Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 17, Issue 8, pp 1837–1852 | Cite as

Impact of anthropogenic disturbances on beetle communities of French Mediterranean coastal dunes

  • Vincent Comor
  • Jérôme Orgeas
  • Philippe Ponel
  • Christiane Rolando
  • Yannick R. Delettre
Original Paper


In coastal dunes, influenced by anthropogenic activities such as tourism, it is important to determine the relative influence of environmental factors at different spatial scales to evaluate the sensitivity of local communities to disturbances. We analyzed beetle communities of 14 dunes of the French Mediterranean coast: four in the relatively preserved Camargue area, and ten in the Var department, where tourism is intensive. Beetle communities were studied three times in early spring using sand sampling. Species-environment relationships were evaluated at the regional, landscape and local scale using redundancy analysis (RDA) and variability partitioning. About 28 species were identified, of which 15 were sand-specialist species, which accounted for more than 93% of total abundance. The beetle communities of Camargue were significantly different from those of the Var department owing to the pullulation of a Tenebrionid species (Trachyscelis aphodioides Latr.) in the Var, except for one restored dune where the community was very similar to those of Camargue. Our results showed no longitudinal gradient between the two regions. Local factors (dune height, preservation and disturbance index) significantly explained most of the variation in the dominance of T. aphodioides, while some other local factors were important for other psammophilous species. This study also suggests that dune beetle communities are strongly affected on beaches intensively managed for tourism, but beetles are still abundant in much disturbed sites.


Insect Coleoptera Tourism Trampling Urbanization Beach Pullulation 



We are greatly indebted to Philippe Vernon, CNRS, UMR 6553 “Ecobio” and to reviewers for their very fruitful comments and suggestions on the manuscript, and to Sandrine Baudry for improving the English of the first draft.


  1. Aloia A, Colombini I, Fallaci M, Chelazzi L (1999) Behavioural adaptations to zonal maintenance of five species of tenebrionids living along a Tyrrhenian sandy shore. Marine Biol 133:473–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arneberg P, Andersen J (2003) The energetic equivalence rejected because of potentially sampling error: evidence from carabid beetles. Oïkos 101:367–375 Google Scholar
  3. Bigot L, Picard J, Roman ML (1982) Contribution à l’étude des peuplements des invertébrés des milieux extrêmes, la plage et les dunes vives de l’Espiguette (Grau-du-Roi, Gard). Ecol Mediter 8:3–29Google Scholar
  4. Borcard DP, Legendre P, Drapeau D (1992) Partialling out the spatial component of ecological variation. Ecology 73:1045–1055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burger JC, Redak RA, Allen EB, Allen MF (2003) Restoring arthropod communities in coastal sage scrub. Conserv Biol 17:460–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Caillol H (1908) Catalogue des Coléoptères de Provence, première partie. Société linnéenne de Provence, MarseilleGoogle Scholar
  7. Caillol H (1913) Catalogue des Coléoptères de Provence, deuxième partie. Société linnéenne de Provence, MarseilleGoogle Scholar
  8. Caillol H (1914) Catalogue des Coléoptères de Provence, troisième partie. Société linnéenne de Provence, MarseilleGoogle Scholar
  9. Caillol H (1954a) Catalogue des Coléoptères de Provence, quatrième partie. Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, ParisGoogle Scholar
  10. Caillol H (1954b) Catalogue des Coléoptères de Provence, cinquième partie: additions et correction. Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, ParisGoogle Scholar
  11. Chelazzi L, Dematthaeis E, Colombini I, Fallaci M, Bandini V, Tozzi C (2005) Abundance, zonation and ecological indices of a coleopteran community from a sandy beach-dune ecosystem of the southern Adriatic coast, Italy. Vie et milieu 55:127–141Google Scholar
  12. Colombini I, Chelazzi L, Fallaci M, Palesse L (1994) Zonation and surface activity of some Tenebrionid beetles living on a mediterranean sandy beach. J Arid Environ 28:215–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Colombini I, Chelazzi L (1996) Environmental factors influencing the surface activity of Eurynebria complanata (Coléoptère, Carabidae). Revista Chilena de Historia Natural 69:511–537Google Scholar
  14. Colombini I, Aloia A, Bouslama MF, ElGtari M, Fallaci M, Ronconi L, Scalpini F, Chelazzi L (2002) Small-scale spatial and seasonal differences in the distribution of beach arthropods on the northwestern Tunisian coast. Are species evenly distributed along the shore? Marine Biol 140:1001–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Colombini I, Fallaci M, Milanesi F, Scapini F, Chelazzi L (2003) Comparative diversity analysis in sandy littoral ecosystems of the western Mediterranean. Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci 58:93–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Colombini I, Fallaci M, Chelazzi L (2005) Micro-scale distribution of some arthropods inhabiting a Mediterranean sandy beach in relation to environmental parameters. Acta Oecolog 28:249–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dajoz R (2002) Les Coléoptères Carabidés et Ténébrionidés, Ecologie et Biologie. Tec et Doc, ParisGoogle Scholar
  18. Diham RK, Ghazoul J, Stork N, Davis AJ (1996) Insects in fragmented forests: a functional approach. Trend Ecol Evol 11:255–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Driscoll DA, Weir T (2005) Beetle responses to habitat fragmentation depend on ecological traits, habitat condition, and remnant size. Conserv Biol 19:182–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Erwin TL (1988) The tropical forest canopy: the heart of biotic diversity. In: Wilson EO, Peter FM (eds) Biodiversity. National Academy Press, Washington, p 105Google Scholar
  21. Fallaci M, Colombini I, Palesse L, Chelazzi L (1997) Spatial and temporal strategies in relation to environmental constraints of four tenebrionids inhabiting a Mediterranean coastal dune system. J Arid Environ 37:45–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fallaci M, Aloia A, Colombini I, Chelazzi L (2002) Population dynamics and life history of two Phaleria species (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) living on the Tyrrhenian sandy coast of central Italy. Acta Oecolog 23:69–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fanini L, Cantarino CM, Scapini F (2005) Relationships between the dynamics of two Talitrus saltator populations and the impacts of activities linked to tourism. Oceanologia 47:93–112Google Scholar
  24. Finnamore AT (1996) The advantages of using arthropods in ecosystem management. A Brief from the Biological Survey of Canada (Terrestrial Arthropods)., Cited January 1996
  25. Hammond P (1992) Species inventory. In: Groombridge B (ed) Global biodiversity: status of the earth’s living resources. Chapman and Hall, London, 17Google Scholar
  26. Hesp PA (1991) Ecological processes and plant adaptations on coastal dunes. J Arid Environ 21:165–191Google Scholar
  27. Hutcheson K (1970) A test for comparing diversities based on the Shannon formula. J Theoret Biol 29:151–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kremen C, Colwell RK, Erwin TL (1993) Terrestrial arthropod assemblages: their use in conservation planning. Conserv Biol 7:796–808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Legendre P, Legendre L (1998) Numerical ecology, 2nd edn. Elsevier Science BV, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  30. Peres-Neto P, Legendre P, Dray S, Borcard D (2006) Variation partitioning of species data matrices: estimation and comparison of fractions. Ecology 87:2614–2625CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Ponel P (1983) Contribution à la connaissance de la communauté des arthropodes psammophiles de l’isthme de Giens. Travaux scientifiques du Parc national de Port Cros 9:149–151Google Scholar
  32. Ponel P (1986) Les communautés des Arthropodes des dunes littorales de Provence: composition, structure, dynamique spatio-temporelle. Thèse Université Aix-Marseille IIIGoogle Scholar
  33. Ponel P (1993) Coléoptères du Massif des Maures et de la dépression permienne périphérique. Faune de Provence 14:5–23Google Scholar
  34. Rangel TF, Diniz-Filho JA, Bini LM (2006) Towards an integrated computational tool for spatial analysis in marcoecology and biogeography. Global Ecol Biogeogr 15:321–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Samways MJ (2005) Insect extinctions and insect survival. Conserv Biol 20:245–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schweiger O, Maelfait JP, Van Wingerden W, Hendrickx F, Billeter R, Speelmans M, Augenstein I, Aukema B, Aviron S, Bailey D, Bukacek R, Burel F, Diekötter T, Dirksen J, Frenzel M, Herzog F, Liira J, Roubalova M, Bugter R (2005) Quantifying the impact of environmental factors on arthropod communities in agricultural landscapes across organizational levels and spatial scales. J Appl Ecol 42:1129–1139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Slobodchikoff CN, Doyen JT (1977) Effects of Ammophila Arenaria on sand dune arthropod communities. Ecology 58:1171–1175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ter Braak CJF, Smilauer P (2002) CANOCO Reference manual and CanoDraw for windows user’s guide. Software for canonical community ordination (version 4.5). Biometris, Wageningen and Ceske BudejoviceGoogle Scholar
  39. Thérond J (1975) Catalogue des Coléoptères de la Camargue et du Gard. Société des Sciences Naturelles de Nîmes. Mémoire n° 10 (Première partie)Google Scholar
  40. Thérond J (1976) Catalogue des Coléoptères de la Camargue et du Gard. Société des Sciences Naturelles de Nîmes. Mémoire n°10 (Deuxième partie)Google Scholar
  41. Wilson EO (1992) The diversity of life. Belknap Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vincent Comor
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jérôme Orgeas
    • 1
  • Philippe Ponel
    • 1
  • Christiane Rolando
    • 1
  • Yannick R. Delettre
    • 3
  1. 1.IMEP, UMR-CNRS 6116, Bâtiment Villemin, Europole de l’ArboisAix-en-Provence cedex 04France
  2. 2.Resource Ecology Group, Wageningen UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.IFR CAREN, UMR-CNRS 6553 « Ecobio »Rennes CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations