Matrix configuration and patch isolation influences override the species-area relationship for urban butterfly communities

Landscape Ecology

Volumn 27, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 159-169

  Lizée, Marie Hélène ^a,b   Manel, Stéphanie ^a   Mauffrey, Jean François ^a   Tatoni, Thierry ^b   Deschamps Cottin, Magali ^a  

^a Aix Marseille University Marseille   (France)

^b AVIGNON UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

Author keywords

Connectivity; Hierarchical partitioning; Landscape metrics; Public parks; Remote sensing; Rhopalocera

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE; BUTTERFLY; CONNECTIVITY; HABITAT MANAGEMENT; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM; MATRIX; METROPOLITAN AREA; REMOTE SENSING; SPECIES DIVERSITY; SPECIES RICHNESS; SPECIES-AREA RELATIONSHIP;

BOUCHES DU RHONE; FRANCE; MARSEILLES; PROVENCE-ALPES-COTE D'AZUR;

PAPILIONOIDEA; RHOPALOCERA;

EID: 84856234750     PISSN: 09212973     EISSN: 15729761     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10980-011-9651-x     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Anderson WB, Wait DA (2001) Subsidized island biogeography: another new twist on an old theory. Ecol Lett 4: 289-291.
2. Andrén H (1994) Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: a review. Oikos 71: 355-366.
3. Angold PG, Sadler JP, Hill MO, Pullin A, Rushton S, Austi K, Small E, Wood B, Wadsworth R, Sanderson R, Thompson K (2006) Biodiversity in urban habitat patches. Sci Total Environ 360: 196-204.
4. Arrhenius O (1921) Species and area. J Ecol 9: 95-99.
5. Baguette M, Mennechez G (2004) Resource and habitat patches, landscape ecology and metapopulation biology: a consensual viewpoint. Oikos 106: 399-403.
6. Baldi A (2008) Habitat heterogeneity overrides the species-area relationship. J Biogeogr 35: 675-681.
7. Barrett K, Wait DA, Anderson WB (2003) Small island biogeography in the Gulf of California: lizards, the subsidized island biogeography hypothesis, and the small island effect. J Biogeogr 30: 1575-1581.
8. Baz A, Garcia-Boyero A (1995) The effects of forest fragmentation on butterfly communities in central Spain. J Biogeogr 22: 129-140.
9. Blair RB, Launer AE (1997) Butterfly diversity and human land use: species assemblages along an urban gradient. Biol Conserv 80: 113-125.
10. Brückmann SV, Krauss J, Steffan-Dewenter I (2010) Butterfly and plant specialists suffer from reduced connectivity in fragmented landscapes. J Appl Ecol 47: 799-809.
11. Burns KC, McHardy RP, Pledger S (2009) The small-island effect: fact or artefact? Ecography 32: 269-276.
12. Cadenasso ML, Pickett STA, Grove JM (2006) Dimensions of ecosystem complexity: heterogeneity, connectivity, and history. Ecol Complex 3: 1-12.
13. Chardon JP, Adriaensen F, Matthysen E (2003) Incorporating landscape elements into a connectivity measure: a case study for the Speckled wood butterfly (Pararge aegeria L.). Landscape Ecol 18: 561-573.
14. Chevan A, Sutherland M (1991) Hierarchical partitioning. Am Stat 45: 90-96.
15. Colwell RK (2009) EstimateS: statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples, version 8. 2. http://purl. oclc. org/estimates. Accessed Mar 2011.
16. Coops NC, Gillanders SN, Wulder MA, Gergel SE, Nelson T, Goodwin NR (2010) Assessing changes in forest fragmentation following infestation using time series Landsat imagery. For Ecol Manag 259: 2355-2365.
17. CRIGE-PACA (2001) http://www. crige-paca. org/frontblocks/donnees/.
18. Croci S, Butet A, Georges A, Aguejdad R, Clergeau P (2008) Small urban woodlands as biodiversity conservation hot-spot: a multi-taxon approach. Landscape Ecol 23: 1171-1186.
19. Cushman SA, McGarigal K, Neel MC (2008) Parsimony in landscape metrics: strength, universality, and consistency. Ecol Indic 8: 691-703.
20. Dover J, Settele J (2009) The influences of landscape structure on butterfly distribution and movement: a review. J Insect Conserv 13: 3-27.
21. Drinnan I (2005) The search for fragmentation thresholds in a Southern Sydney Suburb. Biol Conserv 124: 339-349.
22. Fleishman E, Ray C, Sjögren-Gulve P, Boggs CL, Murphy DD (2002) Assessing the roles of patch quality, area, and isolation in predicting metapopulation dynamics. Conserv Biol 16: 1-11.
23. Franklin JF, Lindenmayer DB (2009) Importance of matrix habitats in maintaining biological diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106: 350-359.
24. Gaston KJ, Warren PH, Thompson K, Smith RM (2005) Urban domestic gardens (IV): the extent of resource and its associated features. Biodivers Conserv 14: 3327-3349.
25. Gustafson EJ (1998) Quantifying landscape spatial pattern: what is the state of the art? Ecosystems 1: 143-156.
26. Hanski I (1999) Metapopulation ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
27. Heikkinen RK, Miska L, Kuussaari M, Pöyry J (2005) New insights into butterfly-environment relationships using partitioning methods. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 272: 2203-2210.
28. Herold M, Liu XH, Clarke KC (2003) Spatial metrics and image texture for mapping urban land use. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 69: 991-1001.
29. IGN (2001) Base de données ALTI - Région Provence-Alpes-Côte-D'azur. Institut Géographique National.
30. IGN (2006) Base de données 1000 - Marseille. Institut Géographique National.
31. Joffre R, Rambal S, Damesin C (2007) Functional attributes in Mediterranean-type ecosystems. In: Pugnaire FI, Valladares F (eds) Functional plant ecology, 2nd edn. CRC Press, New York, pp 285-312.
32. Kinzig AP, Warren P, Martin C, Hope D, Katti M (2005) The effects of human socioeconomic status and cultural characteristics on urban patterns of biodiversity. Ecol Soc 10: 23. http://www. ecologyandsociety. org/vol10/iss1/art23/. Accessed Mar 2011.
33. Kitahara M, Fujii K (1994) Biodiversity and community structure of temperate butterfly species within a gradient of human disturbance: an analysis based on the concept of generalist vs. specialist strategies. Res Popul Ecol 36: 187-199.
34. Kotliar NB, Wiens JA (1990) Multiple scales of patchiness and patch structure: a hierarchical framework for the study of heterogeneity. Oikos 59: 253-260.
35. Lomolino MV (2000) Ecology's most general, yet protean pattern: the species-area relationship. J Biogeogr 27: 17-26.
36. Lomolino MV (2002) "There are areas too small, and areas too large, to show clear diversity patterns" R. H. MacArthur (1972: 191). J Biogeogr 29: 555-557.
37. Lomolino MV, Weiser MD (2001) Towards a more general species-area relationship: diversity on all islands, great and small. J Biogeogr 28: 431-445.
38. Lovett-Doust J, Biernacki M, Page R, Chan M, Natgunarajah R, Timis G (2003) Effects of land ownership and landscape-level factors on rare species richness in natural areas of southern Ontario, Canada. Landscape Ecol 18: 621-633.
39. Lundholm JT (2006) Green roofs and facades: a habitat template approach. Urban Habitats 4: 87-101.
40. Mathieu R, Freeman C, Aryal J (2007) Mapping private gardens in urban areas using object-oriented techniques and very high-resolution satellite imagery. Landsc Urban Plan 81: 179-192.
41. McArthur RH, Wilson EO (1967) The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
42. McGarigal K, Cushman SA, Neel MC, Ene E (2002) FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for categorical maps. Computer software program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. http://www. umass. edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats. html. Accessed Mar 2011.
43. McIntyre NE (2000) The ecology of urban arthropods: a review and a call to action. Ann Entomol Soc Am 93: 825-835.
44. McNally R (2000) Regression and model-building in conservation biology, biogeography and ecology: the distinction between-and reconciliation of-'predictive' and 'explanatory' models. Biodivers Conserv 9: 655-671.
45. McNally R (2002) Multiple regression and inference in ecology and conservation biology: further comments on retention of independent variables. Biodivers Conserv 11: 1397-1401.
46. Melles S, Glenn S, Martin K (2003) Urban bird diversity and landscape complexity: species-environment associations along a multiscale habitat gradient. Conserv Ecol 7: 5. http://www. consecol. org/vol7/iss1/art5/. Accessed Mar 2011.
47. Natuhara Y, Hashimoto H (2009) Spatial pattern and process in urban animal communities. In: McDonnell MJ, Hahs AK, Breuste JH (eds) Ecology of cities and towns-a comparative approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 197-214.
48. Niell RS, Brussard PF, Murphy DD (2007) Butterfly community composition and oak woodland vegetation response to rural residential development. Landsc Urban Plan 81: 235-245.
49. Ockinger E, Dannestam Å, Smith HG (2009) The importance of fragmentation and habitat quality of urban grasslands for butterfly diversity. Landsc Urban Plan 93: 31-37.
50. Opdam P, Steingrover E, van Rooij S (2006) Ecological networks: a spatial concept for multi-actor planning of sustainable landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 75: 322-332.
51. Ovaskainen O (2004) Habitat-specific movement parameters estimated using mark-recapture data and a diffusion model. Ecology 85: 242-257.
52. Pardini R, Bueno ADA, Gardner TA, Prado PI, Metzger JP (2010) Beyond the fragmentation threshold hypothesis: regime shifts in biodiversity across fragmented landscapes. PLoS ONE 5(10): e13666.
53. R Development Core Team (2008) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www. r-project. org. Accessed Mar 2011.
54. Ricketts TH (2001) The matrix matters: effective isolation in fragmented landscapes. Am Nat 158: 87-99.
55. Snep RPH, Opdam PFM, Baveco JM, WallisDeVries MF, Timmermans W, Kwak RGM, Kuypers V (2006) How peri-urban areas can strengthen animal populations within cities: a modeling approach. Biol Conserv 127: 345-355.
56. Sutcliffe OL, Bakkestuen V, Fry G, Stabbetorp OE (2003) Modelling the benefits of farmland restoration: methodology and application to butterfly movement. Landsc Urban Plan 63: 15-31.
57. Taylor P, Fahrig L, With K (2006) Landscape connectivity: a return to basics. In: Crooks KR, Sanjayan M (eds) Connectivity conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 29-43.
58. Tews J, Brose U, Grimm V, Tielborger K, Wichmann MC, Schwager M, Jeltsch F (2004) Animal species diversity driven by habitat heterogeneity/diversity: the importance of keystone structures. J Biogeogr 31: 79-92.
59. Thomas JA, Bourn NAD, Clarke RT, Stewart KE, Simcox DJ, Pearman GS, 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 Biol Sci 268: 1791-1796.
60. Tischendorf L (2001) Can landscape indices predict ecological processes consistently? Landscape Ecol 16: 235-254.
61. Triantis KA, Vardinoyannis K, Tsolaki EP, Botsaris I, Lika K, Mylonas M (2006) Re-approaching the small island effect. J Biogeogr 33: 914-923.
62. Tscharntke T, Steffan-Dewenter I, Kruess A, Thies C (2002) Contribution of small habitat fragments to conservation of insect communities of grassland-cropland landscapes. Ecol Appl 12: 354-363.
63. Wiklund C (1977) Oviposition, feeding and spatial separation of breeding and foraging habitats in a population of Leptidea sinapis (Lepidoptera). Oikos 28: 56-68.