Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The scale of saproxylic beetles response to landscape structure depends on their habitat stability

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Context

Forest management and disturbances cause habitat fragmentation for saproxylic species living on old-growth attributes. The degree of habitat spatiotemporal continuity required by these species is a key question for designing biodiversity-friendly forestry, and it strongly depends on species’ dispersal. The “stability–dispersal” model predicts that species using stable habitats should have lower dispersal abilities than species associated with ephemeral habitat and thus respond to habitat availability at smaller scales.

Objectives

We aimed at testing the stability–dispersal model by comparing the spatial scales at which saproxylic beetle guilds using substrates with contrasted stability (from stable to ephemeral: cavicolous, fungicolous, saproxylophagous and xylophagous guilds) are affected by landscape structure (i.e. habitat amount and aggregation).

Methods

We sampled saproxylic beetles using a spatially nested design (plots within landscape windows). We quantified habitat availability (tree cavities, polypores and deadwood) in 1-ha plots, 26-ha buffers around plots and 506-ha windows, and analyzed their effect on the abundance and diversity of associated guilds.

Results

The habitat amount within plots and buffers positively affected the abundance of the cavicolous and the fungicolous guilds whereas saproxylophagous and xylophagous did not respond at these scales. The habitat aggregation within windows only positively affected the saproxylophagous species richness within plots and also on the similarity in species composition among plots.

Conclusions

Beetle guilds specialized on more stable habitat were affected by landscape structure at smaller spatial scales, which corroborated the stability–dispersal model. In managed forests, the spatial grain of conservation efforts should therefore be adapted to the target habitat lifetime.

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
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barbosa P, Krischik V, Lance D (1989) Life-history traits of forest-inhabiting flightless Lepidoptera. Am Midl Nat 122(2):262–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barton Maintainer K (2018) Package “MuMIn”: multi-model inference. R-package version 1.40.4. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/MuMIn/

  • Baselga A, Orme D, Villeger S (2013) Package “betapart”: partitioning beta diversity into turnover and nestedness components. R-package version 1.2. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/betapart/

  • Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S, Christensen RHB, Singmann H, Dai B, Scheipl F, Grothendieck G, Green P (2017) Package “lme4”: linear mixed-effects models using “Eigen” and S4. R-package version 1.1-15. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/

  • Bouget C, Brin A, Tellez D, Archaux F (2015) Intraspecific variations in dispersal ability of saproxylic beetles in fragmented forest patches. Oecologia 177(3):911–920.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bouget C, Brustel H, Brin A, Noblecourt T (2008a) Sampling saproxylic beetles with window flight traps: methodological insights. Rev d’Ecologie (La Terre la Vie) 63:21–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouget C, Brustel H, Zagatti P (2008b) The FRench Information system on Saproxylic BEetle Ecology (FRISBEE): an ecological and taxonomical database to help with the assessment of forest conservation status. Rev d’Ecologie (La Terre la Vie) suppl. 10: 3–36. hal-00454436f

  • Bouget C, Parmain G, Gilg O, Noblecourt T, Nusillard B, Paillet Y, Pernot C, Larrieu L, Gosselin F (2014) Does a set-aside conservation strategy help the restoration of old-growth forest attributes and recolonization by saproxylic beetles? Anim Conserv 17(4):342–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boutin S, Hebert D (2002) Landscape ecology and forest management: developing an effective partnership. Ecol Appl 12(2):390–397

    Google Scholar 

  • Brin A, Valladares L, Ladet S, Bouget C (2016) Effects of forest continuity on flying saproxylic beetle assemblages in small woodlots embedded in agricultural landscapes. Biodivers Conserv 25(3):587–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cadotte MW (2006) Dispersal and species diversity: a meta-analysis. Am Nat 167(6):913–924.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • D’Eon RGD, Glenn SM, Parfitt I, Fortin M (2002) Landscape connectivity as a function of scale and organism vagility in a real forested landscape. Conserv Ecol 6(2):10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies KF, Margules CR, Lawrence JF (2000) Which traits of species predict population declines in experimental forest fragments? Ecology 81(5):1450–1461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewers RM, Didham RK (2006) Confounding factors in the detection of species responses to habitat fragmentation. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 81:117–142.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Feldhaar H, Schauer B (2018) Dispersal of Saproxylic Insects. In: Ulyshen MD (ed) Saproxylic insects. Zoological monographs, vol 1. Springer, Cham, pp 515–546

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Franc N, Götmark F, Økland B, Nordén B, Paltto H (2007) Factors and scales potentially important for saproxylic beetles in temperate mixed oak forest. Biol Conserv 135:86–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin JF, Lindenmayer DB (2009) Importance of matrix habitats in maintaining biological diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106(2):349–350.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gibb H, Hjältén J, Ball JP, Pettersson RB, Landin J, Alvini O, Danell K (2006a) Wing loading and habitat selection in forest beetles: Are red-listed species poorer dispersers or more habitat-specific than common congenerics? Biol Conserv 132(2):250–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibb H, Hjältén J, Ball JP, Atlegrim O, Pettersson RB, Hilszczański J, Johansson T, Danell K (2006b) Effects of landscape composition and substrate availability on saproxylic beetles in boreal forests: a study using experimental logs for monitoring assemblages. Ecography 29(2):191–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haddad NM, Brudvig LA, Clobert J, Davies KF, Gonzalez A, Holt RD, Lovejoy TE, Sexton JO, Austin MP, Collins CD, Cook WM (2015) Habitat fragmentation and its lasting impact on Earth’s ecosystems. Sci Adv 1(2):1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1999) Habitat connectivity, habitat continuity, and metapopulations in dynamic landscapes. Oikos 87(2):209–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison RG (1980) Dispersal polymorphisms in insects. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 11(1):95–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedin J, Ranius T, Nilsson SG, Smith HG (2008) Restricted dispersal in a flying beetle assessed by telemetry. Biodivers Conserv 17(3):675–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland JD, Fahrig L, Cappuccino N (2005) Body size affects the spatial scale of habitat-beetle interactions. Oikos 110(1):101–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson HB, Fahrig L (2012) What size is a biologically relevant landscape? Landsc Ecol 27(7):929–941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson HB, Fahrig L (2015) Are ecologists conducting research at the optimal scale? Glob Ecol Biogeogr 24(1):52–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen RM, Sverdrup-Thygeson A, Birkemoe T (2015) Scale-specific responses of saproxylic beetles: combining dead wood surveys with data from satellite imagery. J Insect Conserv 19(6):1053–1062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jactel H, Gaillard J (1991) A preliminary study of the dispersal potential of Ips sexdentatus (Boern) (Col., Scolytidae) with an automatically recording flight mill. J Appl Entomol 112:138–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen P, Fuhr M, Cateau E, Nusillard B, Bouget C (2017) Forest continuity acts congruently with stand maturity in structuring the functional composition of saproxylic beetles. Biol Conserv 205:1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonsson M (2003) Colonisation ability of the threatened tenebrionid beetle Oplocephala haemorrhoidalis and its common relative Bolitophagus reticulatus. Ecol Entomol 28(2):159–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonsson M, Johannesen J, Seitz A (2003) Comparative genetic structure of the threatened tenebrionid beetle Oplocephala haemorrhoidalis and its common relative Bolitophagus reticulatus. J Insect Conserv 7(2):111–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Komonen A (2008) Colonization experiment of fungivorous beetles (Ciidae) in a lake-island system. Entomol Tidskr 129:141–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Komonen A, Müller J (2018) Dispersal ecology of deadwood organisms and connectivity conservation. Conserv Biol 32(3):535–545.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kouki J, Löfman S, Martikainen P, Rouvinen S, Uotila A (2001) Forest fragmentation in Fennoscandia: linking habitat requirements of wood-associated threatened species to landscape and habitat changes. Scand J For Res suppl. 3:27–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larrieu L, Cabanettes A, Delarue A (2012) Impact of silviculture on dead wood and on the distribution and frequency of tree microhabitats in montane beech-fir forests of the Pyrenees. Eur J For Res 131(3):773–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larrieu L, Cabanettes A, Brin A, Bouget C, Deconchat M (2014a) Tree microhabitats at the stand scale in montane beech–fir forests: practical information for taxa conservation in forestry. Eur J For Res 133(2):355–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larrieu L, Cabanettes A, Gonin P, Lachat T, Paillet Y, Winter S, Bouget C, Deconchat M (2014b) Deadwood and tree microhabitat dynamics in unharvested temperate mountain mixed forests: a life-cycle approach to biodiversity monitoring. For Ecol Manage 334:163–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larrieu L, Cabanettes A, Gouix N, Burnel L, Bouget C, Deconchat M (2017) Development over time of the tree-related microhabitat profile: the case of lowland beech–oak coppice-with-standards set-aside stands in France. Eur J For Res 136(1):37–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leibold MA, Holyoak M, Mouquet N, Amarasekare P, Chase JM, Hoopes MF, Holt RD, Shurin JB, Law R, Tilman D, Loreau M (2004) The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecol Lett 7(7):601–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenoir J, Hattab T, Pierre G (2017) Climatic microrefugia under anthropogenic climate change: implications for species redistribution. Ecography 40(2):253–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin SA (1992) The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology 73(6):1943–1967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lombardi F, Lasserre B, Tognetti R, Marchetti M (2008) Deadwood in relation to stand management and forest type in Central Apennines (Molise, Italy). Ecosystems 11(6):882–894.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandelbrot B (1983) Fractals and the geometry of nature, vol 173. WH Freeman, New-York

    Google Scholar 

  • McMullin RT, Wiersma YF (2019) Out with OLD growth, in with ecological continNEWity: new perspectives on forest conservation. Front Ecol Environ 17(3):176–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mestre L, Jansson N, Ranius T (2018) Saproxylic biodiversity and decomposition rate decrease with small-scale isolation of tree hollows. Biol Conserv 227:226–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miguet P, Jackson HB, Jackson ND, Martin AE, Fahrig L (2016) What determines the spatial extent of landscape effects on species? Landsc Ecol 31(6):1177–1194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller J, Goßner MM (2010) Three-dimensional partitioning of diversity informs state-wide strategies for the conservation of saproxylic beetles. Biol Conserv 143(3):625–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nordén B, Appelqvist T (2001) Conceptual problems of ecological continuity and its bioindicators. Biodivers Conserv 10(5):779–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paillet Y, Pernot C, Boulanger V, Debaive N, Fuhr M, Gilg O, Gosselin F (2015) Quantifying the recovery of old-growth attributes in forest reserves: a first reference for France. For Ecol Manage 346:51–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranius T (2006) Measuring the dispersal of saproxylic insects: a key characteristic for their conservation. Popul Ecol 48(3):177–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranius T, Kindvall O (2006) Extinction risk of wood-living model species in forest landscapes as related to forest history and conservation strategy. Landsc Ecol 21(5):687–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranius T, Niklasson M, Berg N (2009) Development of tree hollows in pedunculate oak (Quercus robur). For Ecol Manage 257(1):303–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranius T, Johansson V, Fahrig L (2011a) Predicting spatial occurrence of beetles and pseudoscorpions in hollow oaks in southeastern Sweden. Biodivers Conserv 20(9):2027–2040.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranius T, Martikainen P, Kouki J (2011b) Colonisation of ephemeral forest habitats by specialised species: beetles and bugs associated with recently dead aspen wood. Biodivers Conserv 20(13):2903–2915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubene D, Schroeder M, Ranius T (2015) Diversity patterns of wild bees and wasps in managed boreal forests: effects of spatial structure, local habitat and surrounding landscape. Biol Conserv 184:201–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saint-Germain M, Drapeau P (2011) Response of saprophagous wood-boring beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) to severe habitat loss due to logging in an aspen-dominated boreal landscape. Landsc Ecol 26(4):573–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saura S, Pascual-Hortal L (2007) A new habitat availability index to integrate connectivity in landscape conservation planning: comparison with existing indices and application to a case study. Landsc Urban Plan 83(2):91–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seibold S, Bässler C, Brandl R, Fahrig L, Förster B, Heurich M, Hothorn T, Scheipl F, Thorn S, Müller J (2017) An experimental test of the habitat-amount hypothesis for saproxylic beetles in a forested region. Ecology 98(6):1613–1622.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Southwood TRE (1977) Habitat, the templet for ecological strategies? J Anim Ecol 46(2):336–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stokland JN, Siitonen J, Jonsson BG (2012) Biodiversity in dead wood. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thuiller W, Pollock LJ, Gueguen M, Münkemüller T (2015) From species distributions to meta-communities. Ecol Lett 18(12):1321–1328.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Travis JMJ, Dytham C (1999) Habitat persistence, habitat availability and the evolution of dispersal. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 266(1420):723–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villard MA, Metzger JP (2014) Beyond the fragmentation debate: a conceptual model to predict when habitat configuration really matters. J Appl Ecol 51(2):309–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JA (1989) Spatial scaling in ecology. Funct Ecol 3(4):385–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • With KA (1997) The application of neutral models in conservation biology. Conserv Biol 11(5):1069–1080

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Carl Moliard and Benoit Nusillard for their considerable field assistance. Our grateful thanks are also extended to Thierry Noblecourt, Fabien Soldati, Thomas Barnouin and Guilhem Parmain, as well as Oliver Rose (Ciidae), Yves Gomy (Histeridae) and Benoit Nusillard (Latriidae, Curculionidae), for their valuable contribution to insect identification. We are also grateful to the agents from the National Forest Office involved in this project, particularly Vincent Boulanger, Michel Leblanc and Marguerite Delaval for their assistance in the project logistics and the provision of forest management data, as well as Nicolas Caillé and Nicolas Hilt for insect trap collection. We thank Laurent Larrieu for his helpful advice in field sampling of tree-related microhabitats, Vicki Moore for checking the English language and three anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments on previous versions of the manuscript. This work was funded by the National Research Institute of Science and Technology for Environment and Agriculture (IRSTEA) and the National Forest Office (ONF).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UR EFNO, Irstea, Domaine des barres, F-45290, Nogent-sur-Vernisson, France

    Gwendoline Percel, Fabien Laroche & Christophe Bouget

  2. Département recherche, développement et innovation, Office National des Forêts, Boulevard de Constance, F-77300, Fontainebleau, France

    Gwendoline Percel

Authors
  1. Gwendoline Percel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fabien Laroche
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christophe Bouget
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gwendoline Percel.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 3494 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Percel, G., Laroche, F. & Bouget, C. The scale of saproxylic beetles response to landscape structure depends on their habitat stability. Landscape Ecol 34, 1905–1918 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-019-00857-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-019-00857-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation