Butterfly diversity and human land use: Species assemblages along an urban gradient

Biological Conservation

Volumn 80, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 113-125

  Blair, Robert B ^a   Launer, Alan E ^b  

^a MIAMI UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

butterflies; conservation; gradient analysis; land use; oak woodland; species diversity; urbanization

Indexed keywords

BUTTERFLY COMMUNITY; LAND USE; URBAN GRADIENT;

USA, CALIFORNIA, PALO ALTO;

LEPIDOPTERA; PAPILIONOIDEA; QUERCUS; SCOMBERESOX SAURUS SAURUS;

EID: 0030949138     PISSN: 00063207     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0006-3207(96)00056-0     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Alig, R. J. & Healy, R. G. (1987). Urban and built-up land area changes in the United States: an empirical investigation of determinants. Land Economics, 63, 215-226.
2. Blair, R. B. (1994). Birds, butterflies, and conservation on an urban gradient in central California. PhD dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
3. Brown, K. S. (1982). Paleoecology and regional patterns of evolution in neotropical forest butterflies. In Biological diversification in the tropics, ed. G.T. Prance. Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 255-308.
4. Cairns, J. (1988). Restoration ecology: the new frontier. In Rehabilitating damaged ecosystems, ed. J. Cairns. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 2-11.
5. Clay, G. (1994). Real places: an unconventional guide to America's generic landscape. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
6. Connell, J. H. (1978). Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs. Science, N.Y., 199, 1302-1310.
7. Cooper, W. S. (1926). Vegetational development upon alluvial fans in the vicinity of Palo Alto, California. Ecology, 7, 1-30.
8. Denslow, J. S. (1985). Disturbance-mediated coexistence of species. In The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics, ed. S. T. A. Pickett & P. S. White. Academic Press, Orlando, FL, pp. 307-323.
9. del Moral, R. (1983). Competition as a control mechanism in subalpine meadows. Amer. J. Bot., 70, 232-245.
10. Ehrlich, P. R. & Raven, P. H. (1964). Butterflies and plants: a study in coevolution. Evolution, 18, 586-608.
11. Ehrlich, P. R., Breedlove, D. E., Brussard, P. F. & Sharp, M. A. (1972). Weather and the regulation of subalpine populations. Ecology, 53, 243-247.
12. Garth, J. S. & Tilden, J. W. (1986). California butterflies. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
13. Gilbert, L. E. (1980). Food web organization and the conservation of neotropical diversity. In Conservation biology: an evolutionary-ecological perspective, ed. M. E. Soule & B. A. Wilcox. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA, pp. 11-34.
14. Gilbert, L. E. (1984). The biology of butterfly communities. In The biology of butterflies, ed. R. I. Vane-Wright & P. R. Ackery. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp. 41-54.
15. Grantham, B. A. & Hann, B. J. (in press) Leeches (Annelida: Hirudinea) in the experimental lakes area, Northwestern Ontario, Canada: patterns of species composition in relation to environment. Can. J. Fish. Aqua. Sci., 51, 1600-1607.
16. Grime, J. P. (1979). Plant stategies and vegetation processes. John Wiley, New York.
17. Harker, D., Evans, S., Evans, M. & Harker, K. (1993). Landscape restoration handbook. Lewis, Boca Raton, FL.
18. Huston, M. (1979). A general hypothesis of species diversity. Amer. Nat., 113, 81-101.
19. Huston, M. A. (1994). Biological diversity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
20. Kremen, C. (1992). Assessing the indicator properties of species assemblages for natural areas monitoring. Ecol. Appl., 2, 203-217.
21. Lubchenco, J. (1978). Plant species diversity in a marine intertidal community: importance of herbivore food preference and algal competitive abilities. Amer. Nat., 112, 2339.
22. McDonnell, M. J. & Pickett, S. T. A. (1990). Ecosystem structure and function along urban-rural gradients: an unexploited opportunity for ecology. Ecology, 71, 1232-1237.
23. McDonnell, M. J., Pickett, S. T. A. & Pouyat, R. V. (1993). The application of the ecological gradient paradigm to the study of urban effects. In Humans as components of ecosystems, ed. M. J. McDonnell & S. T. A. Pickett. Springer, New York, pp. 175-189.
24. Magurran, A. E. (1988). Ecological diversity and its measurement. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
25. Murphy, D. D., Freas, K. E. & Weiss, S. B. (1990). An environment-metapopulation approach to population viability analysis for a threatened invertebrate. Conserv. Biol., 4, 41-51.
26. Opler, P. A. & Langston, R. L. (1968). A distributional analysis of the butterflies of Contra Costa County California. J. Lepid. Soc., 22, 89-107.
27. Paine, R. T. & Levin, S. A. (1981). Intertidal landscapes: disturbance and dynamics of patterns. Ecol. Monogr., 51, 145-178.
28. Palmer, M. W. (1993). Putting things in even better order: the advantages of canonical correspondence analysis. Ecology, 74, 2215-2230.
29. Petraitis, P. S., Latham, R. E. & Niesenbaum, R. A. (1989). The maintenance of species diversity by disturbance. Q. Rev. Biol., 64, 393-418.
30. Poulin, B., Lefebvre, G. & McNeil, R. (1993). Variations in bird abundance in tropical arid and semi-arid habitats. Ibis, 135, 432-441.
31. Pyle, R. M. (1980). Butterfly eco-geography and biological conservation in Washington. Atala, 8, 1-26.
32. Ruszczyk, A. (1986). Distribution and abundance of butterflies in the urbanization zones of Porto Alegre Brazil. J. Res. Lepid., 25, 157-178.
33. Ruszczyk, A. & De Araujo, A. M. (1992). Gradients in butterfly species diversity in an urban area in Brazil. J. Lepid. Soc., 46, 255-264.
34. Rudnicky, J. L. & McDonnell, M. J. (1989). Forty-eight years of canopy change in a hardwood-hemlock forest in New York City. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, 116, 52-64.
35. Shapiro, A. M. (1987). The butterfly fauna of the University of California at Davis and environs with recommendations for management and development. Background for the University of California at Davis Long Range Development Plan (unpublished report).
36. Shapiro, A. M. & Shapiro, A. R. (1973). The ecological associations of the butterflies of Staten Island. J. Res. Lepid., 12, 65-128.
37. ter Braak, C. J. F. (1992). CANOCO - A FORTRAN program for Canonical Community Ordination. Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, NY.
38. ter Braak, C. J. F. & Prentice, I. C. (1988). A theory of gradient analysis. Adv. Ecol. Res., 18, 271-317.
39. ter Braak, C. J. F. (1986). Canonical correspondence analysis: a new eigenvector technique for multivariable direct gradient analysis. Ecology, 67, 1167-1179.
40. Tilden, J. W. (1965). Butterflies of the San Francisco Bay region. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
41. Tilman, D. (1982). Resource competition and community structure. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
42. Watt, W. B., Chew, F. S., Snyder, L. R. G., Watt, A. G. & Rothschild, D. E. (1968). Population structure of pierid butterflies, I. Numbers and movements of some montane Colias species. Oecologia, Berl., 27, 1-22.
43. Weiss, S. B., White, R. R., Murphy, D. D. & Ehrlich, P. R. (1987). Growth and dispersal of larvae of the checkerspot butterfly Euphydryas editha. Oikos, 50, 161-166.
44. Weiss, S. B., Murphy, D. D. & White, R. R. (1988). Sun, slope and butterflies: topographic determinants of habitat quality for Euphydryas editha. Ecology, 69, 1486-1496.
45. Whitney, G. G. & Adams, S. D. (1980). Man as maker of new plant communities. J. Appl. Ecol., 17, 341-448.
46. Whittaker, R. H. (1967). Gradient analysis of vegetation. Biol. Rev., 49, 207-264.
47. World Resources Institute (1994a). World resources 1994-1995: a guide to the global environment. Oxford University Press, New York.
48. World Resources Institute (1994b). Information please environmental almanac. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA.
49. Yamamoto, M. (1977). A comparison of butterflies assemblages in and near Sapporo city, northern Japan. J. Fac. Sci. Hokkaido Univ. Ser. 6, Zool., 20, 621-646.
50. Zuboy, J. R. (1981). A new tool for fisheries managers: the Delphi technique. N. Amer. J. Fish. Manage., 1, 55-59.