trend in abundance and 95% confidence intervals from a when trends are averaged among LTERs (d.f. = 12). Mean time trends were not significantly different from zero (p = 0.10). c, Violin plots showing the distribution of abundance trends per taxon averaged among subsites, where abundances were standardized by sampling effort and separated by subsite prior to trend estimation, and trends with < 10 data points were excluded. This analysis differs from that depicted in Fig. 1e,f in that trends associated with experimental treatments in the Cedar Creek sweep nets and North Temperate Lakes crayfish datasets were excluded from analysis. d, Average trend in abundance and 95% confidence intervals from c when trends are averaged among LTERs (d.f. = 11). Mean time trends were not significantly different from zero (p = 0.27).
Extended Data Fig. 2 Effort-standardized time trends in arthropod diversity among LTER subsites.
Time trends in arthropod diversity among LTERs, using the dataset where abundances were standardized by sampling effort and separated by subsite, and time series with < 10 data points were excluded. a, Trends in taxon richness (rarefied). b, Trends in taxon evenness (Pielou’s Index). c, Trends in β diversity (1-Jaccard Similarity Index). Boxplots depict trends among insects as medians (thick line), 25th and 75th percentiles (box edges), 95th percentiles (whiskers), and outliers (circles). Right panels depict average change in diversity metrics and 95% confidence intervals among datasets (d.f.=7). Time trends were not significantly different from zero at α=5%. Please refer to Fig. 1 legend for description of colored text.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Information
Supplementary Table 1.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Crossley, M.S., Snyder, W.E. & Moran, M.D. M. S. Crossley et al. reply. Nat Ecol Evol 5, 595–599 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01429-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01429-9