abundance per species for each edge or interior location within a forest remnant (e.g., Harmonic
Woods) by dividing the summed count data per remnant edge and interior by total trap effort
(i.e., number of trap nights). Total trap effort was modified by sampling methodologies utilized
(e.g., 3 funnel traps and 1 pitfall=4/4, or 100% operational) per trap night. For example, if a total
of 10 frogs were caught over 4 nights in which the pitfall trap and only 2 of the 3 funnel traps
were open, then I would calculated this average as: 10/(4 [3/4]) = 3.33.
For most species, three funnel traps and one pitfall trap per array constituted the applicable
sampling methodologies at each array. For tree frogs, the sampling involved only the 6 PVC
pipes per array (e.g., 6 pipes = 6/6 or 100% operational). For Anolis sagrei, which were caught
using all sampling methodologies, the applicable sampling devices included the pipes, the funnel
traps, and the pitfall traps (e.g., 3 funnel traps, 1 pitfall, and 6 pipes = 10/10 or 100%
operational). I used this analytical approach because sampling effort per array was occasionally
reduced when traps or pipes were lost temporarily due to extreme weather or unknown
disturbances (i.e. raccoon interference), or intentionally removed due to ant predation.
In Harmonic Woods, Graham Woods, and Bartram-Carr Woods, there were only 2
sampling arrays (1 at edge, 1 at interior). Lake Alice Conservation Area and Biven's Forest were
larger and had two sampling arrays per edge and interior. However, I inadvertently placed 1 edge
location in each of the larger remnants (Biven's Forest and Lake Alice Conservation Area) too
far from boundaries of these remnants (i.e., > 20-40 m from patch boundaries). I excluded these
arrays from analysis to prevent undue bias on any actual edge effect. In addition, I only sampled
Bartram-Carr Woods through the first week of July in 2006 because of building construction that
began in that remnant.