We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Skip to main content

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

SpringerLink
Log in

Condition-dependent dispersal of a patchily distributed riparian ground beetle in response to disturbance

  • Population Ecology
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In common with many habitat elements of riverine landscapes, exposed riverine sediments (ERS) are highly disturbed, naturally patchy and regularly distributed, whose specialists are strongly adapted to flood disturbance and loss of habitat due to succession. Investigations of dispersal in ERS habitats therefore provide an important contrast to the unnaturally fragmented, stable systems usually studied. The present investigation analysed the three interdependent stages of dispersal: (1) emigration, (2) inter-patch movement and (3) immigration of a common ERS specialised beetle, Bembidion atrocaeruleum (Stephens 1828) (Coleoptera, Carabidae), in a relatively unmodified section of river, using mark–resight methods. Dispersal was correlated with estimates of local population size and density, water level and patch quality in order to test for condition-dependent dispersal cues. Flood inundation of habitat was found to increase strongly the overall rate of dispersal, and the rate of emigration was significantly higher from patches that were heavily trampled by cattle. Strongly declining numbers of dispersers with distance suggested low dispersal rates during periods of low water level. Dispersal in response to habitat degradation by cattle trampling would likely lead to a higher overall population fitness than a random dispersal strategy. Dispersal distances were probably adapted to the underlying habitat landscape distribution, high-flow dispersal cues and ready means of long-distance dispersal through hydrochory. Species whose dispersal is adapted to the natural habitat distribution of riverine landscapes are likely to be strongly negatively affected by reduced flood frequency and intensity and habitat fragmentation through flow regulation or channelisation.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Addicott JF, Aho JM, Antolin MF, Padilla DK, Richardson JS, Soluk DA (1987) Ecological neighbourhoods: scaling environmental patterns. Oikos 49:340–346

    Google Scholar 

  • Amarasekare P (2004) The role of density-dependent dispersal in source—sink dynamics. J Theor Biol 226:159–168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen J (1968) The effect of inundation and choice of hibernation sites of Coleoptera living on river banks. Norsk Tidsskr 15:115–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates AJ, Sadler JP (2004) A long-lasting method for marking beetles (Coleoptera), which does not enhance mortality. Entomol News 115:49–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates AJ, Sadler JP (2005) The ecology and conservation of beetles associated with exposed riverine sediments. CCW Contract Science Report no. 688

  • Bates AJ, Sadler JP, Fowles AP, Butcher CR (2005) Spatial dynamics of beetles living on exposed riverine sediments in the Upper River Severn: method development and preliminary results. Aquat Conserv 15:159–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bates AJ, Sadler JP, Fowles AP (2006) Livestock trampling reduces the conservation value of beetle communities on high quality exposed riverine sediments. Biodivers Conserv (in press). DOI 10.1007/s10531-006-9028-7

  • den Boer PJ (1968) Spreading of risk and stabilisation of animal numbers. Acta Biotheor 18:165–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonn A (2000) Flight activity of carabid beetles on a river margin in relation to fluctuating water levels. In: Brandmayr P, Lövei G, Brandmayr TZ, Casale A, Vigna Taglianti A (eds) Natural history and applied ecology of Carabid beetles. Pensoft, Sofia, Moscow, pp 147–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonte D, Lens L, Maelfait J-P (2004) Lack of homeward orientation and increased mobility result in high emigration rates from low-quality fragments in a dune wolf spider. J Anim Ecol 73:643–650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowler DE, Benton TG (2005) Causes and consequences of animal dispersal strategies: relating individual behaviour to spatial dynamics. Biol Rev 80:205–225

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer PA, Maas GS, Macklin MG (2000) A fifty-year history of exposed riverine sediment dynamics on Welsh rivers. BHS Occas Pap 11:245–252

    Google Scholar 

  • Church M (1983) Pattern of instability in a wandering gravel bed channel. Int Assoc Sedimentol Spec Publ 6:169–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Cormack RM (1964) Loglinear models for capture–recapture. Biometrics 45:395–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dennis RLH, Shreeve TG, van Dyck H (2003) Towards a functional resource-based concept for habitat: a butterfly biology viewpoint. Oikos 102:417–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denno RF, Olmstead KL, McCloud ES (1989) Reproductive cost of flight capability: a comparison of life history traits in wing dimorphic planthoppers. Ecol Entomol 14:31–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Desender K (1989) Ecomorphological adaptations of riparian carabid beetles. In: Wouters K, Baert L (eds) Comptes Rendus du Symposium ‘Invertèbres de Belgique’. Royal Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels, pp 309–314

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreitz VJ, Nichols JD, Hines JE, Bennetts RE, Kitchens WM, Deangelis DL (2002) The use of resighting data to estimate the rate of population growth of the snail kite in Florida. J Appl Stat 29:609–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodson JM, Gurnell AM, Angold PG, Morrissey IP (2003) Evidence for hydrochory and the deposition of viable seeds within winter flow-deposited sediments: the River Dove, Derbyshire, UK. River Res Appl 19:317–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond PM (1998) Riparian and floodplain arthropod assemblages: their characteristics and rapid assessment. In: Bailey RG, José PV, Sherwood BR (eds) United Kingdom floodplains. Westbury Press, Otley, pp 237–282

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I, Gilpin ME (1997) Metapopulation biology: ecology, genetics and evolution. Academic, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison S (1991) Local extinction in a metapopulation context: an empirical evaluation. Biol J Linn Soc 42:73–88

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hering D, Gerhard M, Manderbach R, Reich M (2004) Impact of a 100-year flood on vegetation, benthic invertebrates, riparian fauna and large woody debris standing stock in an Alpine floodplain. River Res Appl 20:445–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jansen A, Robertson AI (2001) Relationship between livestock management and the ecological condition of riparian habitats along an Australian floodplain river. J Appl Ecol 38:63–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jolly GM (1965) Explicit estimates from capture–recapture data with both death and immigration-stochastic model. Biometrika 52:225–247

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Junk WJ, Bayley PB, Sparks RE (1989) The flood pulse concept in river-floodplain systems. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 106:110–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Kondolf GM (1997) Hungry water: effects of dams and gravel mining on river channels. Environ Manag 21:533–551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuussaari M, Nieminen M, Hanski I (1996) An experimental study of migration in the Glanville fritillary butterfly Melitaea cinxia. J Anim Ecol 65:791–801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levins RA (1969) Some demographic and genetic consequences of environmental heterogeneity for biological control. Bull Entomol Soc Am 15:237–240

    Google Scholar 

  • Lude A, Reich M, Plachter H (1999) Life strategies of ants in unpredictable floodplain habitats of Alpine rivers (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Entomol Gen 24:75–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Lytle DA (1999) Use of rainfall cues by Abedus herberti (Hemiptera: Belostomatidae): a mechanism for avoiding flash floods. J Insect Behav 12:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur RH, Wilson EO (1967) The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Matter SF (1996) Interpatch movement of the red milkweed beetle, Tetraopes tetraophthalmus: individual responses to patch size and isolation. Oecologia 105:447–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naiman RJ, Decamps H, Pollock M (1993) The role of riparian corridors in maintaining regional biodiversity. Ecol Appl 3:209–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Nève G, Barascud B, Hughes R, Aubert J, Descimon H, Lebrun P, Baguette M (1996) Dispersal, colonisation power and metapopulation structure in the vulnerable butterfly Proclossiana eunomia (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae). J Appl Ecol 33:14–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petts GE, Gurnell AM, Gerrard AJ, Hannah DM, Hansford B, Morrissey I, Edwards PJ, Kollmann J, Ward JV, Tockner K, Smith BPG (2000) Longitudinal variations in exposed riverine sediments: a context for the ecology of the Fiume Tagliamento, Italy. Aquat Conserv 10:249–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plachter H (1986) Composition of the carabid beetle fauna of natural riverbanks and man-made secondary habitats. In: den Boer PJ, Luff ML, Mossakowski D, Weber F (eds) Carabid beetles: their adaptations and dynamics. Fischer, Stuttgart, pp 509–538

    Google Scholar 

  • Plachter H, Reich M (1998) The significance of disturbance for populations and ecosystems in natural floodplains. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on river restoration, 26–27 May, Tokyo

  • Pollock KH, Nichols JD, Brownie C, Hines JE (1990a) JOLLY—computes estimates of survival and capture probability for 1-age class open population capture–recapture models. US Geological Survey, Patuxent Wildlife Research Centre. http://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/software.html#jolly

  • Pollock KH, Nichols JD, Brownie C, Hines JE (1990b) Statistical inference for capture–recapture experiments. Wildlife Monogr 107:1–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Purse BV, Hopkins GW, Day KJ, Thompson DJ (2003) Dispersal characteristics and management of a rare damselfly. J Appl Ecol 40:716–728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed JM, Dobson AP (1993) Behavioural constraints and conservation biology: conspecific attraction and recruitment. Trends Ecol Evol 8:253–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards K (1982) Rivers: form and process in alluvial channels. Methuen, London New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Roland J, Keyghobadi N, Fownes S (2000) Alpine Parnassius butterfly dispersal: effects of landscape and population size. Ecology 81:1642–1653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler JP, Bell D, Fowles AP (2004) The hydroecological controls and conservation value of beetles on exposed riverine sediments in England and Wales. Biol Conserv 118:41–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sæther B-E, Engen S, Lande R (1999) Finite metapopulation models with density-dependent migration and stochastic local dynamics. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 266:113–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider C (2003) The influence of spatial scale on quantifying insect dispersal: an analysis of butterfly data. Ecol Entomol 28:252–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seber GAF (1965) A note on the multiple-recapture census. Biometrika 52:249–259

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer ML (1981) Minimum viable population sizes for species conservation. Bioscience 31:131–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer MC, Wedlake P (1981) Capture does affect probability of recapture in a butterfly species. Ecol Entomol 6:215–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Southwood TRE (1962) Migration of terrestrial arthropods in relation to habitat. Biol Rev 37:171–214

    Google Scholar 

  • Stelter C, Reich M, Grimm V, Wissel C (1997) Modelling persistence in dynamic landscapes: lessons from a metapopulation of the grasshopper Bryodema tuberculata. J Anim Ecol 66:508–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutcliffe OL, Thomas CD, Peggie D (1997) Area-dependent migration by ringlet butterflies generates a mixture of patchy population and metapopulation attributes. Oecologia 109:229–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas JA, Rose RJ, Clarke RT, Thomas CD, Webb NR (1999) Intraspecific variation in habitat availability among ectothermic animals near their climatic limits and their centres of range. Funct Ecol 13 [Suppl 1]:55–64

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tockner K, Stanford JA (2002) Riverine flood plains: present state and future trends. Environ Conserv 29:308–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tockner K, Malard F, Ward JV (2000) An extension of the flood pulse concept. Hydrol Process 14:2861–2883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Travis JMJ, French DR (2000) Dispersal functions and spatial models: expanding our dispersal toolbox. Ecol Lett 3:163–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward JV, Tockner K, Arscott B, Claret C (2002) Riverine landscape diversity. Freshw Biol 47:517–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waser PM, Creel SR, Lucas JR (1994) Death and disappearance—estimating mortality risks associated with philopatry and dispersal. Behav Ecol 5:135–141

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Birmingham and the Countryside Council for Wales for funding the study; Alan Jones (Environment Agency) for obtaining landowner contact details; Tom Kinsey, Gordon Trow and David Davies for allowing site access; Cat Butcher and Richard Johnson for help with fieldwork and equipment preparation, and Kevin Burkhill and Anne Ankorn for help with Fig. 1. We are grateful to the British Atmospheric Data Centre for access to the Meteorological Office Land Surface Observation Stations Data, to the Patuxent Wildlife Centre for provision of the JOLLY model, and to Klement Tockner and Gavin Stewart for useful comments on the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK

    Adam J. Bates & Jon P. Sadler

  2. Countryside Council for Wales, Plas Penrhos, Bangor, Gwynedd, UK

    Adrian P. Fowles

Authors
  1. Adam J. Bates
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jon P. Sadler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Adrian P. Fowles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jon P. Sadler.

Additional information

Communicated by Matthias Schaefer

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bates, A.J., Sadler, J.P. & Fowles, A.P. Condition-dependent dispersal of a patchily distributed riparian ground beetle in response to disturbance. Oecologia 150, 50–60 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-006-0508-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-006-0508-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation