Relative importance of resource quantity, isolation and habitat quality for landscape distribution of a monophagous butterfly

Ecography

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 465-474

  Krauss, Jochen ^a   Steffan Dewenter, Ingolf ^a   Müller, Christine B ^b   Tscharntke, Teja ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BUTTERFLY; EXTINCTION; FRAGMENTATION; HABITAT QUALITY; POPULATION SIZE;

CENTRAL EUROPE; EASTERN HEMISPHERE; EURASIA; EUROPE; GERMANY; WORLD;

HIPPOCREPIS COMOSA; MAGNOLIOPHYTA; POLYOMMATUS CORIDON;

EID: 23144446237     PISSN: 09067590     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0906-7590.2005.04201.x     Document Type: Review

References (50)

1. Anon. 2001. Statgraphics Plus for Windows, ver. 5.1. - Manugistics, Rockville, MD, USA.
2. Anon. 2004. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. - R Foundation for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria, URL 〈http://www.R- project.org〉.
3. Asher, J. et al. 2001. The millennium atlas of butterflies in Britain and Ireland. - Oxford Univ. Press.
4. Bink, F. A. 1992. Ecologische Atlas van de Dagvlinders van Noordwest-Europa. - Schuyt, Haarem, The Netherlands.
5. Bourn, N. A. D. and Thomas, J. A. 2002. The challenge of conserving grassland insects at the margins of their range in Europe. - Biol. Conserv. 104: 285-292.
6. Bowers, M. A. and Matter, S. F. 1997. Landscape ecology of mammals: relationship between density and patch size. - J. Mammal. 78: 999-1013.
7. Brunken, G. 2002. Zur aktuellen und ehemaligen Situation ausgewählter Tagfalterarten in Landkreis und Stadt Göttingen. - Naturkundliche Berichte zur Fauna und Flora in Süd-Niedersachsen 7: 188-242.
8. Connor, E. F., Courtney, A. C. and Yoder, J. M. 2000. Individuals-area relationships: the relationship between animal population density and area. - Ecology 81: 734-748.
9. Cowley, M. J. R. et al. 2001. Density-distribution relationships in British butterflies. I. The effect of mobility and spatial scale. - J. Anim. Ecol. 70: 410-425.
10. Dennis, R. L. H. and Eales, H. T. 1997. Patch occupancy in Coenonympha tullia (Müller, 1764) (Lepidoptera: Satyrinae): habitat quality matters as much as patch size and isolation. - J. Insect Conserv. 1: 167-176.
11. Dennis, R. L. H., Shreeve, T. G. and Van Dyck, H. 2003. Towards a functional resource-based concept for habitat: a butterfly biology viewpoint. - Oikos 102: 417-426.
12. Eber, S. and Brandl, R. 1996. Metapopulation dynamics of the tephritid fly Urophora cardui: an evaluation of incidence-function model assumptions with field data. - J. Anim. Ecol. 65: 621-630.
13. Ebert, G. and Rennwald, E. 1991. Die Schmetterlinge Baden- Württembergs. Band 1, Tagfalter I., Band 2, Tagfalter II. - Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, Germany.
14. Feber, R. E., Smith, H. and MacDonald, D. W. 1996. The effects on butterfly abundance of the management of uncropped edges of arable fields. - J. Appl. Ecol. 33: 1191-1205.
15. Goverde, M. and Erhardt, A. 2003. Effects of elevated CO2 on development and larval food-plant preference in the butterfly Coenonympha pamphilus (Lepidoptera, Satyridae). - Glob. Change Biol. 9: 74-83.
16. Gutierrez, D., Thomas, C. D. and Leon-Cortes, J. L. 1999. Dispersal, distribution, patch network and metapopulation dynamics of the dingy skipper butterfly (Erynnis tages). - Oecologia 121: 506-517.
17. Hanski, I. 1994. Patch-occupancy dynamics in fragmented landscapes. - Trends Ecol. Evol. 9: 131-135.
18. Hanski, I. and Singer, M. C. 2001. Extinction-colonization dynamics and host-plant choice in butterfly metapopulations. - Am. Nat. 158: 341-353.
19. Hanski, I., Kuussaari, M. and Nieminen, M. 1994. Metapopulation structure and migration in the butterfly Melitaea cinxia. - Ecology 75: 747-762.
20. Harper, G. L., Malian, N. and Goulson, D. 2003. Microsatellite markers to assess the influence of population size, isolation and demographic change on the genetic structure of the UK butterfly Polyommatus bellargus. - Mol. Ecol. 12: 3349-3357.
21. Hennenberg, K. J. and Bruelheide, H. 2003. Ecological investigations on the northern distribution range of Hippocrepis comosa L. in Germany. - Plant Ecol. 166: 167-188.
22. Hjermann, D. O. and Ims, R. A. 1996. Landscape ecology of the wart-biter Decticus verrucivorus in a patchy landscape. - J. Anim. Ecol. 65: 768-780.
23. Hula, V. et al. 2004. Marsh fritillary (Euphydryas aurinia) in the Czech Republic: monitoring, metapopulation structure, and conservation of the endangered butterfly. - Entomol. Fenn. 15: 231-241.
24. Jedicke, E. 1997. Die Roten Listen gefährdeter Pflanzen, Tiere, Pflanzengesellschaften und Biotope in Bund und Ländern. - Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, Germany.
25. Konvicka, M., Hula, V. and Fric, Z. 2003. Habitat of prehibernating larvae of the endangered butterfly Euphydryas aurinia (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae): what can be learned from vegetation composition and architecture? - Euro. J. Entomol. 100: 313-322.
26. Krauss, J., Steffan-Dewenter, I. and Tscharntke, T. 2003a. How does landscape context contribute to effects of habitat fragmentation on diversity and population density of butterflies? - J. Biogeogr. 30: 889-900.
27. Krauss, J., Steffan-Dewenter, I. and Tscharntke, T. 2003b. Local species immigration, extinction, and turnover of butterflies in relation to habitat area and habitat isolation. - Oecologia 137: 591-602.
28. Krauss, J., Steffan-Dewenter, I. and Tscharntke, T. 2004a. Landscape occupancy and local population size depends on host plant distribution in the butterfly Cupido minimus. - Biol. Conserv. 120: 359-365.
29. Krauss, J. et al. 2004b. Effects of habitat area, isolation, and landscape diversity on plant species richness of calcareous grasslands. - Biodiv. Conserv. 13: 1427-1439.
30. Krauss, J. et al. 2004c. The genetic structure of the mono-phagous butterfly Polyommatus coridon along its northern range margin. - Mol. Ecol. 13: 311-320.
31. Kudrna, O. 2002. The distribution atlas of European butterflies. Distribution maps of all species. - Oedippus 20: 1-343.
32. Legendre, P. and Legendre, L. 1998. Numerical Ecolog, 2nd ed. - Elsevier.
33. Leon-Cortes, J. L., Lennon, J. J. and Thomas, C. D. 2003. Ecological dynamics of extinct species in empty habitat networks. 2. The role of host plant dynamics. - Oikos 102: 465-477.
34. Matter, S. F. 2003. Modeling the density-area relationship in a dynamic landscape: an examination for the beetle Tetraopes tetraophthalmus and a generalized model. - Ecol. Modell. 169: 103-117.
35. Moilanen, A. and Hanski, I. 1998. Metapopulation dynamics: effects of habitat quality and landscape structure. - Ecology 79: 2503-2515.
36. Moilanen, A. and Nieminen, M. 2002. Simple connectivity measures in spatial ecology. - Ecology 83: 1131-1145.
37. Murphy, H. T. and Lovett-Doust, J. 2004. Context and connectivity in plant metapopulations and landscape mosaics: does the matrix matter? - Oikos 105: 3-14.
38. Pollard, E. 1977. A method for assessing changes in the abundance of butterflies. - Biol. Conserv. 12: 115-134.
39. Rusterholz, H.-P. and Erhardt, A. 2000. Can nectar properties explain sex-specific flower preferences in the Adonis blue butterfly Lysandra bellargus. - Ecol. Entomol. 25: 81-90.
40. Schmitt, T. and Seitz, A. 2002. Influence of habitat fragmentation on the genetic structure of Polyommatus coridon (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae): implications for conservation. - Biol. Conserv. 107: 291-297.
41. Sokal, R. R. and Rohlf, F. 1995. Biometry. - Freeman, New York, USA.
42. Steffan-Dewenter, I. and Tscharntke, T. 2000. Butterfly community structure in fragmented habitats. - Ecol. Lett. 3: 449-456.
43. Steffan-Dewenter, I. and Tscharntke, T. 2002. Insect communities and biotic interactions on fragmented calcareous grasslands-a mini review. - Biol. Conserv. 104: 275-284.
44. Thomas, C. D., Thomas, J. A. and Warren, M. S. 1992. Distribution of occupied and vacant butterfly habitats in fragmented landscapes. - Oecologia 92: 563-567.
45. Thomas, J. A. 1983. The ecology and conservation of Lysandra bellargus (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in Britain. - J. Appl. Ecol. 20: 59-83.
46. Thomas, J. A. et al. 2001. The quality and isolation of habitat patches both determine where butterflies persist in fragmented landscapes. - Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268: 1791-1796.
47. Tscharntke, T. and Brandl, R. 2004. Plant-insect interactions in fragmented landscapes. - Annu. Rev. Entomol. 49: 405-430.
48. Van Swaay, C. A. M. 2002. The importance of calcareous grasslands for butterflies in Europe. - Biol. Conserv. 104: 315-318.
49. Wahlberg, N., Klemetti, T. and Hanski, I. 2002. Dynamic populations in a dynamic landscape: the metapopulation structure of the marsh fritillary butterfly. - Ecography 25: 224-232.
50. Weidemann, H. J. 1995. Tagfalter beobachten, bestimmen. - Naturbuch, Augsburg, Germany.