Body size affects the spatial scale of habitat-beetle interactions

Oikos

Volumn 110, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 101-108

  Holland, Jeffrey D ^a   Fahrig, Lenore ^b   Cappuccino, Naomi ^b  

^a PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CARLETON UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BEETLE; BODY SIZE; HABITAT USE; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; VEGETATION COVER;

CERAMBYCIDAE; COLEOPTERA;

EID: 20444387282     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0030-1299.2005.13638.x     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Addicott, J. F., Aho, J. M., Antolin, M. F. et al. 1987. Ecological neighborhoods: scaling environmental patterns. - Oikos 49: 340-346.
2. Barbalat, S. 1995. Efficacité comparée de quelques méthodes de piégage sur certains coléopteres et influence de l'anthophilie sur le résultat des captures. - Bull. Soc. Neuchâteloise Sci. Nat. 118: 39-52.
3. Blackman, M. W. and Stage, H. H. 1924. On the succession of insects living in the bark and wood of dying, dead and decaying hickory. - New York State College of Forestry at Syracuse University, Tech. Publ. No. 17.
4. Bowman, J., Jaeger, J. A. G. and Fahrig, L. 2002. Dispersal distance of mammals is proportional to home range size. - Ecology 83: 2049-2055.
5. Cale, P. G. and Hobbs, R. J. 1994. Landscape heterogeneity indices: problems of scale and applicability, with particular reference to animal habitat description. - Pac. Conserv. Biol. 1: 183-193.
6. Clarke, R. T., Thomas, J. A., Elmes, G. W. et al. 1997. The effects of spatial patterns in habitat quality on community dynamics within a site. - Proc. R. Soc. Lond Ser. B. 1380: 347-354.
7. Craighead, F. C. 1950. Insect enemies of eastern forests. Misc. Publication No. 657. - US Government Printing Office. Washington.
8. Elliott, N. C., Kieckhefer, R. W., Lee, J.-H. et al. 1998. Influence of within-field and landscape factors on aphid predator populations in wheat. - Landscape Ecol. 14: 239-252.
9. Gehring, T. M. and Swihart, R. K. 2003. Body size, niche breadth, and ecologically scaled responses to habitat fragmentation: mammalian predators in an agricultural landscape. - Biol. Conserv. 109: 283-295.
10. Gjerløv, C. 1997. Disturbance and refugia in the ecology of stream benthic communities. PhD thesis. - School of Biological Sciences, Queen Mary and Westfield College, Univ. of London.
11. Graham, J. A. 1925. The felled tree trunk as an ecological unit. - Ecology 6: 397-411.
12. Gutowski, J. M. 2002. The role of Cerambycidae and Buprestidae (Coleoptera) in forest ecosystems and some remarks on their economic significance. - In: 4th Symp. Protection of Forest Ecosystems, Warsaw Agric. Univ., pp. 165-175.
13. Hanks, L. M. 1999. Influence of the larval host plant on reproductive strategies of cerambycid beetles. - Annu. Rev. Entomol. 44: 483-505.
14. Hanks, L. M., Paine, T. D. and Millar, J. G. 1993. Host species preference and larval performance in the wood-boring beetle Phoracantha semipunctata F. - Oecologia 95: 22-29.
15. Hanks, L. M., Millar, J. G. and Paine, T. D. 1998. Dispersal of the eucalyptus longhorned borer (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in urban landscapes. - Environ. Entomol. 27: 1418-1424.
16. Hanski, I. 1987. Colonization of ephemeral habitats. - In: Gray, A. J., Crawley, M. J. and Edwards, P. J. (eds), Colonization, succession and stability. Blackwell, pp. 155-185.
17. Holland, J. D., Bert, D. G. and Fahrig, L. 2004. Determining the spatial scale of species' response to habitat. - Bioscience 54: 229-235.
18. Kinnunen, H., Tiainen, J. and Tukia, H. 2001. Farmland carabid beetle communities at multiple levels of spatial scale. - Ecography 24: 189-197.
19. Kletecka, Z. 1996. The xylophagous beetles (Insecta, Coleoptera) community and its succession on scotch elm (Ulmus glabra) branches. - Biologia 51: 143-152.
20. Linsley, E. G. 1954. Ecology of Cerambycidae. - Annu. Rev. Entomol. 4: 99-138.
21. Linsley, E. G. 1962a. The Cerambycidae of North America, Part II Taxonomy and classification of the Parandrinae, Prioninae, Spondylinae and Aseminae. - Univ. of California Press.
22. Linsley, E. G. 1962b. The Cerambycidae of North America, Part III Taxonomy and classification of the subfamily Cerambycinae, tribes Opsimini through Megaderini. - Univ. of California Press.
23. Linsley, E. G. 1963. The Cerambycidae of North America, Part IV Taxonomy and classification of the subfamily Cerambycinae, Elaphidionini through Rhinotragini. - Univ. of California Press.
24. Linsley, E. G. 1964. The Cerambycidae of North America, Part V. Taxonomy and classification of the subfamily Cerambycinae, tribes Callichromini through Ancylocerini. - Univ. of California Press.
25. Linsley, E. G. and Chemsak, J. A. 1972. The Cerambycidae of North America, Part VI No. 1 Taxonomy and classification of the subfamily Lepturinae. - Univ. of California Press.
26. Linsley, E. G. and Chemsak, J. A. 1976. The Cerambycidae of North America, Part VI No. 2 Taxonomy and classification of the subfamily Lepturinae. - Univ. of California Press.
27. Lomolino, M. V. and Creighton, J. C. 1996. Habitat selection, breeding success and conservation of the endangered American burying beetle Nicrophorus americanus. - Biol. Conserv. 77: 235-241.
28. Ludwig, J. A., Wiens, J. A. and Tongway, D. J. 2000. A scaling rule for landscape patches and how it applies to conserving soil resources in savannas. - Ecosystems 3: 84-97.
29. Mech, S. G. and Zollner, P. A. 2002. Using body size to predict perceptual range. - Oikos 98: 47-52.
30. Mitchell, M. S., Lancia, R. A. and Gerwin, J. A. 2001. Using landscape-level data to predict the distribution of birds on a managed forest: effects of scale. - Ecol. Appl. 11: 1692-1708.
31. Nicholson, A. J. 1954. An outline of the dynamics of animal populations. - Aust. J. Zool. 2: 9-65.
32. Nilsson, S. G. and Baranowski, R. 1994. Indikatorer på jätteträdskontinuitet - svenska förekomster av knäppare som är beroende av grova, levande träd. - Entomol. Tidskrift 115: 81-97.
33. Økland, B., Bakke, A., Hågvar, S. et al. 1996. What factors influence the diversity of saproxylic beetles? A multiscaled study from a spruce forest in southern Norway. - Biodiv. Conserv. 5: 75-100.
34. Perry, G. and Garland, T. 2002. Lizard home ranges revisited: effects of sex, body size, diet, habitat, and phylogeny. - Ecology 83: 1870-1885.
35. Peters, R. H. 1983. The ecological implications of body size. - Cambridge Univ. Press.
36. Roland, J. and Taylor, P. D. 1997. Insect parasitoid species respond to forest structure at different spatial scales. - Nature 386: 710-713.
37. Rukke, B. A. and Midtgaard, F. 1998. The importance of scale and spatial variables for the fungivorous beetle Bolitophagus reticulatus (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) in a fragmented forest landscape. - Ecography 21: 561-572.
38. Safranyik, L. and Moeck, H. A. 1995. Wood borers. - In: Armstrong, J. A. and Ives, W. G. H. (eds), Forest insect pests in Canada. Nat. Resour. Can. Can. For. Serv, pp. 171-177.
39. Samuelsson, J., Gustafsson, L. and Ingelög, T. 1994. Dying and dead trees - a review of their importance in nature conservation. - SLU Info/Repro, Uppsala, Sweden.
40. Scheiner, S. M., Cox, S. B., Willig, M. et al. 2000. Species richness, species-area curves and Simpson's paradox. - Evol. Ecol. Res. 2: 791-802.
41. Schopf, K. M. and Ivany, L. C. 1998. Scaling the ecosystem: a hierarchical view of stasis and change. - In: McKinney, M. L. and Drake, J. A. (eds), Biodiversity dynamics: turnover of populations, taxa, and communities. Columbia Univ. Press.
42. Schowalter, T. D. 1985. Adaptations of insects to disturbance. - In: Pickett, S. T. A. and White, P. S. (eds), The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, pp. 235-252.
43. Shibata, E. 1987. Oviposition schedules, survivorship curves, and mortality factors within trees of two cerambycid beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae), the Japanese pine sawyer, Monochamus alternatus Hope, and Sugi bark borer, Semanotus japonicus Lacordaire. - Res. Popul. Ecol. 29: 347-367.
44. Southwood, T. R. E. 1977. Habitat, templet for ecological strategies - presidential address to British Ecological Society, 5 January 1977. - J. Anim. Ecol. 46: 337-365.
45. Starzomski, B. M. and Bondrup-Nielsen, S. 2002. Analysis of movement and the consequence for metapopulation structure of the forked fungus beetle, Bolitotherus cornutus Panzer (Tenebrionidae). - Ecoscience 9: 20-27.
46. Steffan-Dewenter, I., Munzenberg, U., Burger, C. et al. 2002. Scale-dependent effects of landscape context on three pollinator guilds. - Ecology 83: 1421-1432.
47. Sutherland, G. D., Harestad, A. S., Price, K. et al. 2000. Scaling of natal dispersal distances in terrestrial birds and mammals. - Conserv. Ecol. 4: 16. [online] URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol4/iss1/art16.
48. Thomas, C. D. and Kunin, W. E. 1999. The spatial structure of populations. - J. Anim. Ecol. 67: 647-657.
49. Wiens, J. A. and Milne, B. T. 1989. Scaling of 'landscapes' in landscape ecology, or, landscape ecology from a beetle's perspective. - Landscape Ecol. 3: 87-96.
50. Yanega, D. 1996. Field guide to northeastern longhorned beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). - Illinois Nat. Hist. Surv.