Spatially and financially explicit population viability analysis of Maculinea alcon in the Netherlands

PLoS ONE

Volumn 7, Issue 6, 2012, Pages

  Radchuk, Viktoriia ^a   WallisDeVries, Michiel F ^b,c   Schtickzelle, Nicolas ^a  

^a EARTH AND LIFE INSTITUTE   (Belgium)

^b DUTCH BUTTERFLY CONSERVATION   (Netherlands)

^c WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BUTTERFLY; DEMOGRAPHY; HABITAT PATCHINESS; HABITAT QUALITY; MACULINEA ALCON; METAPOPULATION; NETHERLANDS; NONHUMAN; POPULATION DISPERSAL; POPULATION DYNAMICS; POPULATION SIZE; PREDICTION; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SPECIES CONSERVATION; SPECIES EXTINCTION; SPECIES REINTRODUCTION;

ANIMALS; BUTTERFLIES; ECOSYSTEM; MODELS, THEORETICAL; NETHERLANDS; POPULATION DYNAMICS;

EID: 84862260208     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0038684     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Hanski I, (1999) Metapopulation ecology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. Hodgson JA, Molainen A, Wintle BA, Thomas CD, (2011) Habitat area, quality and connectivity: striking the balance for efficient conservation. Journal of Applied Ecology 48: 148-152.
3. Hanski I, Thomas CD, (1994) Metapopulation dynamics and conservation: A spatially explicit model applied to butterflies. Biological Conservation 68: 167-180.
4. Thomas JA, Bourn NAD, Clarke RT, Stewart KE, Simcox DJ, et al. (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-Biological Sciences 268: 1791-1796.
5. WallisDeVries MF, Ens S, (2010) Effects of habitat quality and isolation on the colonization of restored heathlands by butterflies. Restoration Ecology 18: 390-398.
6. Schtickzelle N, Baguette M, (2009) Metapopulation viability analysis: a crystal ball for the conservation of endangered butterflies? In: Settele J, Shreeve TG, Konvicka M, Van Dyck H, editors. editors. Ecology of butterflies in Europe. London: Cambridge University Press. pp 339-352.
7. Stewart AJA, New TR, Lewis OT, editors (2007) Insect conservation biology. Wallingford, Oxfordshire: CABI Publishing.
8. Boggs CL, Watt WR, Ehrlich PR, editors (2003) Butterflies: ecology and evolution taking flight. Chicago: The University of Chicago.
9. IUCN (2010) IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4./http://www.iucnredlist.org/. Assessed 22 November 2010.
10. Thomas JA, Elmes GW, (1998) Higher productivity at the cost of increased host-specificity when Maculinea butterfly larvae exploit ant colonies through trophallaxis rather than by predation. Ecological Entomology 23: 457-464.
11. Elmes GW, Thomas JA, Wardlaw JC, Hochberg ME, Clarke R, et al. (1998) The ecology of Myrmica ants in relation to the conservation of Maculinea butterflies. Journal of Insect Conservation 2: 67-68.
12. Thomas JA, Elmes GW, Wardlaw JC, Woyciechowski M, (1989) Host specificity among Maculinea butterflies in Myrmica ant netst. Oecologia 79: 452-457.
13. Als TD, Nash DR, Boomsma JJ, (2001) Adoption of parasitic Maculinea alcon caterpillars (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) by three Myrmica ant species. Animal Behaviour 62: 99-106.
14. Thomas JA, Simcox DJ, Clarke RT, (2009) Successful Conservation of a Threatened Maculinea Butterfly. Science 325: 80-83.
15. Maes D, Vanreusel W, Talloen W, Van Dyck H, (2004) Functional conservation units for the endangered Alcon Blue butterfly Maculinea alcon in Belgium (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). Biological Conservation 120: 229-241.
16. Nowicki P, Bonelli S, Barbero F, Balletto E, (2009) Relative importance of density-dependent regulation and environmental stochasticity for butterfly population dynamics. Oecologia 161: 227-239.
17. Van Dyck H, Oostermeijer JGB, Talloen W, Feenstra V, van der Hidde A, et al. (2000) Does the presence of ant nests matter for oviposition to a specialized myrmecophilous Maculinea butterfly? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 267: 861-866.
18. WallisDeVries MF, (2004) A quantitative conservation approach for the endangered butterfly Maculinea alcon. Conservation Biology 18: 489-499.
19. Gadeberg RME, Boomsma JJ, (1997) Genetic population structure of the large blue butterfly Maculinea alcon in Denmark. Journal of Insect Conservation 1: 99-111.
20. Nash DR, Als TD, Maile R, Jones GR, Boomsma JJ, (2008) A mosaic of chemical coevolution in a large blue butterfly. Science 319: 88-90.
21. Schonrogge K, Wardlaw JC, Thomas JA, Elmes GW, (2000) Polymorphic growth rates in myrmecophilous insects. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 267: 771-777.
22. Hochberg ME, Thomas JA, Elmes GW, (1992) A modeling study of the population dynamics of a Large Blue Butterfly, Maculinea rebeli, a parasite of red ant nests. Journal of Animal Ecology 61: 397-409.
23. Hochberg ME, Clarke RT, Elmes GW, Thomas JA, (1994) Population-dynamic consequences of direct and indirect interactions involving a Large Blue Butterfly and its plant and red ant hosts. Journal of Animal Ecology 63: 375-391.
24. Hovestadt T, Mitesser O, Elmes GW, Thomas JA, Hochberg ME, (2007) An evolutionarily stable strategy model for the evolution of dimorphic development in the butterfly Maculinea rebeli, a social parasite of Myrmica ant colonies. American Naturalist 169: 466-480.
25. Johst K, Drechsler M, Thomas J, Settele J, (2006) Influence of mowing on the persistence of two endangered large blue butterfly species. Journal of Applied Ecology 43: 333-342.
26. Railsback SF, Harvey BC, (2002) Analysis of habitat-selection rules using an individual-based model. Ecology 83: 1817-1830.
27. Clarke RT, Thomas JA, Elmes GW, Hochberg ME, (1997) The effects of spatial patterns in habitat quality on community dynamics within a site. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 264: 347-354.
28. Mouquet N, Belrose V, Thomas JA, Elmes GW, Clarke RT, et al. (2005) Conserving community modules: A case study of the endangered lycaenid butterfly Maculinea alcon. Ecology 86: 3160-3173.
29. Clarke R, Thomas JA, Elmes GW, Wardlaw JC, Munguira ML, et al. (1998) Population modelling of the spatial interactions between Maculinea rebeli, their initial foodplant Gentiana cruciata and Myrmica ants within a site. Journal of Insect Conservation 2: 29-37.
30. Mouquet N, Thomas JA, Elmes GW, Clarke RT, Hochberg ME, (2005) Population dynamics and conservation of a specialized predator: A case study of Maculinea arion. Ecological Monographs 75: 525-542.
31. Griebeler EM, Seitz A, (2002) An individual based model for the conservation of the endangered Large Blue Butterfly, Maculinea arion (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). Ecological Modelling 156: 43-60.
32. Wynhoff I, Oostermeijer G, Sheper M, Van der Made J, (1996) Effects of habitat fragmetation on the butterfly Maculinea alcon in the Netherlands. In: Settele J, Margules CR, Poschlod P, Henle K, editors. pp. 15-23 editors. Species survival in fragmented landscapes. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
33. Nowicki P, Settele J, Thomas JA, Woyciechowski M, (2005) A review of population structure of Maculinea butterflies. In: Settele J, Thomas JA, editors. editors. Studies of the ecology and conservation of butterflies in Europe. Moscow: Pensoft Publishers. pp 144-119.
34. Hovestadt T, Binzenhofer B, Settele J, Nowicki P, (2011) Do all inter-patch movements represent dispersal? A mixed kernel study of butterfly mobility in fragmented landscapes. Journal of Animal Ecology 80: 1070-1077.
35. Clobert J, Danchin E, Dhondt AA, Nichols JD, editors (2001) Dispersal. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
36. Akcakaya HR, (2002) RAMAS/GIS: Linking spatial data with population viability analysis (version 4.0): Applied biomathematics.
37. Nowicki P, Pepkowska A, Kudlek J, Skorka P, Witek M, et al. (2007) From metapopulation theory to conservation recommendations: Lessons from spatial occurrence and abundance patterns of Maculinea butterflies. Biological Conservation 140: 119-129.
38. Hanski I, Alho J, Moilanen A, (2000) Estimating the parameters of survival and migration of individuals in metapopulations. Ecology 81: 239-251.
39. Nowicki P, Vrabec V, (2011) Evidence for positive density-dependent emigration in butterfly metapopulations. Oecologia 167: 657-665.
40. Ginzburg LR, Slobodkin LB, Johnson K, Bindman AG, (1982) Quasiextinction probabilities as a measure of impact on population growth. Risk Analysis 2: 171-181.
41. Hamby DM, (1994) A review of techniques for parameter sensitivity analysis of environmental models. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment pp. 135-154.
42. Cariboni J, Gatelli D, Liska R, Saltelli A, (2007) The role of sensitivity analysis in ecological modelling. Ecological modelling 203: 167-182.
43. Courchamp F, Berec L, Gascoigne J, (2008) Allee effects in ecology and conservation. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.
44. Schultz CB, Hammond PC, (2003) Using population viability analysis to develop recovery criteria for endangered insects: Case study of the Fender's blue butterfly. Conservation Biology 17: 1372-1385.
45. Schtickzelle N, Choutt J, Goffart P, Fichefet V, Baguette M, (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.
46. Schtickzelle N, Baguette M, (2004) Metapopulation viability analysis of the bog fritillary butterfly using RAMAS/GIS. Oikos 104: 277-290.
47. Schtickzelle N, WallisDeVries MF, Baguette M, (2005) Using surrogate data in population viability analysis: the case of the critically endangered cranberry fritillary butterfly. Oikos 109: 89-100.
48. Als TD, Vila R, Kandul NP, Nash DR, Yen SH, et al. (2004) The evolution of alternative parasitic life histories in large blue butterflies. Nature 432: 386-390.
49. Barbero F, Thomas JA, Bonelli S, Balletto E, Schonrogge K, (2009) Queen ants make distinctive sounds that are mimicked by a butterfly social parasite. Science 323: 782-785.
50. van Langevelde F, Wynhoff I, (2009) What limits the spread of two congeneric butterfly species after their reintroduction: quality or spatial arrangement of habitat? Animal Conservation 12: 540-548.
51. Nowicki P, Witek M, Skorka P, Settele J, Woyciechowski M, (2005) Population ecology of the endangered butterflies Maculinea teleius and M-nausithous and the implications for conservation. Population Ecology 47: 193-202.
52. Schneider C, Dover J, Fry GLA, (2003) Movement of two grassland butterflies in the same habitat network: the role of adult resources and size of the study area. Ecological Entomology 28: 219-227.
53. Zeisset I, Als TD, Settele J, Boomsma JJ, (2005) Microsatellite markers for the large blue butterflies Maculinea nausithous and Maculinea alcon (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) and their amplification in other Maculinea species. Molecular Ecology Notes 5: 165-168.
54. Henein K, Wegner J, Merriam G, (1998) Population effects of landscape model manipulation on two behaviourally different woodland small mammals. Oikos 81: 168-186.
55. Falcy MR, Estades CF, (2007) Effectiveness of corridors relative to enlargement of habitat patches. Conservation Biology 21: 1341-1346.
56. Stevens VM, Baguette M, (2008) Importance of habitat quality and landscape connectivity for the persistence of endangered natterjack toads. Conservation Biology 22: 1194-1204.