Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How accurate are single site transect data for monitoring butterfly trends? Spatial and temporal issues identified in monitoring Lasiommata megera

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Insect Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Multiple transect counts following Butterfly Monitoring Scheme (UKBMS) guidelines and Jolly–Seber estimates of population size were used to monitor the abundance of second generation Lasiommata megera on a single site in southern England. The two methods resulted in different patterns of emergence being detected. The proportion of the population (estimated by Jolly–Seber) recorded with transect counts depended on the time of day and weather with afternoon transect counts best recording the trend in abundance over the flight period, but even then counts recorded a variable fraction of the population (6.2–51.3%). Increasing the frequency with which transect counts are carried out per week reduced variation and increased the fit of transect counts to Jolly–Seber generated population estimates. However, indices of abundance generated from randomly selected transect counts for L. megera within sampling weeks varied 4-fold and indices for other butterfly species were also highly variable. For L. megera, transect count variability is attributed to non-representative placement of the transect route and changes in the behaviour and spatial distribution in relation to population size and season. We suggest that transect counts need to be fully validated before the data are used to monitor changes of butterfly populations at individual sites.

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

  • Asher J, Warren M, Fox R, Harding P, Jeffcoate G, Jeffcoate S (2001) The millennium atlas of butterflies in Britain and Ireland. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Begon M (1979) Investigating animal abundance. Edward Arnold, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown JA, Boyce MS (1998) Line transect sampling of Karner blue butterflies (Lycaeides melissa samuelis). Environ Ecol Stat 5:81–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brereton T, Stewart KA and Warren M (2002) Developing a system for assessing the effects of agri-environment schemes on butterfly populations. http://www.butterfly-conservation.org/conbio/mfb/maff/2002_newsletter.pdf

  • Brereton T, Wigglesworth T, Warren MS and Stewart K (2005) BD1446: agri-environment schemes and butterflies: re-assessing the impacts and improving final delivery of BAP targets. Butterfly Conservation Final Project report, supplied to Defra

  • Butterfly Conservation (1996) Species action plan: the Mountain ringlet Erebia epiphron. Butterfly Conservation, Wareham, Dorset

  • Dennis RLH (2004a) Just how important are structural elements as habitat components? Indications from a declining lycaenid butterfly with priority conservation status. J Insect Conserv 8:37–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dennis RLH (2004b) Butterfly habitats, broad-scale biotope affiliations, and structural exploitation of vegetation at finer scales: the matrix revisited. Ecol Entomol 29:744–752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dennis RLH, Bramley MJ (1985) The influence of man and climate on dispersion of patterns within a population of adult Lasiommata megera (L.) (Satyridae) at Brereton Heath, Cheshire (UK). Nota Lep 8: 309–324

    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 

  • Dennis RLH, Shreeve TG, Isaac N, Roy DB, Hardy P, Fox R, Asher J (2006) Are butterflies, as an indicator taxon, affected by biased recording? Biol Conserv 128:486–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dennis RLH, Sparks TH (2006) When is a habitat not a habitat? Dramatic resource use changes under differing weather conditions for the butterfly Plebejus argus. Biol Conserv 129:291–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox R, Warren MS, Harding PT, McLean IFG, Asher J, Roy DB (2001) The state of Britain’s butterflies. Butterfly conservation, CEH and JNCC, Wareham, Dorset

    Google Scholar 

  • Krauss J, Steffan-Dewenter I, Muller CB, Tscharntke T (2005) Relative importance of resource quantity, isolation and habitat quality for landscape distribution of a monophagous butterfly. Ecography 28:465–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maes D, Ghesquiere A, Logie M, Bonte D (2006) Habitat use and mobility of two threatened coastal dune insects: implications for conservation. J Insect Conserv 10:105–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parmesan C, Ryrholme N, Stefanescu C, Hill JK, Thomas CD, Descimon H, Huntley B, Kaila L, Kullberg J, Tammaru T, Tennant J, Thomas JA, Warren M (1999) Polewards shifts in geographical ranges of butterfly species associated with regional warming. Nature 399:579–583

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pollard E (1977) A method for assessing changes in the abundance of butterflies. Biol Conserv 12:115–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollard E, Yates TJ (1993) Monitoring butterflies for ecology and conservation. Chapman and Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Poyry J, Lindgren S, Salminen J, Kuussaari M (2004) Restoration of butterfly and moth communities in semi-natural grasslands by cattle grazing. Ecol Appl 14:1656–1670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothery P, Roy DB (2001) Application of generalised additive models to butterfly transect count data. J Appl Stat 28:897–909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy DB, Rothery P, Moss D, Pollard E, Thomas JA (2001) Butterfly numbers and weather: predicting historical trends in abundance and the future effects of climate change. J Anim Ecol 70:201–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy DB, Sparks TH (2000) Phenology of British butterflies and climate change. Glob Change Biol 6:407–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schtickzelle N, Baguette M, Le Boulengé E (2003) Modelling insect demography from capture-recapture data: comparison between the constrained linear models and the Jolly–Seber analytical method. Can Entomol 135:313–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seber GAF (1982) The estimation of animal abundance and related parameters. Griffin, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Shreeve TG (1984) Habitat selection, mate-location and microclimatic constraints on the activity of the speckled wood butterfly Pararge aegeria. Oikos 42:371–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shreeve TG (1990) Microhabitat use and hindwing phenotype in Hipparchia semele (L.) (Lepidoptera: Satyrinae): thermoregulation and background matching. Ecol Entomol 15:201-213

    Google Scholar 

  • Shreeve TG, Dennis RLH, Roy DB, Moss D (2001) An ecological classification of British butterflies: Ecological attributes and biotope occupancy. J Insect Conserv 5:145–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shreeve TG, Dennis RLH, Van Dyck H (2004) Resources, habitats and metapopulations—whither reality? Oikos 106:404–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefanescu C, Penuelas J, Filella I (2005) Butterflies highlight the conservation value of hay meadows highly threatened by land-use changes in a protected Mediterranean area. Biol Conserv 126:234–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas JA (1983) A quick method of estimating butterfly numbers during surveys. Biol Conserv 27:195–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas JA (2005) Monitoring change in the abundance and distribution of insects using butterflies and other indicator groups. Philos T Roy Soc B 360:339–357

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas JA, Telfer MG, Roy DB, Preston CD, Greenwood JJD, Asher J, Fox R, Clarke R, Lawton JA (2004) Comparative losses of British butterflies, birds and plants and the global extinction crisis. Science 303:1879–1881

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • United Kingdom Butterfly Monitoring Scheme (UKBMS) (2006a) http://www.ukbms.org/speciesLists/species_by_family.htm

  • UKBMS (2006b) Wall Brown (Lasiommata megera). http://www.ukbms.org/species94/description.htm

  • van Strien AJ, van de Pavert R, Moss D, Yates TJ, van Swaay CAM, Vos P (1997) The statistical power of two butterfly monitoring schemes to detect trends. J Anim Ecol 34:817–828

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren MS (1987) The ecology and conservation of the heath fritillary butterfly, Mellicta athalia. III. Population dynamics and the effects of habitat management. J Anim Ecol 24:499–513

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren MS, Pollard E, Bibby TJ (1986) Annual and long-term changes in a population of the wood white butterfly Leptidea sinapis. J Anim Ecol 55:707–719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White GC (2000) Program MARK. http://www.warnercnr.colostate.edu/gwhite/mark/mark.htm (accessed 20 December 2006)

  • Zonneveld C, Longcore T, Mulder C (2003) Optimal schemes to detect the presence of insect species. Conserv Biol 17:476–487

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Nick Greatorex-Davies, David Roy, Ernie Pollard, Roger Dennis and Paul Howe for comments during the preparation of this work. Also thanks to Mike Fuller for supplying transect data for Bratton Downs SSSI. Rebecca Harker is funded by the Litmore Shaw Nature Trust.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Headington, Oxford, OX3 0BP, UK

    Rebecca J. Harker & Tim G. Shreeve

Authors
  1. Rebecca J. Harker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tim G. Shreeve
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tim G. Shreeve.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Harker, R.J., Shreeve, T.G. How accurate are single site transect data for monitoring butterfly trends? Spatial and temporal issues identified in monitoring Lasiommata megera . J Insect Conserv 12, 125–133 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-007-9068-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-007-9068-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation