Estimation of habitat quality based on plant community, and effects of isolation in a network of butterfly habitat patches

Acta Oecologica

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 25-33

  Sawchik, Javier ^a,b   Dufrêne, Marc ^a   Lebrun, Philippe ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ CATHOLIQUE DE LOUVAIN   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSIDAD DE LA REPÚBLICA   (Uruguay)

Author keywords

Butterfly assemblage; CCA; Habitat connectivity; Habitat quality; Isolation effect; Predictive model

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE; BUTTERFLY; ENDANGERED SPECIES; HABITAT QUALITY; ISOLATION EFFECT; PATCH DYNAMICS; PREDICTION;

CLOSSIANA SELENE; HELLE; LYCAENA; LYCAENA HELLE; LYCAENA HIPPOTHOE; PROCLOSSIANA; PROCLOSSIANA EUNOMIA; SELENE;

EID: 0242499952     PISSN: 1146609X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1146-609X(02)00005-X     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Baguette, M., Nève, G., 1994. Adult movements between populations in the specialist butterfly Proclossiana eunomia (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae). Ecol. Entomol. 19, 1-5.
2. Borcard, D., Legendre, P., Drapeau, P., 1992. Partialling out the spatial component of ecological variation. Ecology 73, 1045-1055.
3. Boyce, M.S., 1992. Population viability analysis. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 23, 481-506.
4. ter Braak, C.F.J., 1986. Canonical correspondence analysis: a new eigenvector technique for multivariate direct gradient analysis. Ecology 67, 1167-1179.
5. ter Braak, C.F.J., 1987. The analysis of vegetation-environment relationship by canonical correspondence analysis. Vegetatio 69, 69-77.
6. ter Braak, C.F.J., 1989. Canoco-a Fortran program for canonical community ordination by (partial) (detrended) (canonical) correspondence analysis, principal components analysis and redundancy analysis (version 2.1). Agricultural Mathematics Group, Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Wageningen.
7. ter Braak, C.F.J., 1990. Update notes: Canoco version 3.10. Agricultural Mathematics Group, Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Wageningen.
8. ter Braak, C.J.F., Prentice, I.C., 1988. A theory of gradient analysis. Adv. Ecol. Res. 18, 271-317.
9. ter Braak, C.J.F., Smilauer, P., 1998. Canoco reference manual and user's guide to Canoco for Windows: software for canonical community ordination (version 4). Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, NY.
10. Burgman, M.A., Ferson, S., Akçakaya, H.R., 1996. Risk Assessment in Conservation Biology. Chapman & Hall, London.
11. Chew, F.S., 1980. Food plants preferences of Pieris caterpillars (Lepidoptera). Oecologia 46, 347-353.
12. Daiyuan, P., André, B., Legendre, P., Gérald, D., 1998. Influence of edaphic factors on the spatial structure of inland halophytic communities: a case study in China. J. Veg. Sci. 9, 797-804.
13. Dowdy, S., Wearden, S., 1985. Statistics for Research. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
14. EEW, 1993. Etat de l'environnement wallon, Chapitre Faune-Flore, Ministère de la Région wallonne, Jambes.
15. Ellenberg, H., Weber, H.E., Düll, R., 1992. Indicator values of plants in Central Europe, Scripta Geobotanica. Goltze Verlag, Göttingen.
16. Fischer, K., Beinlich, B., Platcher, H., 1999. Population structure, mobility and habitat preferences of the violet copper Lycaena helle (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in Western Germany: implications for conservation. J. Insect. Conserv. 3, 43-52.
17. Gilbert, L., Singer, M.C., 1975. Butterfly ecology, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 6, 365-397.
18. Goffart, P., Waeyenbergh, M., 1994. Exigences écologiques et gestion des populations de deux papillons des prairies humides ardennaises: le cuivré et le nacré de la bistorte (Lycaena helle, Proclossiana eunomia). Cah. Réserves Nat. 7, 21-29.
19. Goffart, P., Baguette, M., de Bast, B., 1992. La situation des Lépidoptères Rhopalocères en Wallonie ou que sont nos papillons devenus? Bull. Soc. R. Beige Entomol. 128, 355-392.
20. Hanski, I.A., 1998. Metapopulation ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
21. Hanski, I.A., Gilpin, M.E. (Eds.), 1997. Metapopulation Biology: Ecology, Genetics and Evolution. Academic Press, San Diego.
22. Holl, K.D., 1995. Nectar resources and their influence on butterfly communities on reclaimed coal surface mine. Restoration Ecol. 3, 76-85.
23. Jongman, R.H.G., ter Braak, C.J.F., van Tongeren, O.F.R. (Eds.), 1995. Data Analysis in Community and Landscape Ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
24. Kent, M., Coker, P., 1992. Vegetation Description: A Practical Approach. Belhaven Press, London.
25. Kremen, C., 1992. Assessing the indicator properties of species assemblages for natural areas monitoring. Ecol. Appl. 2, 203-217.
26. Legendre, P., 1993. Spatial autocorrelation: trouble or a new paradigm?. Ecology 74, 1659-1673.
27. Legendre, P., Fortin, M.J., 1989. Spatial patterns and ecological analysis. Vegetatio 80, 107-178.
28. Legendre, P., Legendre, L., 1998. Numerical Ecology. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
29. Legendre, P., Vaudor, A., 1991. Le progiciel R: analyse multidimensionnelle, analyse spatiale. Université de Montréal, Montréal.
30. Lindenmayer, D.B., Burgman, M.A., Akçakaya, H.R., Lacy, R.C., Possingham, H.P., 1995. A review of the generic computer-programs Alex, Ramas/space and Vortex for modeling the viability of wildlife metapopulations. Ecol. Modell. 82, 161-174.
31. Loertscher, M., Erhardt, A., Zettel, J., 1995. Microdistribution of butterflies in a mosaic-like habitat: the role of nectar sources. Ecography 18, 15-26.
32. Moilanen, A., 1998. Modeling metapopulation dynamics, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Helsinki, Helsinki.
33. Moilanen, A., Hanski, I., 1998. Metapopulation dynamics: effects of habitat quality and landscape structure. Ecology 79, 2503-2515.
34. Murphy, D.D., 1983. Nectar sources as constraints on the distribution of egg masses by the checkerspot butterfly. Euphydryas chalcedona (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Environ. Entomol. 12, 463-466.
35. Nève, G., 1996. Dispersion chez une espèce à habitat fragmenté: Proclossiana eunomia (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae), Ph.D. Thesis, Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain-La-Neuve.
36. Nève, G., Barascud, B., Hughes, R., Aubert, J., Descimon, H., Lebrun, P., Baguette, M., 1996. Dispersal, colonisation power and metapopulation structure in the vulnerable butterfly Proclossiana eunomia (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). J. Appl. Ecol. 33, 14-22.
37. Øksanen, J., Minchin, P.R., 1997. Instability of ordination axes results under changes in input order: explanations and remedies. J. Veg. Sci. 8, 447-454.
38. Oostermeijer, J.G.B., van Swaay, C.A.M., 1998. The relationship between butterflies and environmental indicator values: a tool for conservation in a changing landscape. Biol. Conserv. 86, 271-280.
39. Palmer, M.W., 1993. Putting things in even better order: the advantages of canonical correspondence analysis. Ecology 74, 2215-2230.
40. Pollard, E., 1977. A method of assessing changes in the abundance of butterflies. Biol. Conserv. 12, 115-134.
41. Porter, K., 1992. Eggs and egg-laying. In: Dennis, R.L.H. (Ed.), The Ecology of Butterflies in Britain. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 46-72.
42. Post, E., Stenseth, N.C., 1998. Large-scale climatic fluctuation and population dynamics of moose and white-tailed deer. J. Anim. Ecol. 67, 537-543.
43. Potvin, C., Roff, D.A., 1993. Distribution-free and robust statistical methods: viable alternatives to parametrics statistics. Ecology 74, 1617-1628.
44. Ravenscroft, N.O.M., 1994. The ecology of the chequered skipper butterfly Carterocephalus palaemon in Scotland: food plant quality and population range. J. Appl. Ecol. 31, 623-630.
45. SAS, 1982. SAS users guide: statistics, SAS. Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina.
46. Sawchik, J., 1999. Répartition spatial et dynamique de populations de rhopalocères des prairies humides du Plateau des Tallies, Ph.D. Thesis, Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve.
47. Shaffer, M.L., 1990. Minimum viable population: coping with uncertainty. In: Soulé, M.E. (Ed.), Viable Populations for Conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 69-86.
48. Shreeve, T.G., 1992. Adult behaviour. In: Dennis, R.L.H. (Ed.), The Ecology of Butterflies in Britain. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 22-45.
49. Smallidge, P.J., Leopold, D.J., Allen, C.M., 1996. Community characteristics and vegetation management of karner blue butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis) habitats on rights-of-way in east-central New York, USA. J. Appl. Ecol. 33, 1405-1419.
50. Thomas, J.A., 1984. A quick method for estimating butterfly numbers during surveys. Biol. Conserv. 27, 195-211.
51. Thomas, J.A., Bourn, N.A.D., Clarke, R.T., Stewart, K.E., Simcox, D.J., Pearman, G.S., Curtis, R., Goodger, B., 2001. The quality and isolation of habitat patches both determine where butterflies persist in fragmented landscapes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268, 1791-1796.
52. Wheeler, B.D., Proctor, M.C.F., 2000. Ecological gradients, subdivisions and terminology of north-west European mires. J. Ecol. 88, 187-203.