Journal of Insect Conservation

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 125–133

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

Original Paper


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.


Butterfly monitoring Bias Lasiommata megera Mark-release-recapture Transect counts Conservation 


  1. 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, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  2. Begon M (1979) Investigating animal abundance. Edward Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown JA, Boyce MS (1998) Line transect sampling of Karner blue butterflies (Lycaeides melissa samuelis). Environ Ecol Stat 5:81–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brereton T, Stewart KA and Warren M (2002) Developing a system for assessing the effects of agri-environment schemes on butterfly populations. Scholar
  5. 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 DefraGoogle Scholar
  6. Butterfly Conservation (1996) Species action plan: the Mountain ringlet Erebia epiphron. Butterfly Conservation, Wareham, DorsetGoogle Scholar
  7. 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 8:37–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dennis RLH (2004b) Butterfly habitats, broad-scale biotope affiliations, and structural exploitation of vegetation at finer scales: the matrix revisited. Ecol Entomol 29:744–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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: 309–324Google Scholar
  10. Dennis RLH, Shreeve TG, Van Dyck H (2003) Towards a functional resource-based concept for habitat: a butterfly biology viewpoint. Oikos 102:417–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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 128:486–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 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 129:291–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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, DorsetGoogle Scholar
  14. 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 28:465–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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 10:105–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. New TR (1997) Are Lepidoptera an effective ‘umbrella group’ for biodiversity conservation? J Insect Conserv 1:5–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 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 399:579–583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pollard E (1977) A method for assessing changes in the abundance of butterflies. Biol Conserv 12:115–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pollard E, Yates TJ (1993) Monitoring butterflies for ecology and conservation. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Poyry J, Lindgren S, Salminen J, Kuussaari M (2004) Restoration of butterfly and moth communities in semi-natural grasslands by cattle grazing. Ecol Appl 14:1656–1670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rothery P, Roy DB (2001) Application of generalised additive models to butterfly transect count data. J Appl Stat 28:897–909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 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 70:201–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Roy DB, Sparks TH (2000) Phenology of British butterflies and climate change. Glob Change Biol 6:407–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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 135:313–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Seber GAF (1982) The estimation of animal abundance and related parameters. Griffin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. Shreeve TG (1984) Habitat selection, mate-location and microclimatic constraints on the activity of the speckled wood butterfly Pararge aegeria. Oikos 42:371–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Shreeve TG (1990) Microhabitat use and hindwing phenotype in Hipparchia semele (L.) (Lepidoptera: Satyrinae): thermoregulation and background matching. Ecol Entomol 15:201-213Google Scholar
  28. Shreeve TG, Dennis RLH, Roy DB, Moss D (2001) An ecological classification of British butterflies: Ecological attributes and biotope occupancy. J Insect Conserv 5:145–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shreeve TG, Dennis RLH, Van Dyck H (2004) Resources, habitats and metapopulations—whither reality? Oikos 106:404–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 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 126:234–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Thomas JA (1983) A quick method of estimating butterfly numbers during surveys. Biol Conserv 27:195–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Thomas JA (2005) Monitoring change in the abundance and distribution of insects using butterflies and other indicator groups. Philos T Roy Soc B 360:339–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 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 303:1879–1881PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. United Kingdom Butterfly Monitoring Scheme (UKBMS) (2006a) Scholar
  35. UKBMS (2006b) Wall Brown (Lasiommata megera). Scholar
  36. 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 34:817–828Google Scholar
  37. 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 24:499–513Google Scholar
  38. 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 55:707–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. White GC (2000) Program MARK. (accessed 20 December 2006)Google Scholar
  40. Zonneveld C, Longcore T, Mulder C (2003) Optimal schemes to detect the presence of insect species. Conserv Biol 17:476–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Life SciencesOxford Brookes UniversityHeadington, OxfordUK

Personalised recommendations