Minimum viable metapopulation size, extinction debt, and the conservation of a declining species

Ecological Applications

Volumn 17, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 1460-1473

  Bulman, Caroline R ^a   Wilson, Robert J ^b   Holt, Alison R ^c   Bravo, Lucía Gálvez ^d   Early, Regan I ^c   Warren, Martin S ^a   Thomas, Chris D ^c  

^a BUTTERFLY CONSERVATION   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSIDAD REY JUAN CARLOS   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ALCALÁ   (Spain)

Author keywords

Conservation; Euphydryas aurinia; Extinction threshold; Habitat loss; Incidence function model; Metapopulation capacity; Nonequilibrium metapopulations; Transient dynamics

Indexed keywords

BUTTERFLY; COLONIZATION; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; ENDANGERED SPECIES; EXTINCTION; HABITAT LOSS; HABITAT QUALITY; METAPOPULATION; MINIMUM VIABLE POPULATION; POPULATION DECLINE; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; POPULATION MODELING; POPULATION SIZE; SPECIES CONSERVATION;

EURASIA; EUROPE; UNITED KINGDOM; WESTERN EUROPE;

EUPHYDRYAS AURINIA;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; GEOGRAPHY; LEPIDOPTERA; PHYSIOLOGY; POPULATION DENSITY; STATISTICAL MODEL; TIME; UNITED KINGDOM;

ANIMALS; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENT; GEOGRAPHY; GREAT BRITAIN; LEPIDOPTERA; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; POPULATION DENSITY; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 34848906629     PISSN: 10510761     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/06-1032.1     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Anthes, N., T. Fartmann, G. Hermann, and G. Kaule. 2003. Combining larval habitat quality and metapopulation structure: the key for successful management of pre-alpine Euphydryas aurinia colonies. Journal of Insect Conservation 7:175-185.
2. Asher, J., M. Warren, R. Fox, P. Harding, G. Jeffcoate, and S. Jeffcoate. 2001. The millennium atlas of butterflies in Britain and Ireland. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
3. Baguette, M. 2003. Long distance dispersal and landscape occupancy in a metapopulation of the cranberry fritillary butterfly. Ecography 26:153-160.
4. Biedermann, R. 2000. Metapopulation dynamics of the froghopper Neophilaenus albipennis (F., 1798) (Homoptera, Cercopidae): What is the minimum viable metapopulation size? Journal of Insect Conservation 4:99-107.
5. Brooks, T., and A. Balmford. 1996. Atlantic forest extinctions. Nature 380:115.
6. Brooks, T. M., S. L. Pimm, and N. J. Collar. 1997. Deforestation predicts the number of threatened birds in insular Southeast Asia. Conservation Biology 11:382-394.
7. Bulman, C. R. 2001. Conservation biology of the marsh fritillary butterfly Euphydryas aurinia. Dissertation. University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
8. Cowlishaw, G. 1999. Predicting the pattern of decline of African primate diversity: an extinction debt from historical deforestation. Conservation Biology 13:1183-1193.
9. Department of Environment. 1995. Biodiversity: the UK steering group report. HMSO, London, UK.
10. Dreschler, M., K. Frank, I. Hanski, R. B. O'Hara, and C. Wissel. 2003. Ranking metapopulation extinction risk: from patterns in data to conservation management decisions. Ecological Applications 13:990-998.
11. English Nature. 1982. Phase one habitat surveys, squares ST60, ST61, ST70, ST71, ST80, ST81, SY69, SY76, SY89. English Nature, Dorset Team, Wareham, UK.
12. Fowles, A. P., and R. G. Smith. 2006. Mapping the habitat quality of patch networks for the marsh fritillary Euphydryas aurinia (Rottemburg, 1775) (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae) in Wales. Journal of Insect Conservation 10:161-177.
13. Fox, R., J. Asher, T. Brereton, D. Roy, and M. Warren. 2006. The state of butterflies in Britain and Ireland. Pisces Publications, Newbury, UK.
14. Groombridge, B. 1992. Global biodiversity: status of the earth's living resources. Chapman and Hall, London, UK.
15. Hanski, I. 1994. A practical model of metapopulation dynamics. Journal of Animal Ecology 63:151-162.
16. Hanski, I. 1999. Metapopulation ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
17. Hanski, I., A. Moilanen, and M. Gyllenberg. 1996a. Minimum viable metapopulation size. American Naturalist 147:527-541.
18. Hanski, I., A. Moilanen, T. Pakkala, and M. Kuussaari. 1996b. The quantitative incidence function model and persistence of an endangered butterfly metapopulation. Conservation Biology 10:578-590.
19. Hanski, I., and O. Ovaskainen. 2000. The metapopulation capacity of a fragmented landscape. Nature 404:755-758.
20. Harrison, S. 1991. Local extinction in a metapopulation context: an empirical evaluation. Pages 73-88 in M. E. Gilpin and I. Hanski, editors. Metapopulation dynamics: empirical and theoretical investigations. Academic Press, London, UK.
21. Harrison, S., and A. D. Taylor. 1997. Empirical evidence for metapopulation dynamics. Pages 27-42 in I. Hanski and M. E. Gilpin, editors. Metapopulation biology: ecology, genetics and evolution. Academic Press, San Diego, USA.
22. Helm, A, I. Hanski, and M. Partel. 2006. Slow response of plant species richness to habitat loss and fragmentation. Ecology Letters 9:72-77.
23. Hula, V., M. Konvicka, A. Pavlicko, and Z. Fric. 2004. Marsh fritillary (Euphydryas aurinia) in the Czech Republic: monitoring, metapopulation structure, and conservation of an endangered butterfly. Entomologica Fennica 15:231-241.
24. Joyce, D. A., and A. S. Pullin. 2003. Conservation implications of the distribution of genetic diversity at different scales: a case study using the marsh fritillary butterfly (Euphydryas aurinia). Biological Conservation 114:453-461.
25. Lewis, O. T., and C. Hurford. 1997. Assessing the status of the marsh fritillary butterfly (Eurodryas aurinia): an example from Glamorgan, UK. Journal of Insect Conservation 1:159-166.
26. Moilanen, A. 1999. Patch occupancy models of metapopulation dynamics: efficient parameter estimation using implicit statistical inference. Ecology 80:1031-1043.
27. Moilanen, A. 2000. The equilibrium assumption in estimating the parameters of metapopulation models. Journal of Animal Ecology 69:143-153.
28. Moilanen, A., and I. Hanski. 1998. Metapopulation dynamics: effects of habitat quality and landscape structure. Ecology 79:2503-2515.
29. Moilanen, A., and M. Nieminen. 2002. Simple connectivity measures for metapopulation studies. Ecology 83:1131-1145.
30. Moilanen, A., A. T. Smith, and I. Hanski. 1998. Long-term dynamics in a metapopulation of the American pika. American Naturalist 152:530-542.
31. Nee, S. 1994. How populations persist. Nature 124:123-124.
32. Norusis, M. J. 1998. SPSS for Windows, Release 9.0. SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA.
33. Ovaskainen, O., and I. Hanski. 2002. Transient dynamics in metapopulation response to perturbation. Theoretical Population Biology 61:285-295.
34. Ovaskainen, O., and I. Hanski. 2004. Metapopulation dynamics in highly fragmented landscapes. Pages 73-103 in I. Hanski and O. E. Gaggiotti, editors. Ecology, genetics, and evolution of metapopulations. Elsevier Academic Press, London, UK.
35. Petit, S., and F. Burel. 1998. Effects of landscape dynamics on the metapopulation of a ground beetle (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in a hedgerow network. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment 69:243-252.
36. Pimm, S. L., G. J. Russell, J. L. Gittleman, and T. M. Brooks. 1995. The future of biodiversity. Science 269:347-350.
37. Porter, K. 1981. The population dynamics of small colonies of the butterfly Euphydryas aurinia. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
38. Porter, K. 1983. Multivoltism in Apanteles bignellii and the influence of weather on synchronisation with its host Euphydryas aurinia. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 34:155-162.
39. Schtickzelle, N., J. Choutt, P. Goffart, V. Fichefet, and M. Baguette. 2005. Metapopulation dynamics and conservation of the marsh fritillary butterfly: population viability analysis and management options for a critically endangered species in Western Europe. Biological Conservation 126:569-581.
40. Soulé, M. E., A. C. Alberts, and D. T. Bolger. 1992. The effects of habitat fragmentation on chaparral plants and vertebrates. Oikos 63:39-47.
41. Soulé, M. E., D. T. Bolger, A. C. Alberts, J. Wright, M. Sorice, and S. Hill. 1988. Reconstructed dynamics of rapid extinctions of chaparral-requiring birds in urban habitat islands. Conservation Biology 2:75-92.
42. Stewart, K. E. J., N. A. D. Bourn, and J. A. Thomas. 2001. An evaluation of three quick methods commonly used to assess sward height in ecology. Journal of Applied Ecology 38:1148-1154.
43. Thomas, C. D., and I. Hanski. 1997. Butterfly metapopulations. Pages 359-386 in I. Hanski and M. E. Gilpin, editors. Metapopulation biology: ecology, genetics and evolution. Academic Press, San Diego, California, USA.
44. Thomas, C. D., and I. Hanski. 2004. Metapopulation dynamics in changing environments: butterfly responses to habitat and climate change. Pages 489-514 in I. Hanski and O. E. Gaggiotti, editors. Ecology, genetics, and evolution of metapopulations. Elsevier Academic Press, London, UK.
45. Thomas, C. D., R. J. Wilson, and O. T. Lewis. 2002. Short-term studies underestimate 30-generation changes in a butterfly metapopulation. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B 269:563-569.
46. Thomas, J. A. 1983. A quick method for estimating butterfly numbers during surveys. Biological Conservation 27:196-211.
47. Thomas, J. A., N. A. D. Bourn, R. T. Clarke, K. E. Stewart, D. J. Simcox, G. S. Pearman, R. Curtis, and B. Goodger. 2001. The quality and isolation of habitat patches both determine where butterflies persist in fragmented landscapes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B 268:1791-1796.
48. Tilman, D., and C. L. Lehman. 1997. Habitat destruction and species extinction. Pages 233-249 in D. Tilman and P. Kareiva, editors. Spatial ecology: the role of space in population dynamics and interspecific interactions. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
49. Tilman, D., R. M. May, C. L. Lehman, and M. A. Nowak. 1994. Habitat destruction and the extinction debt. Nature 371:65-66.
50. Tolman, T., and R. Lewington. 1997. Butterflies of Britain and Europe. Harper Collins, London, UK.
51. van Swaay, C. A. M., and M. S. Warren. 1999. Red data book of European butterflies (Rhopalocera). Nature and environment, no. 99. Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg, France.
52. Wahlberg, N., T. Klemetti, and I. Hanski. 2002a. Dynamic populations in a dynamic landscape: the metapopulation structure of the marsh fritillary butterfly. Ecography 25:224-232.
53. Wahlberg, N., T. Klemetti, V. Selonen, and I. Hanski. 2002b. Metapopulation structure and movements in five species of checkerspot butterflies. Oecologia 130:33-43.
54. Wahlberg, N., A. Moilanen, and I. Hanski. 1996. Predicting the occurrence of endangered species in fragmented landscapes. Science 273:1536-1538.
55. Wang, R., Y. Wang, J. Chen, G.-C. Lei, and R. Xu. 2004. Contrasting movement patterns in two species of chequerspot butterflies, Euphydryas aurinia and Melitaea phoebe, in the same patch network. Ecological Entomology 29:367-374.
56. Warren, M. S. 1994. The UK status and suspected metapopulation structure of a threatened European butterfly, the marsh fritillary Eurodryas aurinia. Biological Conservation 67:239-249.
57. Wilson, R. J., S. Ellis, J. S. Baker, M. E. Lineham, R. Whitehead, and C. D. Thomas. 2002. Large-scale patterns of distribution and persistence at the range margins of a butterfly. Ecology 83:3357-3368.
58. Wilson, R. J., and C. D. Thomas. 2002. Dispersal and the spatial dynamics of butterfly populations. Pages 257-278 in J. Bullock, R. Kenward, and R. Hails, editors. Dispersal ecology. Blackwell, Oxford, UK.