Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Biotope prioritisation in the Central Apennines (Italy): species rarity and cross-taxon congruence

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The conservation status of invertebrates is usually lesser known than that of vertebrates, and strategies to identify biotopes to preserve invertebrate diversity are typically based on a single surrogate taxon, or even on the use of vertebrates as surrogates. Aim of this research is to illustrate a method for biotope prioritisation that can be easily adapted to different animal groups and geographical contexts. A two-step protocol for biotope prioritisation is proposed on the basis of a multidimensional characterisation of species vulnerability. Firstly, species vulnerability is estimated from rarity measures which include geographical range, abundance and biotope specialisation. Then, these values of vulnerability are used to rank biotopes. The method was applied here to the tenebrionid beetles, the butterflies, the birds and the mammals of the Central Apennines, a montane area of high conservation concern for South Europe. This study provides evidence for the importance of including insects in conservation decisions, because vertebrates are poor surrogates for insects. Conservation efforts in the reserves included in the study area are mostly focused on vertebrates, for which woodlands are considered particularly important. However high altitude open biotopes are crucial for both tenebrionids and butterflies, and preservation of such kind of biotopes would be beneficial also for vertebrates. The approach applied here demonstrates that (1) vertebrates are poor surrogates for insects, and (2) measures of species rarity, typically used in vertebrate conservation, can be obtained also for insects, for which a veritable amount of data are hidden in specialised literature and museum collections.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ales RF, Martin A, Ortega F, Ales EE (1992) Recent changes in landscape structure and function in a Mediterranean region of SW Spain (1950–1984). Landscape Ecol 7:3–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apollonio M, Mattioli L, Scandura M, Mauri L, Gazzola A, Avanzinelli E (2004) Wolves in the Casentinesi Forests: insights for wolf conservation in Italy from a protected area with a rich wild prey community. Biol Conserv 120:249–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aradis A (2003) Gli uccelli Pianificazione e reti ecologiche. In: Filpa A, Romano B (eds) Planeco-planning in ecological network. Gangemi Editore, Roma, pp 76–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Arita HT, Robinson JG, Redford KH (1990) Rarity in Neotropical forest mammals and its ecological correlates. Conserv Biol 4:181–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baccetti N, Dall’Antonia P, Magagnali P, Melega L, Serra L, Soldatini C, Zenatello M (2002) Risultati dei censimenti degli uccelli acquatici svernanti in Italia: distribuzione stima e trend delle popolazioni nel 1991–2000. Biologia della Conservazione e Fauna 111:1–240

    Google Scholar 

  • Balletto E, Casale A (1991) Mediterranean insect conservation. In: Collins NM, Thomas JA (eds) The conservation of insects and their habitats. Academic Press, London, pp 121–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Balletto E, Bonelli S, Cassulo L (2005) Insecta Lepidoptera Papilionoidea (Rhopalocera). Memorie del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona (Scienze della Vita) 16:259–264

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergerot B, Lasne E, Vigneron T, Laffaille P (2008) Prioritization of fish assemblages with a view to conservation and restoration on a large scale European basin, the Loire (France). Biodiv Conserv 17:2247–2262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blair RB (1999) Birds and butterflies along an urban gradient: surrogate taxa for assessing biodiversity? Ecol Appl 9:164–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blondel J, Aronson J (1999) Biology and wildlife of the Mediterranean region. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciucci P, Boitani L (2008) The Apennine brown bear: A critical review of its status and conservation problems. Ursus 19:130–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark JA, May RM (2002) Taxonomic bias in conservation research. Science 297:191–192

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cook JA, MacDonald SO (2001) Should endemism be a focus of conservation efforts along the North Pacific coast of North America? Biol Conserv 97:207–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbet GB, Ovenden D (1985) Guida dei Mammiferi d’Europa. Franco Muzio and C, Editore, Padova

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Alessandro C, Sala G, Zilli A (2008) Le farfalle diurne del Parco Nazionale d’Abruzzo Lazio e Molise (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea Papilionoidea). Bollettino dell’Associazione Romana di Entomologia 63:91–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Dapporto L, Dennis RLH (2008) Island size is not the only consideration. Raking priorities for the conservation of butterflies on Italian offshore islands. J Insect Conserv 12:237–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Debussche M, Lepart J, Dervieux A (1999) Mediterranean landscape changes: evidence from old postcards. Global Ecol Biogeogr 8:3–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dennis RLH (2010) A resource-based habitat view for conservation. Butterflies in the British landscape. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, UK

    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 

  • Di Marzio P, Riggio L (2003) Priority habitat types in Italy. In: Blasi C (ed) Ecological information in Italy. Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio and Società Botanica Italiana, Rome, pp 47–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobson FS, Yu J (1993) Rarity in Neotropical forest mammals revised. Conserv Biol 7:586–591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erhardt A (1985) Diurnal Lepidoptera: sensitive indicators of cultivated and abandoned grassland. J Appl Ecol 22:849–861

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farina A (1991) Recent changes of the mosaic patterns in a montane landscape (North Italy) and consequences on vertebrate fauna. Option Méditerranéennes 15:121–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Farina A, Johnson AR, Turner SJ, Belgrano A (2003) ‘Full’ world versus ‘empty’ world paradigm at the time of globalization. Ecol Econ 45:11–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fattorini S (2006) A new method to identify important conservation areas applied to the butterflies of the Aegean Islands (Greece). Anim Conserv 9:75–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fattorini S (2008a) A multidimensional characterization of rarity applied to the Aegean tenebrionid beetles (Coleoptera Tenebrionidae). J Insect Conserv 12:251–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fattorini S (2008b) Foreword. In: Fattorini S (ed) Insect ecology and conservation. Research Signpost, Kerala, pp i–vi

    Google Scholar 

  • Fattorini S (2009) Assessing priority areas by imperilled species: insights from the European butterflies. Anim Conserv 12:313–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fattorini S (2010) Use of insect rarity for biotope prioritisation: the tenebrionid beetles of the Central Apennines (Italy). J Insect Conserv 14:367–378

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrer J (2009) Evaluatión crítica del libro “Revisión del género Phylan” y notas sobre las genitalia de Pedinini (Coleoptera Tenebrionidae). Boletín de la Sociedad Entomológica Aragonesa 45:453–469

    Google Scholar 

  • Filippi E, Luiselli L (2000) Status of the Italian snake fauna and assessment of conservation threats. Biol Conserv 93:219–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flather CH, Sieg CH (2007) Species rarity: definition causes and classification. In: Raphael MG, Molina R (eds) Conservation of rare or little-known species. Island Press, Washington, pp 40–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleishman E, Thomson JR, MacNally R, Murphy DD, Fay JP (2005) Using indicator species to predict species richness of multiple taxonomic groups. Conserv Biol 19:1125–1137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Ruiz JM, Lasanta T, Ruiz-Flano P, Ortigosa L, White S, Gonzàles C, Martì C (1996) Land-use changes and sustainable development in mountain areas: a case study in the Spanish Pyrenees. Landscape Ecol 11:267–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grill A, Cleary DFR (2003) Diversity patterns in butterfly communities of the Greek nature reserve Dadia. Biol Conserv 114:427–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groppali R, Fanfani A, Pavan M (1983) Aspetti della copertura forestale, della flora e della fauna nel paesaggio naturalistico dell’Italia meridionale e insulare. Collana verde 65. Ministero dell’Agricoltura e delle Foreste, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley S, Kunin W (2003) Scale dependency of rarity extinction risk and conservation priority. Conserv Biol 17:1559–1570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heino J, Mykrä H (2008) Among-taxon congruence and species richness-environment relationships in stream insects: implications for conservation planning. In: Fattorini S (ed) Insect ecology and conservation. Research Signpost, Kerala, pp 29–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins LG, Riley ND (1983) A field guide to the butterflies of Britain and Europe. Collins, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaac NJB, Purvis A (2004) The species problem and testing macroevolutionary hypotheses. Divers Distrib 10:275–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IUCN (1994) IUCN red list categories prepared by the IUCN Species Survival Commission. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  • IUCN (2001) IUCN red list categories and criteria: Version 31 IUCN Species Survival Commission. IUCN, Gland, Switzerlandand Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • IUCN (2003) Guidelines for application of IUCN red list criteria at regional levels: Version 3.0. IUCN Species Survival Commission, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Kati V, Dufrêne M, Legakis A, Grill A, Lebrun P (2003) Conservation management for Orthoptera in the Dadia reserve, Greece. Biol Conserv 115:33–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kati V, Devillers P, Dufrêne M, Legakis A, Vokou D, Lebrun P (2004) Testing the value of six taxonomic groups as biodiversity indicators at a local scale. Conserv Biol 18:667–675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kattan G (1992) Rarity and vulnerability: the birds of the Cordillera Central of Colombia. Conserv Biol 6:64–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koomen P, van Helsdingen PJ (1996) Listing of biotopes in Europe according to their significance for invertebrates. Nature and Environment no 77. Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen FW, Bladt J, Rahbek C (2007) Improving the performance of indicator groups for the identification of important areas for species conservation. Conserv Biol 21:731–740

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lawler JJ, White D, Sifneos JC, Master LL (2003) Rare species and the use of indicator groups for conservation planning. Conserv Biol 17:875–882

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyons KG, Brigham CA, Traut BH, Schwartz MW (2005) Rare species and ecosystem functioning. Conserv Biol 19:1019–1024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maiorano L, Falcucci A, Boitani L (2006) Gap analysis of terrestrial vertebrates in Italy: priorities for conservation planning in a human dominated landscape. Biol Conserv 133:455–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manne LL, Pimm SL (2001) Beyond eight forms of rarity: which species are threatened and which will be next? Anim Conserv 4:221–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCreadie JW, Adler PH (2008) Spatial distribution of rare species in lotic habitats. Insect Conserv Divers 1:127–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills M, Schwartz MW (2005) Rare plants at the extremes of distribution: broadly and narrowly distributed rare species. Biol Conserv 14:1401–1420

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of the Environment and Protection of the Territory and Sea (2009) Portale Cartografico Nazionale. Available at http://wwwpcnminambienteit/PCN/ (last accessed 2 April 2009)

  • Moran MD (2003) Arguments for rejecting the sequential Bonferroni in ecological studies. Oikos 100:403–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moritz C, Richardson KS, Ferrier S, Monteith GB, Stanisic J, Williams SE, Whiffin T (2001) Biogeographical concordance and efficiency of taxon indicators for establishing conservation priority in a tropical rainforest biota. Proc R Soc Lond, Ser B: Biol Sci 268:1875–1881

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Myers AA, De Grave S (2000) Endemism: origins and implications. Vie et Milieu 50:195–204

    Google Scholar 

  • New TR (1997) Are Lepidoptera an effective ‘umbrella group’ for biodiversity conservation? J Insect Conserv 1:5–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • New TR (2008) Insect species conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ottaviani D, Panzacchi M, Jona Lasinio G, Genovesi P, Boitani L (2009) Modelling semi-aquatic vertebrates’ distribution at the drainage basin scale: the case of the otter Lutra lutra in Italy. Ecol Model 220:111–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ottino P (2003) I mammiferi Pianificazione e reti ecologiche. In: Filpa A, Romano B (eds) Planeco-planning in ecological network. Gangemi Editore, Roma, pp 68–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson R, Mountfort G, Hollom PAD (1988) Guida degli Uccelli d’Europa. Franco Muzio and C, Editore, Padova

    Google Scholar 

  • Pharo EJ, Beattie AJ, Binns D (1999) Vascular plant diversity as surrogate for bryophite and lichen diversity. Conserv Biol 13:282–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pignatti S, Menegoni P, Giacanelli V (2001) Liste rosse e blu della flora italiana. ANPA, Roma

    Google Scholar 

  • Piovesan G, Presutti Saba E, Biondi F, Alessandrini A, Di Filippo A, Schirone B (2009) Population ecology of yew (Taxus baccata L.) in the Central Apennines: spatial patterns and their relevance for conservation strategies. Plant Ecol 205:23–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posillico M, Meriggi A, Pagnin E, Lovari S, Russo L (2004) A habitat model for brown bear conservation and land use planning in the central Apennines. Biol Conserv 118:141–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Primack RB (2006) Essentials of conservation biology, 4th edn. Sinauer Associates Inc Publishers, Sunderland

    Google Scholar 

  • Prola C, Provera P, Racheli T, Sbordoni V (1978) I Macrolepidotteri dell’Appennino Centrale, parte I Diurna Bombyces e Sphinges. Fragmenta Entomologica 14:1–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabinowitz DS (1981) Seven forms of rarity. In: Synge H (ed) The biological aspects of rare plant conservation. Wiley, Chichester, pp 205–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabinowitz D, Cairns S, Dillon T (1986) Seven forms of rarity and their frequency in the flora of the British Isles. In: Soulé ME (ed) Conservation biology: the science of scarcity and diversity. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, pp 182–204

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryder OA (1986) Species conservation and systematics: the dilemma of subspecies. Trends Ecol Evol 1:9–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samways MJ (1994) Insect conservation biology. Chapman and Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Samways MJ (2005) Insect diversity conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Santoul F, Figuerola J, Mastrorillo S, Cereghino R (2005) Patterns of rare fish and aquatic insects in a southwestern French river catchment in relation to simple physical variables. Ecography 28:307–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scozzafava S, De Sanctis A (2006) Exploring the effects of land abandonment on habitat suitability for three passerine species in a highland area of Central Italy. Landscape Urban Plan 75:23–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smiraglia C (2002) Le forme delle montagne italiane. In: Caveri L, Da Polenza A, Salvatori F, Smiraglia C (eds) Montagne d’Italia. Istituto Geografico De Agostani, Novara, pp 26–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanisci A, Pelino G, Blasi C (2005) Vascular plant diversity and climatic change in the alpine belt of the central Apennines (Italy). Biodiv Conserv 14:1301–1318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tellini-Florenzano G (2004) Birds as indicators of recent environmental changes in the Apennines (Foreste Casentinesi National Park, Central Italy). Italian J Zool 71:317–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Swaay CAM, Warren MS (1999) Red data book of European butterflies (Rhopalocera). Nature and Environment No 99. Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Vessby K, Soderstrom B, Glimskar A, Svensson B (2002) Species-richness correlations of six different taxa in Swedish seminatural grasslands. Conserv Biol 16:430–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vos W, Stortelder A (1992) Vanishing Tuscan land-scapes. Landscape ecology of a Submediterranean-Montane area (Solano Basin, Tuscany, Italy). Pudoc, Wageningen

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank two anonymous reviewers for their useful comments on a first version of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Water Ecology Team, Department of Biotechnology and Biosciences, University of Milano Bicocca, Piazza della Scienza 2, 20126, Milan, Italy

    Simone Fattorini

Authors
  1. Simone Fattorini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simone Fattorini.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supporting Information

Additional Supporting Information may be found in the online version of this article: Appendix S1 Rarity and distribution across biotopes for the tenebrionid beetles, butterflies, birds and mammals of the Central Apennines. (XLS 97 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fattorini, S. Biotope prioritisation in the Central Apennines (Italy): species rarity and cross-taxon congruence. Biodivers Conserv 19, 3413–3429 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-010-9903-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-010-9903-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation