Advertisement

Journal of Insect Conservation

, Volume 12, Issue 5, pp 549–560 | Cite as

The last population of the Woodland Brown butterfly (Lopinga achine) in the Czech Republic: habitat use, demography and site management

  • Martin Konvicka
  • Jan Novak
  • Jiri Benes
  • Zdenek Fric
  • Jonathan Bradley
  • Petr Keil
  • Jan Hrcek
  • Karel Chobot
  • Pavel Marhoul
Original Paper

Abstract

The distribution of Lopinga achine (Lepidoptera Nymphalidae, Satyrinae) in the Czech Republic has declined from thirty grid squares before 1950 to just one extant population, restricted to a single area of deciduous woodland. A review of historical sites shows that this species used to occur in various types of deciduous woodland with a relatively sparse canopy maintained by coppicing and/or grazing. The extant population inhabits mature woodland with a mean canopy cover of 60% (quartiles 50% and 65%), sparse shrubs and a species-rich herb layer containing plant species requiring dry, warm and nutrient-poor conditions. The larval host plants are the fine-leafed sedges, Carex fritschii and C. michelii. In 2006, the total population contained about 10,000 adults but this may be an over-estimate, biased by male behaviour. Measurements of adult mobility, well approximated by an inverse-power function, suggested that all existing colonies are interconnected by dispersal. Continuing existence of the population depends on two conditions; nutrient-poor conditions for a diverse ground flora and a sparse tree canopy. While canopy closure is gradually increasing, the herb layer is threatened by soil enrichment due to the demise of traditional grazing, litter raking and grass mowing in woodlands. Any future management to favour Lopinga achine should include both measures to maintain a sparse canopy and measures to export biomass, such as raking or mowing of ground flora or, preferably, re-establishment of grazing.

Keywords

Butterfly conservation Canopy Forest ground flora Lepidoptera Mark-recapture Pasture woodland Population size 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank D. Cizkova, J. Dovala, P. Dufkova, L. Honc, J. Patera, J. Piszkiewicz, L. Spitzer for enjoyable companionship in the field. Zuzana Veverkova, our fellow zoologist who was born in a village next to the wood, recalled collecting grass in the wood with her grandmother in the late 1970s. Lepidopterists L. Honc, M. Kralicek, L. Stiova and J. Uricar, and botanists M. Chytry, V. Grulich and J. Rolecek informed us on their observations from historical Lopinga achine sites. We acknowledge funding by the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic (526/04/0417), Czech Department of Environment (VaV/620/1/03) and Education (LC06073).

References

  1. Benes J, Konvicka M (2006) Denní motýli v národních maloploškách: první poznatky z celostátní inventarizace. Ochrana Prirody 61:145–150Google Scholar
  2. Benes J, Kuras T (1997) Dlouhodobé změny diverzity heliofilních motýlů (Lepidoptera) Opavské pahorkatiny a Nízkého Jeseníku (Česká republika). I Cas Slez Muz Opava (A) 46:135–158Google Scholar
  3. Benes J, Cizek O, Dovala J, Konvicka M (2006) Intensive game keeping, coppicing and butterflies: the story of Milovicky Wood, Czech Republic. Forest Ecol Manag 237:353–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benes J, Konvicka M, Dvorak J, Fric Z, Havelda Z, Pavlicko A, Vrabec V, Weidenhoffer Z (2002) Butterflies of the Czech Republic: distribution and conservation I. SOM, PrahaGoogle Scholar
  5. Bergman KO (1996) [2000] Oviposition, host plant choice and survival of a grass feeding butterfly, the Woodland Brown (Lopinga achine) (Nymphalidae: Satyrinae). J Res Lepidoptera 35:9–21.Google Scholar
  6. Bergman KO (1999) Habitat utilization by Lopinga achine (Nymphalidae: Satyrinae) larvae and ovipositing females: implications for conservation. Biol Conserv 88:69–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bergman KO (2001) Population dynamics and the importance of habitat management for conservation of the butterfly Lopinga achine. J Appl Ecol 38:1303–1313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bergman KO, Kindvall O (2004) Population viability analysis of the butterfly Lopinga achine in a changing landscape in Sweden. Ecography 27:49–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bergman KO, Landin J (2001) Distribution of occupied and vacant sites and migration of Lopinga achine (Nymphalidae: Satyrinae) in a fragmented landscape. Biol Conserv 102:183–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bergman KO, Landin J (2002) Population structure and movements of a threatened butterfly (Lopinga achine) in a fragmented landscape in Sweden. Biol Conserv 108:361–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Borhidi A (1995) Social behaviour types, the naturalness and relative ecological indicator values of the higher plants in the Hungarian Flora. Acta Bot Hung 39:97–181Google Scholar
  12. Braun-Blanquet J (1964) Pflanzensoziologie, Grundzüge der Vegetationskunde, 3rd edn. Springer, WienGoogle Scholar
  13. Cizek O, Konvicka M (2005) What is a patch in a dynamic metapopulation? Mobility of an endangered woodland butterfly, Euphydryas maturna. Ecography 28:791–800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chytry M., Kucera T, Koci N (eds) (2001) Katalog biotopů České republiky. AOPK, PragueGoogle Scholar
  15. Ellenberg H, Weber HE, Düll R, Wirth V, Werner W, Paulissen D (1992) Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa, 2nd edn. Scr Geobotanica 18:1–258Google Scholar
  16. Freese A, Benes J, Bolz R, Cizek O, Dolek M, Geyer A, Gros P, Konvicka M, Liegl A, Stettmer C (2006) Habitat use of the endangered butterfly Euphydryas maturna and forestry in Central Europe. Anim Conserv 9: 388–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fric Z, Konvicka M (2007) Dispersal kernels of butterflies: power-law functions are invariant to marking frequency. Basic Appl Ecol (in press)Google Scholar
  18. Greatorex-Davies JN, Sparks TH, Hall ML, Marrs RH (1993) The influence of shade on butterflies in rides of coniferized lowland woods in southern England and implications for conservation management. Biol Conserv 63:31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hofmeister J, Mihaljevic M, Hosek J, Sadlo J (2002) Eutrophication of deciduous forests in the Bohemian Karst (Czech Republic): the role of nitrogen and phosphorus. Forest Ecol Manag 169:213–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Horváth F, Dobolyi Z, Morschhauser T, Lokos L, Karas L, Szerdahelyi T (1995) Flora adatbázis 1.2.—taxonlista es attributum allomany. Hungarian Academy of Sciences, VacrátótGoogle Scholar
  21. Höttinger H, Pennerstorfer J (1999) Rote Listen ausgewählter Tiergruppen Niederösterreichs—tagfalter (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera & Hesperiidae), 1 Fassung 1999. NÖ Landesregierung Abt Naturshcutz, St PöltenGoogle Scholar
  22. Ide JY (2004) Diurnal and seasonal changes in the mate-locating behavior of the satyrine butterfly Lethe diana. Ecol Res 19:189–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ide J, Kondoh M (2000) Male-female evolutionary game on mate-locating behaviour and evolution of mating systems in insects. Ecol Lett 3:433–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jakubowska-Gabara J (1996) Decline of Potentillo albae-quercetum Libb 1933 phytocoenoses in Poland. Vegetatio 124:45–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Konvicka M (1999) Macrolepidoptera of the Litovelské Pomoraví protected landscape area—I. Cas Slez Muz Opava (A) 48:41–64Google Scholar
  26. Konvicka M, Kuras T (1999) Population structure and the selection of oviposition sites of the endangered butterfly Parnassius mnemosyne (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) in the Litovelske Pomoravi, Czech Republic. J Insect Conserv 3:211–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Konvicka M, Benes J, Kuras T (2002) Microdistribution and diurnal behaviour of two sympatric mountain butterflies (Erebia epiphron and E. euryale): relations to vegetation and weather. Biologia 57:223–233Google Scholar
  28. Konvicka M, Cizek O, Filipova L, Fric Z, Benes J, Krupka M, Zamecnik J, Dockalova Z (2005) For whom the bells toll: demography of the last population of the butterfly Euphydryas maturna in the Czech Republic. Biologia 60:551–557Google Scholar
  29. Kralicek M, Gottwald A (1984) Motyli jihovychodni Moravy I [Butterflies of Southeast Moravia I]. Okresni Museum & OV CSOP, Uhersky Brod & Uherske HradisteGoogle Scholar
  30. Kralicek M, Gottwald A (1987) Motyli jihovychodni Moravy IIII [Butterflies of Southeast Moravia I]. Okresni Museum & OV CSOP, Uhersky Brod & Uherske HradisteGoogle Scholar
  31. Kudrna O (2002) The distribution atlas of European butterflies. Oedippus 20:1–342Google Scholar
  32. Lastuvka Z (1994) Motýli rozšířeného území CHKO Pálava. Agronomická fakulta VSZ, BrnoGoogle Scholar
  33. Lastuvka Z, Marek J (2002) Lepidoptera of the Moravian Karst—diversity, communities and protection. Korax, BlanskoGoogle Scholar
  34. Lebreton JD, Burnham KP, Clobert J, Anderson DR (1992) Modeling survival and testing biological hypotheses using marked animals—a unified approach with case studies. Ecol Monogr 62:67–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lekes V (2000) Motýli (Lepidoptera) Rožd’álovické tabule. Práce muzea Kolíně, Řada přírodovědná 4:45–148Google Scholar
  36. Lepidopterologen Arbeitsgruppe (1987) Tagfalter und ihre lebensräume. Fotorotar, EggGoogle Scholar
  37. Leps J, Smilauer P (2003) Multivariate analysis of ecological data using CANOCO. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UKGoogle Scholar
  38. Pollard E, Woiwod IP, Greatorex-Davies JN, Yates TJ, Welch RC (1998) The spread of coarse grasses and changes in numbers of lepidoptera in a woodland nature reserve. Biol Conserv 84:17–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rolecek J (2005) Vegetation types of dry-mesic oak forests in Slovakia. Preslia 77:241–261Google Scholar
  40. Schneider C (2003) The influence of spatial scale on quantifying insect dispersal: an analysis of butterfly data. Ecol Entomol 28:252–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schtickzelle N, Baguette M, Le Boulenge 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
  42. Schtickzelle N, Le Boulenge E, Baguette M (2002) Metapopulation dynamics of the bog fritillary butterfly: demographic processes in a patchy population. Oikos 97:349–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Stiova L (1973) Vyskyt dennich motylu v oblasti Oderskych vrchu, Jeseniku a Hlucinske pahorkatiny. Entomol Zpravodaj (Ostrava) 3(2,3):1–20,1–14Google Scholar
  44. Tybirk K, Strandberg B (1999) Oak forest development as a result of historical land-use patterns and present nitrogen deposition. Forest Ecol Manag 114:97–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. van Swaay CAM, Warren MS (1999) Red Data book of European butterflies (Rhopalocera). Nature and Environment 99 Strasbourg, Council of Europe PublishingGoogle Scholar
  46. Wahlberg N (1998) The life history and ecology of Euphydryas maturna (Nymphalidae: Melitaeini) in Finland. Nota Lepid 21:154–169Google Scholar
  47. Warren MS (1985) The influence of shade on butterfly numbers in woodland rides, with special reference to the wood white Leptidea sinapis. Biol Conserv 33:147–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Warren MS (1987) The ecology and conservation of the heath fritillary, Mellicta athalia. III. Population dynamics and the effect of habitat management. J Appl Ecol 24:499–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Warren MS (1991) The successful conservation of an endangered species, the heath fritillary butterfly Mellicta athalia, in Britain. Biol Conserv 55:37–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Warren MS, Key RS (1991) Woodlands: past, present and potential for insects. In: Collins NM, Thomas JA (eds) The conservation of insects and their habitats. Academic Press, London, pp 155–212Google Scholar
  51. Weidemann HJ (1995) Tagfalter beobachten, bestimmen. Naturbuch, VerlagGoogle Scholar
  52. Whigham DF (2004) Ecology of woodland herbs in temperate deciduous forests. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 35:583–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Konvicka
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jan Novak
    • 1
  • Jiri Benes
    • 2
  • Zdenek Fric
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jonathan Bradley
    • 3
  • Petr Keil
    • 4
  • Jan Hrcek
    • 1
  • Karel Chobot
    • 5
  • Pavel Marhoul
    • 5
  1. 1.School of Biological SciencesUniversity South BohemiaCeske BudejoviceCzech Republic
  2. 2.Institute of EntomologyCzech Academy of SciencesCeske BudejoviceCzech Republic
  3. 3.Verdant EcologyHome Farm, BroadmoorDorking, SurreyUK
  4. 4.Department of Ecology, Faculty of SciencesCharles UniversityPraha 2Czech Republic
  5. 5.Nature Conservation Authority of the Czech RepublicPraha 4Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations