Skip to main content
Log in

Rapid recovery of an insect–plant interaction following habitat loss and experimental wetland restoration

  • Plant Animal Interactions
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examined the impact of wetland habitat loss and isolation on an insect–plant interaction, and the subsequent rate of recovery of the interaction following experimental habitat restoration. We compared herbivore colonisation rates and herbivory damage by ‘Batrachedra’ sp. (Lepidoptera: Coleophoridae) on experimentally placed potted Sporadanthus ferrugineus (Restionaceae) plants at increasing distances (up to 800 m) from an intact habitat (the source population). These tests showed that even a moderate degree of isolation (i.e. greater than 400 m) from the intact wetland habitat caused an almost complete collapse of the insect–plant interaction, at least in the short term. The number of eggs and larvae of colonising ‘Batrachedra’ sp., as well as average larval size and the proportion of S. ferrugineus stems damaged, all decreased logarithmically with increasing distance from the intact habitat, presumably due to dispersal limitation of the herbivore. Subsequently, to test whether the interaction can recover following habitat restoration, we surveyed herbivore colonisation rates and herbivory damage on naturally regenerated S. ferrugineus plants on experimentally restored ‘islands’ at increasing distances (up to 800 m) from an intact habitat. The rate of recovery of the interaction was surprisingly rapid (i.e. between 196 and 308 weeks). The degree of difference in the density of eggs and larvae, and in the proportion of stems damaged with increasing isolation from the intact wetland, gradually diminished over 196 weeks. After 308 weeks there was no significant difference in the insect–plant interaction between the intact wetland sites and any of the experimentally restored sites up to 800 m away. These results suggest that some insect–plant interactions can recover rapidly from habitat loss with restoration management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andersen AN, Hoffmann BD, Somes J (2003) Ants as indicators of minesite restoration: community recovery at one of eight rehabilitation sites in central Queensland. Ecol Manage Restor 4:12–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andresen E (2003) Effects of forest fragmentation on dung beetle communities and functional consequences for plant regeneration. Ecography 26:87–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armitage AR, Fong P (2004) Gastropod colonization of a created coastal wetland: potential influences of habitat suitability and dispersal ability. Restor Ecol 12:391–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aronson J, Floret C, Le Floc’h E, Ovalle C, Pontanier R (1993) Restoration and rehabilitation of degraded ecosystems in arid and semi-arid land. I. A view from the south. Restor Ecol 1:8–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baer SG, Kitchen DJ, Blair JM, Rice CW (2002) Changes in ecosystem structure and function along a chronosequence of restored grasslands. Ecol Appl 12:1688–1701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker P, Moure JS, Peralta FJA (1991) More about euglossine bees in Amazonian forest fragments. Biotropica 23:586–591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bisevac L, Majer JD (1999) Comparative study of ant communities of rehabilitated mineral sand mines and heathland, Western Australia. Restor Ecol 7:117–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson BR (2002) Swamps, fens and bogs. In: Clarkson B, Merrett M, Downs T (eds) Botany of the Waikato. Waikato Botanical Society, Hamilton, pp 49–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies RG, Eggleton P, Dibog L, Lawton JH, Bignell DE, Brauman A, Hartmann C, Nunes L, Holt J, Rouland C (1999) Successional response of a tropical forest termite assemblage to experimental habitat perturbation. J Appl Ecol 36:946–962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis ALV, van Aarde RJ, Scholtz CH, Delport JH (2002) Increasing representation of localized dung beetles across a chronosequence of regenerating vegetation and natural dune forest in South Africa. Global Ecol Biogeogr 11:191–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis ALV, van Aarde RJ, Scholtz CH, Delport JH (2003) Convergence between dung beetle assemblages of a post-mining vegetational chronosequence and unmined dune forest. Restor Ecol 11:29–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denys C, Schmidt H (1998) Insect communities on experimental mugwort (Artemisia vulgaris L.) plots along an urban gradient. Oecologia 113:269–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denys C, Tscharntke T (2002) Plant–insect communities and predator–prey ratios in field margins, adjacent crop fields, and fallows. Oecologia 130:315–324

    Google Scholar 

  • Didham RK (1997) An overview of invertebrates responses to forest fragmentation. In: Watt AD, Stork NE, Hunter MD (eds) Forests and insects. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 303–320

    Google Scholar 

  • Didham RK, Ghazoul J, Stork NG, Davis AJ (1996) Insects in fragmented forests: a functional approach. Trends Ecol Evol 11:255–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Didham RK, Hammond PM, Lawton JH, Eggleton P, Stork NE (1998) Beetle species responses to tropical forest fragmentation. Ecol Monogr 68:295–323

    Google Scholar 

  • Didham RK, Watts CH, Norton DA (2005) Are systems with strong underlying abiotic regimes more likely to exhibit alternative stable states? Oikos 110:409–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubbert M, Tscharntke T, Vidal S (1998) Stem-boring insects of fragmented Calamagrostis habitats: herbivore–parasitoid community structure and the unpredictability of grass shoot abundance. Ecol Entomol 23:271–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn RR (2004) Recovery of faunal communities during tropical forest regeneration. Conserv Biol 18:302–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagan WF, Cantrell RS, Cosner C (1999) How habitat edges change species interactions. Am Nat 153:165–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 34:487–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forup ML, Memmott J (2005) The restoration of plant–pollinator interactions in hay meadows. Restor Ecol 13:265–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golden DM, Crist TO (1999) Experimental effects of habitat fragmentation on old-field canopy insects: community, guild and species responses. Oecologia 118:371–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gratton C, Denno RF (2005) Restoration of arthropod assemblages in a Spartina salt marsh following removal of the invasive plant Phragmites australis. Restor Ecol 13:258–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groom MJ (1998) Allee effects limit population variability of an annual plant. Am Nat 151:487–496

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Henle K, Davies K, Kleyer M, Margules C, Settele J (2004) Predictors of species sensitivity to fragmentation. Biodivers Conserv 13:207–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs RJ, Norton DA (1996) Towards a conceptual framework for restoration ecology. Restor Ecol 4:93–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann BD, Andersen AN (2003) Responses of ants to disturbance in Australia, with particular reference to functional groups. Austral Ecol 28:444–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaila L (2004) Phylogeny of the superfamily Gelechioidae (Lepidoptera: Ditrysia): an exemplar approach. Cladistics—Int J Willli Hennig Soc 20:303–340

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein BC (1989) Effects of forest fragmentation on dung and carrion beetle communities in Central Amazonia. Ecology 70:1715–1725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krauss J, Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2003) How does landscape context contribute to effects of habitat fragmentation on diversity and population density of butterflies? J Biogeogr 30:889–900

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krauss J, Klein A, Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2004) Effects of habitat area, isolation, and landscape diversity on plant species richness of calcareous grasslands. Biodivers Conserv 13:1427–1439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruess A (2003) Effects of landscape structure and habitat type on a plant–herbivore–parasitoid community. Ecography 26:283–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruess A, Tscharntke T (1994) Habitat fragmentation, species loss, and biological control. Science 264:1581–1584

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kruess A, Tscharntke T (1999) Effects of habitat fragmentation on plant–insect communities. In: Ekbom B, Irwin M, Robert Y (eds) Interchanges of insects between agriculture and surrounding landscapes. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 53–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruess A, Tscharntke T (2000) Species richness and parasitism in a fragmented landscape: experiments and field studies with insects on Vicia sepium. Oecologia 122:129–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Lange PJ, Heenan PB, Clarkson BD, Clarkson BR (1999) Taxonomy, ecology and conservation of Sporadanthus (Restionaceae) in New Zealand. NZ J Bot 37:413–431

    Google Scholar 

  • Laurance WF, Bierregaard RO (1997) Tropical forest remnants. Ecology, management and conservation of fragmented communities. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

  • Lawton JH (1995) Population dynamic principles. In: Lawton JH, May RM (eds) Extinction rates. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 174–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Majer JD (1990) Rehabilitation of disturbed land: long-term prospects for the recolonisation of fauna. Proc Ecol Soc Aust 16:509–519

    Google Scholar 

  • Majer JD, Nichols OG (1998) Long-term recolonisation patterns of ants in Western Australian rehabilitated bauxite mines with reference to their use as indicators of restoration success. J Appl Ecol 35:161–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mortimer SR, Hollier JA, Brown VK (1998) Interactions between plant and insect diversity in the restoration of lowland calcareous grasslands in southern Britain. Appl Veg Sci 1:101–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mortimer SR, Booth RG, Harris SJ, Brown VK (2002) Effects of initial site management on the Coleoptera assemblages colonising newly established chalk grassland on ex-arable land. Biol Conserv 104:301–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muller S, Dutoit T, Alard D, Grevilliot F (1998) Restoration and rehabilitation of species-rich grassland ecosystems in France: a review. Restor Ecol 6:94–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols OG, Nichols FM (2003) Long-term trends in faunal recolonization after bauxite mining in the Jarrah forest of Southwestern Australia. Restor Ecol 11:261–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opperman JJ, Merenlender AM (2000) Deer herbivory as an ecological constraint to restoration of degraded riparian corridors. Restor Ecol 8:41–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell AH, Powell GVN (1987) Population dynamics of male euglossine bees in Amazonian forest fragments. Biotropica 19:176–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reay SD, Norton DA (1999) Assessing the success of restoration plantings in a temperate New Zealand forest. Restor Ecol 7:298–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schipper L, Clarkson B, Vojvodic-Vukovic M, Webster R (2002) Restoring cut-over restiad peat bogs: a factorial experiment of nutrients, seed and cultivation. Ecol Eng 19:29–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulke B, Waser NM (2001) Long-distance pollinator flights and pollen dispersal between populations of Delphinium nuttallianum. Oecologia 127:239–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (1999) Effects of habitat isolation on pollinator communities and seed set. Oecologia 121:432–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2000) Butterfly community structure in fragmented habitats. Ecol Lett 3:449–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steffan-Dewenter I, Munzenberg U, Tscharntke T (2001) Pollination, seed set and seed predation on a landscape scale. Proc Roy Soc Lond Ser B 268:1685–1690

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Steffan-Dewenter I, Munzenberg U, Burger C, Thies C, Tscharntke T (2002) Scale-dependent effects of landscape context on three pollinator guilds. Ecology 83:1421–1432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suding KN, Gross KL, Houseman GR (2004) Alternative states and positive feedbacks in restoration ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 19:46–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas CD (2000) Dispersal and extinction in fragmented landscapes. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:139–145

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tscharntke T (1992) Fragmentation of Phragmites habitats, minimum viable population size, habitat suitability, and local extinction of moths, midges, flies, aphids and birds. Conserv Biol 6:530–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tscharntke T, Brandl R (2004) Plant–insect interactions in fragmented landscapes. Annu Rev Entomol 49:405–430

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • VSN International (2002) GenStat Sixth Edition version 6.2.0.235. Lawes Agricultural Trust, Rothamstead, United Kingdom

  • Warren MS, Hill JK, Thomas JA, Asher J, Fox R, Huntley B, Roy DB, Telfer MG, Jeffcoate S, Harding P, Jeffcoate G, Willis SG, Greatorex–Davies JN, Moss D, Thomas CD (2001) Rapid responses of British butterflies to opposing forces of climate and habitat change. Nature 414:65–69

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wassenaar TD, Van Aarde RJ, Pimm SL, Ferreira SM (2005) Community convergence in disturbed subtropical dune forests. Ecology 86:655–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watts CH, Gibbs GW (2002) Revegetation and its effect on the ground-dwelling beetle fauna of Matiu-Somes Island, New Zealand. Restor Ecol 10:96–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiegand T, Revilla E, Moloney KA (2005) Effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on population dynamics. Conserv Biol 19:108–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young TP (2000) Restoration ecology and conservation biology. Biol Conserv 92:73–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zabel J, Tscharntke T (1998) Does fragmentation of Urtica habitats affect phytophagous and predatory insects differentially? Oecologia 116:419–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank R. Gamman (Gamman Mining) for kindly providing a study site. We are grateful to N. Fitzgerald, J. Zanders, L. Baxter, C. Briggs and N. Berry for field assistance. Thank you to L. Baxter for nurturing the potted S. ferrugineus plants in the glasshouse. We are most grateful to R. Hoare and J. Dugdale for their taxonomic expertise, and to G. Arnold for statistical advice. B. Burns and R. Harris provided useful comments on the experimental design. D. Wardle, A. Austin, R. Harris, W. Lee, I. Steffan-Dewenter and three anonymous reviewers provided useful comments on earlier drafts of the manuscript. Research funds were provided by the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology New Zealand under contract C09X0204: Biodiversity and Threatened Species.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Corinne H. Watts.

Additional information

Communicated by Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Watts, C.H., Didham, R.K. Rapid recovery of an insect–plant interaction following habitat loss and experimental wetland restoration. Oecologia 148, 61–69 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-005-0344-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-005-0344-5

Keywords

Navigation