Eur. J. Entomol. 123: 197-207, 2026 | DOI: 10.14411/eje.2026.020

Evaluation of vinegar effectiveness in carabid traps (Coleoptera: Carabidae): A viable alternative to conventional liquidsOriginal article

Julien PÉTERS ORCID...1, Marc DUFRÊNE ORCID...1, Fanny BOERAEVE ORCID...2
1 Biodiversity and Landscape Research Unit, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, University of Liege, Gembloux, Belgium; e-mails: julien.peters@uliege.be, Marc.Dufrene@uliege.be
2 Plant Sciences Research Unit, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, University of Liege, Gembloux, Belgium; e-mail: F.Boeraeve@uliege.be

In response to the growing challenges of sustainable agriculture and the preservation of functional biodiversity, robust entomological monitoring protocols now require large-scale sampling, leading to significant operational costs. In this context, the adoption of cost-effective alternatives to preservation liquids is crucial. Vinegar, propylene glycol, and brine are three solutions commonly used in the literature, raising questions regarding the comparability of data across studies. We compared the effectiveness of vinegar, propylene glycol, and brine in Barber traps for the census of carabids (Carabidae), key auxiliaries in agroecosystems. Trapping campaigns were conducted in 2023 across 20 sugar beet plots (vinegar vs. propylene glycol) and in 2024 across 17 winter cereal plots (vinegar vs. brine), following standardized protocols. The results indicate that traps containing vinegar captured significantly more individuals overall than the other liquids, while maintaining a comparable species diversity and assemblage composition to those obtained with propylene glycol. In contrast, brine showed more variable captures compared to the other liquids and should be excluded for more reliable surveys. These findings suggest that vinegar, as an economical option, represents a promising alternative to propylene glycol for carabid census. However, the choice of preservation liquid should align with the specific objectives of each study: propylene glycol remains preferable for specimen preservation, particularly for DNA analyses, while vinegar offers an affordable solution for studies not requiring such analyses.

Keywords: Entomological monitoring, pitfall traps, carabids, preservation liquids, functional biodiversity

Received: March 27, 2026; Revised: June 24, 2026; Accepted: June 24, 2026; Published online: July 14, 2026  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
PÉTERS, J., DUFRÊNE, M., & BOERAEVE, F. (2026). Evaluation of vinegar effectiveness in carabid traps (Coleoptera: Carabidae): A viable alternative to conventional liquids. EJE, 123, Article 197-207. https://doi.org/10.14411/eje.2026.020
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Adis J. 1976: Bodenfallenfange in einem Buchenwald und ihr Aussagewert. Okologie. Arbeiten, Berichte, Mitteilungen (Solling-Projekt Zoologische Beiträge), Universität Ulm, 49 pp.
    2. Adis J. & Kramer E. 1975: Formaldehyd-Lösung attrahiert Carabus problematicus (Coleoptera: Carabidae). - Entomol. German. 2: 121-125. Go to original source...
    3. Anderson M.J. & Willis T.J. 2003: Canonical analysis of principal coordinates: A useful method of constrained ordination for ecology. - Ecology 84: 511-525. Go to original source...
    4. Aristophanous M. 2010: Does your preservative preserve? A comparison of the efficacy of some pitfall trap solutions in preserving the internal reproductive organs of dung beetles. - ZooKeys 34: 1-16. Go to original source...
    5. Barber H.S. 1931: Traps for cave-inhabiting insects. - J. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 46: 259-266.
    6. Bates D., Mächler M., Bolker B. & Walker S. 2015: Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. - J. Stat. Softw. 67(1): 48 pp. Go to original source...
    7. Boeraeve F., Vialatte A., Sirami C., Caro G., Thenard J., Francis F. & Dufrêne M. 2022: Combining organic and conservation agriculture to restore biodiversity? Insights from innovative farms in Belgium and their impacts on carabids and spiders. - Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 6: 1003637, 15 pp. Go to original source...
    8. Boetzl F.A., Ries E., Schneider G. & Krauss J. 2018: It's a matter of design - How pitfall trap design affects trap samples and possible predictions. - PeerJ 6: e5078, 14 pp. Go to original source...
    9. Brooks M.E., Kristensen K., Benthem K.J. van, Magnusson A., Berg C.W., Nielsen A., Skaug H.J., Maechler M. & Bolker B.M. 2017: glmmTMB balances speed and flexibility among packages for zero-inflated generalized linear mixed modeling. - R Journal 9: 378-400. Go to original source...
    10. Brown G.R. & Matthews I.M. 2016: A review of extensive variation in the design of pitfall traps and a proposal for a standard pitfall trap design for monitoring ground-active arthropod biodiversity. - Ecol. Evol. 6: 3953-3964. Go to original source...
    11. Buchholz S., Corman A.-M., Hertenstein F. & Schirmel J. 2010: Effect of the colour of pitfall traps on their capture efficiency of carabid beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae), spiders (Araneae) and other arthropods. - Eur. J. Entomol. 107: 277-280. Go to original source...
    12. Costa C., García-Lestón J., Costa S., Coelho P., Silva S., Pingarilho M., Valdiglesias V., Mattei F., Dall'Armi V., Bonassi S., Laffon B., Snawder J. & Teixeira J.P. 2014: Is organic farming safer to farmers' health? A comparison between organic and traditional farming. - Toxicol. Lett. 230: 166-176. Go to original source...
    13. Coulon J., Pupier R., Quéinnec E., Ollivier E. & Richoux P. 2011: Faune de France 94: Coléoptères carabiques. Fédération Française des sociétés de sciences naturelles, Paris, 337 pp.
    14. Császár P., Torma A., Gallé-Szpisjak N., Tölgyesi C. & Gallé R. 2018: Efficiency of pitfall traps with funnels and/or roofs in capturing ground-dwelling arthropods. - Eur. J. Entomol. 115: 15-24. Go to original source...
    15. Deppe F. & Fischer K. 2023: Landscape type affects the functional diversity of carabid beetles in agricultural landscapes. - Insect Conserv. Divers. 16: 441-450. Go to original source...
    16. Dethier V.G. 1947: Chemical Insect Attractants and Repellents. Blakiston, Philadelphia, xv + 289 pp.
    17. Fritsch C., Berny P., Crouzet O., Le Perchec S. & Coeurdassier M. 2025: Wildlife ecotoxicology of plant protection products: Knowns and unknowns about the impacts of currently used pesticides on terrestrial vertebrate biodiversity. - Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 32: 2893-2955. Go to original source...
    18. Gardarin A. & Valantin-Morison M. 2021: Which pitfall traps and sampling effort to choose to evaluate cropping system effects on spider and carabid assemblages? - Environ. Entomol. 50: 256-266. Go to original source...
    19. Geiger F., Bengtsson J., Berendse F., Weisser W.W., Emmerson M., Morales M.B., Ceryngier P., Liira J., Tscharntke T., … Inchausti P. 2010: Persistent negative effects of pesticides on biodiversity and biological control potential on European farmland. - Basic Appl. Ecol. 11: 97-105. Go to original source...
    20. Gerlach A., Voigtländer K. & Heidger C. 2009: Influences of the behaviour of epigeic arthropods (Diplopoda, Chilopoda, Carabidae) on the efficiency of pitfall trapping. - Soil Organisms 81: 773-790.
    21. Graux Y., Querejeta M., Gaba S., Bretagnolle V. & Boyer S. 2024: A comparison of live versus kill pitfall traps to assess the diet of carabids through a metabarcoding approach. - Entomol. Exp. Appl. 172: 249-260. Go to original source...
    22. Hartig F. 2016: DHARMa: Residual Diagnostics for Hierarchical (Multi-Level/Mixed) Regression Models. CRAN: Contributed Packages. URL: https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/ 1360583646752175744.
    23. Hertz M. 1927: Huomioita petokuoriaisten olinpaikoista. [Notes on the habitats of predatory beetles.] - Lunnon Ystävä 31: 218-222 [in Finnish].
    24. Hoekman D., LeVan K.E., Gibson C., Ball G.E., Browne R.A., Davidson R.L., Erwin T.L., Knisley C.B., LaBonte J.R., Lundgren J. et al. 2017: Design for ground beetle abundance and diversity sampling within the National Ecological Observatory Network. - Ecosphere 8: e01744, 17 pp. Go to original source...
    25. Hohbein R.R. & Conway C.J. 2018: Pitfall traps: A review of methods for estimating arthropod abundance. - Wildlife Soc. Bull. 42: 597-606. Go to original source...
    26. Holland J.M., Bianchi F.J.J.A., Entling M.H., Moonen A.-C., Smith B.M. & Jeanneret P. 2016: Structure, function and management of semi-natural habitats for conservation biological control: A review of European studies: Structure, function and management of semi-natural habitats for biological control. - Pest Manag. Sci. 72: 1638-1651. Go to original source...
    27. Holopainen J. 1992: Catch and sex ratio of Carabidae (Coleo­ptera) in pitfall traps filled with ethylene glycol or water. - Pedobiologia 36: 257-261. Go to original source...
    28. Knapp M. & Růžička J. 2013: The effect of pitfall trap construction and preservative on catch size, species richness and species composition of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae). - Eur. J. Entomol. 109: 419-426. Go to original source...
    29. Knapp M., Baranovská E. & Jakubec P. 2016: Effects of bait presence and type of preservative fluid on ground and carrion beetle samples collected by pitfall trapping. - Environ. Entomol. 45: 1022-1028. Go to original source...
    30. Koivula M., Kotze J., Hiisivuori L. & Rita H. 2003: Pitfall trap efficiency: Do trap size, collecting fluid and vegetation structure matter? - Entomol. Fenn. 14: 1-14. Go to original source...
    31. Kuznetsova A., Brockhoff P.B. & Christensen R.H.B. 2017: lmer test package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. - J. Stat. Softw. 82: 13, 26 pp. Go to original source...
    32. Kwon T.-S., Park Y.K., Jung J.-K., Lee Y.G., Park C.W. & Park Y.-S. 2022: Effects of preservatives in pitfall traps for collecting arthropods: A comparison of ethylene glycol and five alternative preservatives. - J. Asia-Pacific Biodiv. 15: 541-546. Go to original source...
    33. Lenth R.V., Piaskowski J., Banfai B., Bolker B., Buerkner P., Giné-Vázquez I., Hervé M., Jung M., Love J., Miguez F., Riebl H. & Singmann H. 2026: emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means. Version 2.0.3. URL: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/emmeans/index.html
    34. Litavský J. & Prokop P. 2024: Coverings on pitfall traps influence the abundance of ground-dwelling arthropods. - Diversity 16: 19, 13 pp. Go to original source...
    35. Luff M.L. 1968: Some effects of formalin on the numbers of Coleoptera caught in pitfall traps. - Entomol. Mon. Mag. 104: 115-116.
    36. Luff M.L. 1975: Some features influencing the efficiency of pitfall traps. - Oecologia 19: 345-357. Go to original source...
    37. Marrec R., Caro G., Migue P., Badenhausser I., Plantegenest M., Vialatte A., Bretagnolle V. & Gauffre B. 2017: Spatiotemporal dynamics of the agricultural landscape mosaic drives distribution and abundance of dominant carabid beetles. - Landsc. Ecol. 32: 2383-2398. Go to original source...
    38. Martin J.E. 1978: The Insects and Arachnids of Canada: Part 1. Collecting, Preparing, and Preserving Insects, Mites, and Spiders. Canadian Department of Agriculture, Ottawa, 182 pp.
    39. McCravy K. & Willand J. 2007: Effects of pitfall trap preservative on collections of carabid beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae). - The Great Lakes Entomologist 40: 154-165. Go to original source...
    40. Montgomery G.A., Belitz M.W., Guralnick R.P. & Tingley M.W. 2021: Standards and best practices for monitoring and benchmarking insects. - Front. Ecol. Evol. 8: 579193, 18 pp. Go to original source...
    41. Moreau C.S., Wray B.D., Czekanski-Moir J.E. & Rubin B.E.R. 2013: DNA preservation: A test of commonly used preservatives for insects. - Invertebr. Syst. 27: 81-86. Go to original source...
    42. Mostafalou S. & Abdollahi M. 2017: Pesticides: An update of human exposure and toxicity. - Arch. Toxicol. 91: 549-599. Go to original source...
    43. Müller P., Neuhoff D., Nabel M., Schiffers K. & Döring T.F. 2022: Tillage effects on ground beetles in temperate climates: A review. - Agron. Sustain. Dev. 42: 65, 20 pp. Go to original source...
    44. Nakamura S., Tamura S., Taki H. & Shoda-Kagaya E. 2020: Propylene glycol: A promising preservative for insects, comparable to ethanol, from trapping to DNA analysis. - Entomol. Exp. Appl. 168: 158-165. Go to original source...
    45. Oksanen J., Blanchet G.F., Friendly M., Kindt R., Legendre P., McGlinn D., Minchin P.R., O'Hara R.B., Simpson G.L., Solymos P., Stevens M.H.H. & Szoecs E. 2019: 'Vegan' Package for Multivariate Analyses in R. URL: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/vegan/vegan.pdf
    46. Onstad D.W. & Knolhoff L.M. 2023: Chapter one - Major issues in insect resistance management. In Onstad D.W. & Knolhoff L.M. (eds): Insect Resistance Management. 3rd ed. Academic Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 1-29. Go to original source...
    47. Pekár S. 2002: Differential effects of formaldehyde concentration and detergent on the catching efficiency of surface active arthropods by pitfall traps. - Pedobiologia 46: 539-547. Go to original source...
    48. R Core Team 2024: R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, URL: https://www.R-project.org/
    49. Roberts D.W. 2023: labdsv: Ordination and Multivariate Analysis for Ecology. R Package Version 2.1-0. URL: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=labdsv
    50. Roger J.-L., Jambon O. & Bouger G. 2012: Clé de détermination des carabides - Paysages agricoles du Nord Ouest de la France. INRA, Rennes, 253 pp.
    51. Santos S.A.P., Cabanas J.E. & Pereira J.A. 2007: Abundance and diversity of soil arthropods in olive grove ecosystem (Portugal): Effect of pitfall trap type. - Eur. J. Soil Biol. 43: 77-83. Go to original source...
    52. Saska P., Makowski D. & Van der Werf W. 2021: The effects of trapping effort and sources of variability on the estimation of activity-density and diversity of carabids in annual field crops by pitfall trapping; a meta-analysis. - Entomol. Gener. 41. 553-566. Go to original source...
    53. Scheller H.V. 1984: Pitfall trapping as the basis for studying ground beetle (Carabidae) predation in spring barley. - Tidsskr. Plantea 88: 317-324.
    54. Schmidt M., Clough Y. & Schulz W. 2006: Capture efficiency and preservation attributes of different fluids in pitfall traps. - J. Arachnol. 34: 159-162. Go to original source...
    55. Skvarla M.J., Larson J.L. & Dowling A.P.G. 2014: Pitfalls and preservatives: A review. - J. Entomol. Soc. Ont. 145: 15-43. Go to original source...
    56. Topping C.J. 1993: Behavioural responses of three linyphiid spiders to pitfall traps. - Entomol. Exp. Appl. 68: 287-293. Go to original source...
    57. Topping C.J. & Luff M.L. 1995: Three factors affecting the pitfall trap catch of linyphiid spiders (Araneae: Linyphiidae). - Bull. Br. Arachnol. Soc. 10: 35-38.
    58. Tougeron K., Couthouis E., Marrec R., Barascou L., Baudry J., Boussard H., Burel F., Couty A., Doury G., Francis C. et al. 2022: Multi-scale approach to biodiversity proxies of biological control service in European farmlands. - Sci. Total Environ. 822: 153569, 13 pp. Go to original source...
    59. Triquet C., Roume A., Tolon V., Wezel A. & Ferrer A. 2022: Undestroyed winter cover crop strip in maize fields supports ground-dwelling arthropods and predation. - Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 326: 107783, 13 pp. Go to original source...
    60. Wan N.-F., Fu L., Dainese M., Kiær L.P., Hu Y.-Q., Xin F., Goulson D., Woodcock B.A., Vanbergen A.J., Spurgeon D.J., Shen S. & Scherber C. 2025: Pesticides have negative effects on non-target organisms. - Nature Commun. 16: 1360, 16 pp. Go to original source...
    61. Weigand A.M., Desquiotz N., Weigand H. & Szucsich N. 2021: Application of propylene glycol in DNA-based studies of invertebrates. - Metabarcoding Metagenomics 5: e57278, 15 pp. Go to original source...
    62. Woodcock B.A. 2005: Pitfall trapping in ecological studies. In Leather S.R. (ed.): Insect Sampling in Forest Ecosystems. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, pp. 37-57. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content