Journal of Insect Conservation

, Volume 15, Issue 1–2, pp 241–258

Evidence based conservation of butterflies

Original Paper

Abstract

Few results of research aimed at solving questions arising from butterfly conservation are rigorously tested by manipulating populations and habitats in the field. Some factors common to successful conservation projects are analysed. In most non-migratory species, population density may vary by up to two orders of magnitude between sites or over time, and is primarily determined by the extent to which a subset of each species’ foodplant (or ant host) exists in the optimum growth-form or micro-habitat preferred by its larvae. Successful conservation projects have identified the optimum subset of each species’ larval resource before managing sites to increase its representation. In contrast, short-term fluctuations around a site’s carrying capacity or equilibrium level are mainly attributable to variation in weather, and are generally two orders of magnitude smaller than that attributable to larval habitat quality. There is little evidence that changing the abundance of adult resources, apart from shelter, influences population size or trends. The main constraint of the adult stage is the inability of many species to track the generation of new habitat patches that arise across modern landscapes. Within-patch larval habitat quality is again critical at the meta-population scale, explaining slightly more examples of patch occupancy than site isolation. This is because the higher density populations supported by optimum habitat are less likely to go extinct, and immigrants to new high-quality patches have a higher probability of founding new populations. Such patches may also generate up to a hundred times more emigrants per hectare than low-quality source patches.

Keywords

Habitat quality Metapopulation Butterfly population dynamics Larval niche Dispersal 

References

  1. Asher J, Warren MS, Fox R, Jeffcoate G, Jeffcoate S (2001) The millenium atlas of butterflies in Britain and Ireland. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  2. Bergstrom J, Wiklund C (2002) Effects of size and nuptial gifts on butterfly reproduction. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52:296–302Google Scholar
  3. Betzholtz PE, Ehrig A, Lindeborg M, Dinnétz P (2006) Food plant density, patch isolation and vegetation height determine occurrence in a Swedish metapopulation of the marsh fritillary Euphydryas aurinia (Rottemburg, 1775) (Lepidoptera. Nymphalidae). J Insect Conserv 11:343–350Google Scholar
  4. Bickmore CJ, Thomas JA (2000) The development of habitat for butterflies in former arable cultivation. Asp Appl Biol 58:305–312Google Scholar
  5. Boggs CL, Ross CL (1993) The effect of adult food limitation on life history traits in Speyeria mormonia. Ecology 74:433–441Google Scholar
  6. Bourn N, Thomas JA (1992) The ecology and conservation of the Brown Argus butterfly in Britain. Biol Conserv 63:67–74Google Scholar
  7. Brereton TM (1997) Ecology and conservation of the butterfly Pyrgus malvae (Grizzled Skipper) in south-east England. Dissertation, University of East LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Brereton TM, Warren MS, Roy DB, Stewart K (2008) The changing status of the Chalkhill Blue butterfly Polyommatus coridon in the UK: the impacts of conservation policies and environmental factors. J Insect Conserv 2:629–638Google Scholar
  9. Brown KS, Brown GG (1992) In: Whitmore TC, Sayer JA (eds) Tropical forest deforestation and species extinction. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 119–142Google Scholar
  10. Bulman CR, Wilson RJ, Holt AR, Bravo LG, Early RI, Warren MS, Thomas CD (2007) Minimum viable metapopulation size, extinction debt and the conservation of a declining species. Ecol Appl 7:1460–1473Google Scholar
  11. Clarke RT, Thomas JA, Elmes GW, Hochberg ME (1997) The effects of spatial patterns in habitat quality on community dynamics within a site. Proc R Soc Lond B 264:247–354Google Scholar
  12. Clarke RT, Mouquet N, Thomas JA, Hochberg ME, Elmes GW, Tesar D, Singer A, Hale J (2005) Modelling the local population dynamics of Maculinea and their spatial interactions with their larval foodplant and Myrmica ant species. In: Settele J, Kűhn E, Thomas JA (eds) Studies in the ecology & conservation of butterflies in Europe II. Pensoft, Sofia, pp 115–119Google Scholar
  13. Davies ZG, Wilson RJ, Brereton TM, Thomas CD (2005) The re-expansion and improving status of the silver-spotted skipper butterfly (Hesperia comma) in Britain: a metapopulation success story. Biol Conserv 124:189–198Google Scholar
  14. Dempster JP (1968) The control of Pieris rapae with DDT. I. The natural mortality of the young stages of Pieris. J Appl Ecol 4:485–500Google Scholar
  15. Dempster JP (1967) The control of Pieris rapae with DDT. II. Survival of young stages of Pieris after spraying. J Appl Ecol 5:451–462Google Scholar
  16. Dempster JP (1969) Some effects of weed control on the numbers of the small cabbage white (Pieris rapae L.) on Brussels sprouts. J Appl Ecol 6:339–345Google Scholar
  17. Dempster JP (1971) Some observations on a population of small copper butterfly Lycaena phlaeas (Linnaeus). Ent Gaz 22:199–204Google Scholar
  18. Dempster JP (1983) The natural control of populations of butterflies and moths. Biol Rev 58:461–481Google Scholar
  19. Dempster JP (1991) Fragmentation, isolation and mobility of insect populations. In: Collins NM, Thomas JA (eds) The conservation of insects and their habitats. Academic Press, London, pp 143–154Google Scholar
  20. Dempster JP, King ML, Lakhani KH (1976) The status of the swallowtail butterfly in Britain. Ecol Entomol 1:71–84Google Scholar
  21. Dempster JP, Pollard E (1981) Fluctuations in resource availability and insect populations. Oecologia 50:412–416Google Scholar
  22. Dennis RLH (1985) Polyommatus icarus on Brerteon Heath in Cheshire: voltinism and switches in resource exploitation. Ent Gaz 36:175–179Google Scholar
  23. Dennis RLH (1993) Butterflies & climate change. Manchester University Press, ManchesterGoogle Scholar
  24. Dennis RLH (2010) A resource-based habitat view for conservation: butterflies in the British Landscape. Wiley-Blackwell, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  25. Dennis RLH, Eales HT (1997) Patch occupancy in Coenonympha tullia (Lepidoptera: Satyridae): habitat quality matters as much as patch size and isolation. J Insect Conserv 1:167–176Google Scholar
  26. Dennis RLH, Eales HT (1999) Probability of site occupancy in the large heath butterfly Coenonympha tullia determined from geographical and ecological data. Biol Conser 87:295–301Google Scholar
  27. Dennis S, Van Dyck H (2003) Towards a resource-based concept for habitat: a butterfly biology viewpoint. Oikos 102:417–426Google Scholar
  28. Dennis S, Van Dyck H (2006) Habitats and resources: the need for a resource-based definition to conserve butterflies. Biodivers Conserv 15:1943–1966Google Scholar
  29. Dover JW (1996) Factors affecting the distribution of satyrid butterflies on arable farmland. J Appl Ecol 33:723–734Google Scholar
  30. Dover JW, Sparks TH, Greatorex-Davies JN (1997) The importance of shelter for butterflies in open landscapes. J Insect Conserv 1:89–97Google Scholar
  31. Duffey E (1968) Ecological studies on the large copper butterfly Lycaena dispar Haw. batavus Obth. at Woodwalton Fen National nature reserve, Huntingdonshire. J Appl Ecol 5:69–96Google Scholar
  32. Ehrlich PR (1961) Intrinsic barriers to dispersal in checkerspot butterfly. Science 134:108–109PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Ehrlich PR, Hanski I (2004) On the wings of checkerspots: A model system for population biology. OUP, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Elmes GW, Thomas JA (1992) The complexity of species conservation: interactions between Maculinea butterflies and their ant hosts. Biodivers Conserv 1:155–169Google Scholar
  35. Elmes GW, Clarke RT, Thomas JA, Hochberg ME (1996) Empirical tests of specific predictions made from a spatial model of the population dynamics of Maculinea rebeli, a parasitic butterfly of red ant colonies. Acta Oecol 17:61–80Google Scholar
  36. Erhardt A (1985) Diurnal Lepidpotera: sensitive indicators of cultivated and abandoned grassland. J Appl Ecol 22:849–861Google Scholar
  37. Fischer K, Fiedler K (2001) Effects of adult feeding and temperature regime on fecundity and longevity in the butterfly Lycaena hippothoe. J Lep Soc 54:91–95Google Scholar
  38. Fox R, Asher J, Brereton T, Roy D, Warren MS (2006) The state of butterflies in Britain and Ireland. Pisces, NewburyGoogle Scholar
  39. Gossard TW, Jones RE (1977) The effects of age and weather on egglaying in Pieris rapae L. J Appl Ecol 14:65–71Google Scholar
  40. Gros A, Poethke HJ, Hovestadt T (2009) Sex-specific spatio-temporal variability in reproductive success promotes the evolution of sex-biased dispersal. Theor Popul Biol 76:13–18PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Habel JC, Schmitt T, Hardtle W, Lutkepohl M, Assmann T (2001) Dynamics in a butterfly–plant–ant system: influence of habitat characteristics on turnover rates of the endangered lycaenid Maculinea alcon. Ecol Entomol 32:536–543Google Scholar
  42. Hanski I (1994) A practical model of metapopulation dynamics. J Anim Ecol 63:151–162Google Scholar
  43. Hanski I (1999) Metapopulation ecology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  44. Heath J, Pollard E, Thomas JA (1984) Atlas of butterflies in Britain and Ireland. Viking, HarmondsworthGoogle Scholar
  45. Hill JK, Thomas CD, Lewis OT (1999) Flight morphology in fragmented populations of a rare British butterfly, Hesperia comma. Biol Conserv 87:277–283Google Scholar
  46. Hill JK, Ohleműller R, Fox R, Thomas CD (2009) Climate warming and distribution changes in butterflies In: Ecology of butterflies in Europe. CUP, Cambridge, pp 315–321Google Scholar
  47. Hochberg M, Thomas JA, Elmes GW (1992) The population dynamics of a Large Blue Butterfly, Maculinea rebeli, a parasite of red ant nests. J Anim Ecol 61:397–409Google Scholar
  48. Hochberg ME, Clarke RT, Elmes GW, Thomas JA (1994) Population dynamic consequences of direct and indirect interactions involving a large blue butterfly and its plant and red ant hosts. J Anim Ecol 63:375–391Google Scholar
  49. Hovestadt T, Kubisch A, Poethke HJ (2010) Information processing in models for density-dependent emigration: a comparison. Ecol Model 221:405–410Google Scholar
  50. Hovestadt T, Poethke HJ (2006) The control of emigration and its consequences for the survival of populations. Ecol Model 190:443–453Google Scholar
  51. Hughes CL, Hill JK, Dytham C (2003) Evolutionary trade-offs between reproduction and dispersal in populations at expanding range boundaries. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:147–150Google Scholar
  52. Jervis MA, Boggs CL (2005) Linking nectar amino acids to fitness in female butterflies. TREE 20:585–587PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Karlsson B, Van Dyck H (2009) Evolutionary ecology of butterfly fecundity. In: Settele J, Shreeve T, Konvicka M, Van Dyck H (eds) Ecology of butterflies in Europe. CUP, Cambridge, pp 189–197Google Scholar
  54. Klapwijk MJ (2008) Host parasitoid interactions in the context of climate change and habitat fragmentation. Dissertation, University of OxfordGoogle Scholar
  55. Kűhn E, Feldman R, Thomas JA, Settele J (eds) (2005) Studies on the ecology and conservation of butterflies in Europe. I. General concepts and case studies. Pensoft, SofiaGoogle Scholar
  56. Lewis OT, Hurford C (1997) Assessing the status of the marsh fritillary butterfly (Eurodryas aurinia): an example from Glamorgan, UK. J Insect Conserv 1:159–166Google Scholar
  57. Mevi-Schütz J, Erhardt A (2003) Effects of nectar amino acids on fecundity of the wall brown butterfly (Lasiommata megera L.). Basic Appl Ecol 4:413–421Google Scholar
  58. Morris MG, Thomas JA, Ward L, Snazell RG, Pywell RF, Stevenson M, Webb NR (1994) Recreation of early successional stages for threatened butterflies—an ecological engineering example. J Environ Manage 42:119–135Google Scholar
  59. Mouquet N, Thomas JA, Elmes GW, Clarke RT, Hochberg ME (2005a) Population dynamics and conservation of a highly specialized predator: a case study of Maculinea arion. Ecol Monogr 75:525–542Google Scholar
  60. Mouquet N, Belrose V, Thomas JA, Elmes GW, Clarke RT, Hochberg ME (2005b) Conserving community modules: a case study of the endangered lycaenid butterfly Maculinea alcon. Ecology 86:3160–3173Google Scholar
  61. New TR (1997) Butterfly conservation. OUP, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  62. New TR, Pyle M, Thomas JA, Thomas CD, Hammond PC (1995) Butterfly conservation management. Ann Rev Entomol 40:57–83Google Scholar
  63. Nowicki P, Bonelli S, Barbero F, Balletto E (2009) Relative importance of density-dependent regulation and environmental stochasticity for butterfly population dynamics. Oecologia 161:227–239PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Parmesan C et al (1999) Poleward shifts of species’ ranges associated with regional warming. Nature 399:579–583Google Scholar
  65. Pollard E (1979) Population ecology and change in range of the white admiral butterfly Ladoga camilla L. in England. Ecol Entomol 4:61–74Google Scholar
  66. Pollard E (1991) Synchrony of population fluctuations: the dominant influence of widespread factors on local butterfly populations. Oikos 60:7–10Google Scholar
  67. Pollard E, Yates TJ (1993) Monitoring butterflies for ecology and conservation. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  68. Porter K (1981) The population dynamics of small colonies of the butterfly Euphydryas aurinia. Dissertation, Oxford BrookesGoogle Scholar
  69. Pullin AS (1987) Changes in leaf quality following clipping and regrowth on Urtica dioica, and consequences for a specialist insect herbivore Aglais urticae. Oikos 49:39–45Google Scholar
  70. Pullin AS (1995) Ecology and conservation of butterflies. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  71. Pyle RM (1976) Conservation of Lepidoptera in the United States. Biol Conserv 9:55–75Google Scholar
  72. Ravenscroft NOM (1994a) The ecology of the chequered skipper Carterocephalus palaemon in Scotland. I. Microhabitat. J Appl Ecol 31:613–622Google Scholar
  73. Ravenscroft NOM (1994b) The ecology of the chequered skipper Carterocephalus palaemon in Scotland. II. Food plant quality and population range. J Appl Ecol 31:623–630Google Scholar
  74. Ravenscroft NOM (1994c) The feeding behaviour of Carterocephalus palaemon (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae) caterpillars: does it avoid host defences or maximize nutrient intake? Ecol Entomol 19:26–30Google Scholar
  75. Ravenscroft NOM (1995) The conservation of Carterocephalus palaemon in Scotland. In: Pullin AS (ed) Ecology and conservation of Butterflies. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 165–179Google Scholar
  76. Revels, R (2006) More on the rise and fall of the Holly blue. British Wildlife, 419–424Google Scholar
  77. Roy DB, Rothery P, Pollard E, Moss D, Thomas JA (2001) Butterfly numbers and weather: the potential for predicting historical trends in abundance and the effects of climate change. J Anim Ecol 70:201–217Google Scholar
  78. Roy DB, Thomas JA (2003) Seasonal variation in the niche, habitat availability and population fluctuations of a bivoltine thermophilous insect near its range margin. Oecologia 134:439–444PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Schtickzelle N, Baguette M (2009) Metapopulation viability analysis: a chrystal ball for the conservation of endangered butterflies? In: Settele J, Shreeve T, Konvicka M, Van Dyck H (eds) Ecology of butterflies in Europe. CUP, Cambridge, pp 339–352Google Scholar
  80. Settele J, Kűhn E, Thomas JA (eds) (2005) Studies in the ecology & conservation of butterflies in Europe II. Species ecology along a European gradient: Maculinea butterflies as a model. Pensoft, SofiaGoogle Scholar
  81. Settele J, Kudrna O et al (2008) Climatic risk atlas of European butterflies. Pensoft, SofiaGoogle Scholar
  82. Settele J, Kühn E (2009) Insect conservation. Science 325:41–42PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Settele J, Shreeve T, Konvička M, Van Dyck H (eds) (2009) Ecology of butterflies in Europe. CUP, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  84. Shreeve TG (1986) Egglaying by the speckled wood butterfly (Pararge aegeria)—the role of female behaviour, host plant abundance and temperature. Ecol Entomol 11:229–236Google Scholar
  85. Snazell RS, Rispin WE, Thomas JA, Elmes GW (2001) M3 Bar End to Compton: invertebrate monitoring: Arethusa Clump chalk grassland restoration. NERC, HuntingdonGoogle Scholar
  86. Stewart AJA, New TR, Lewis OT (2007) Insect conservation biology. CABI, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
  87. Thomas CD (1985a) Specializations and polyphagy of Plebejus argus (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in North Wales. Ecol Entomol 33:29–51Google Scholar
  88. Thomas CD (1985b) The status and conservation of the butterfly Plebejus argus L. (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in North West Britain. Biol Conserv 33:29–51Google Scholar
  89. Thomas CD, Jones CD (1993) Partial recovery of a skipper butterfly (Hesperia comma) from population refuges: lessons for conservation in a fragmented landscape. J Anim Ecol 62:472–481Google Scholar
  90. Thomas CD, Thomas JA, Warren MS (1992) Distributions of occupied and vacant butterfly habitats in fragmented landscapes. Oecologia 92:563–567Google Scholar
  91. Thomas CD, Glen SWT, Lewis OT, Hill JK, Blakely DS (1999) Population differentiation and conservation of endemic races: the butterfly. Plebejus argus Anim Conserv 2:15–210Google Scholar
  92. Thomas CD, Badsworth EJ, Wilson RJ, Simons AD, Davies ZG, Musche M, Conradt L (2001) Ecological and evolutionary processes at expanding range margins. Nature 411:577–581PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. Thomas CD, Franco AMA, Hill JK (2006) Range retractions and extinction in the face of climate warming. TREE 21:415–416PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. Thomas JA (1974) Ecological studies of hairstreak butterflies. Dissertation, Leicester UniversityGoogle Scholar
  95. Thomas JA (1975) The black hairstreak butterfly. ITE, HuntingdonGoogle Scholar
  96. Thomas JA (1983a) The ecology and conservation of Lysandra bellargus (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in Britain. J Appl Ecol 20:59–83Google Scholar
  97. Thomas JA (1983b) The ecology and status of Thymelicus acteon (Lepidoptera: Hesperidae) in Britain. Ecol Entomol 8:427–435Google Scholar
  98. Thomas JA (1984a) The conservation of butterflies in temperate countries: past efforts and lessons for the future. In: Vane-Wright RI, Ackery P (eds) Biology of butterflies. Academic Press, London, pp 333–353Google Scholar
  99. Thomas JA (1984b) The behaviour and habitat requirements of Maculinea nausithous (the dusky large blue butterfly) and M. teleius (the scarce large blue) in France. Biol Conserv 28:325–347Google Scholar
  100. Thomas JA (1991) Rare species conservation: case studies of European butterflies. In: Spellerberg I, Goldsmith B, Morris MG (eds) The scientific management of temperate communities for conservation. Blackwells, Oxford, pp 149–197Google Scholar
  101. Thomas JA (1993) Holocene climate change and warm man-made refugia may explain why a sixth of British butterflies inhabit unnatural early-successional habitats. Ecography 16:278–284Google Scholar
  102. Thomas JA (1995) The conservation of declining butterfly populations in Britain and Europe: priorities, problems and successes. Biol J Linn Soc 56:55–72Google Scholar
  103. Thomas JA (2001) Can ecologists recreate habitats and restore absent species? In: Smout TC (ed) Nature, landscape and people since the second world war: a celebration of the 1949 act. Royal Society of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, pp 150–160Google Scholar
  104. Thomas JA (2005) Monitoring change in the abundance and distribution of insects using butterflies and other indicator groups. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 360:339–357Google Scholar
  105. Thomas JA (2007) Philip’s guide to butterflies of Britain and Ireland. Philip’s, LondonGoogle Scholar
  106. Thomas JA, Elmes GW (2001) Foodplant niche selection rather than the presence of ant nests explains oviposition patterns in the myrmecophilous butterfly genus Maculinea. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:471–477Google Scholar
  107. Thomas JA, Hovestadt T (in prep) Effects of habitat quality on the colonisation of unoccupied patches in landscapesGoogle Scholar
  108. Thomas JA, Lewington R (2010) Butterflies of the British Isles. BWP, GillinghamGoogle Scholar
  109. Thomas JA, Thomas CD, Simcox DJ, Clarke RT (1986) The ecology and declining status of the silver-spotted skipper butterfly (Hesperia comma) in Britain. J Appl Ecol 23:365–380Google Scholar
  110. Thomas JA, Moss D, Pollard E (1994) Increased fluctuations of butterfly populations towards the northern edges of species’ ranges. Ecography 17:215–220Google Scholar
  111. Thomas JA, Snazell RG, Moy IL (1996) The conservation of violet-feeding fritillaries in southern Britain. ITE, HuntingdonGoogle Scholar
  112. Thomas JA, Clarke RT, Elmes GW, Hochberg ME (1998a) Population dynamics in the genus Maculinea (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). In: Dempster JP, McLean IFG (eds) Insect population dynamics: in theory and practice. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 261–290Google Scholar
  113. Thomas JA, Simcox DJ, Wardlaw JC, Elmes GW, Hochberg ME, Clarke RT (1998b) Effects of latitude, altitude and climate on the habitat and conservation of the endangered butterfly Maculinea arion and its Myrmica ant hosts. J Insect Conserv 2:39–46Google Scholar
  114. Thomas JA, Rose RJ, Clarke RT, Thomas CD, Webb NR (1999) Intraspecific variation in habitat availability among ectothermic animals near their climatic limits and their centres of range. Funct Ecol 13:55–64Google Scholar
  115. Thomas JA, Bourn NAD, Clarke RT, Whitfield KE, Simcox DJ, Pearman GS, Curtis R, Goodger B (2001) The quality and isolation of habitat patches both determine where butterflies persist in fragmented landscapes. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:1791–1796Google Scholar
  116. Thomas JA, Simcox DJ, Clarke RT (2009) Successful conservation of a threatened Maculinea butterfly. Science 325:80–83PubMedGoogle Scholar
  117. Turlure C, Choutte J, Van Dyck H, Baguette M, Schtickzelle N (2010) Functional habitat area as a reliable proxy for population size: case study using two butterfly species of conservation concern. J Insect Conserv 14:379–388Google Scholar
  118. Van Swaay CAM, Warren MS (1999) Red data book of European butterflies. Council of Europe, StrasbourgGoogle Scholar
  119. Wahlberg N, Klemetti T, Hanski I (2002) Dynamic populations in a dynamic landscape: the metapopulation structure of the marsh fritillary butterfly. Ecography 25:224–232Google Scholar
  120. Warren MS (1985) The influence of shade on butterfly numbers in woodland rides, with special reference to the wood white butterfly Leptidea sinapis. Biol Conserv 33:147–164Google Scholar
  121. Warren MS (1987a) The ecology and conservation of the heath fritillary butterfly, Mellicta athalia. II. Adult population structure and mobility. J Appl Ecol 24:483–498Google Scholar
  122. Warren MS (1987b) The ecology and conservation of the heath fritillary butterfly, Mellicta athalia. III. Population dynamics and the effect of habitat management. J Appl Ecol 24:499–513Google Scholar
  123. Warren MS (1987c) The ecology and conservation of the heath fritillary butterfly, Mellicta athalia. I Host selection and phenology. J Appl Ecol 24:467–482Google Scholar
  124. Warren MS (1991) The successful conservation of an endangered species, the heath fritillary butterfly, Mellicta athalia, in Britain. Biol Conserv 55:37–56Google Scholar
  125. Warren MS (1992) The conservation of British butterflies. In: Dennis RLH (ed) The ecology of butterflies in Britain. OUP, Oxford, pp 246–274Google Scholar
  126. Warren MS (1994) The UK status and suspected metapopulation structure of a threatened European butterfly, the marsh fritillary Eurodryas aurinia. Biol Conserv 67:329–349Google Scholar
  127. Warren MS (1995) Managing local microclimates for the high brown fritillary, Argynnis adippe. In: Pullin AS (ed) Ecology and conservation of butterflies. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 198–210Google Scholar
  128. 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 55:707–719Google Scholar
  129. Warren MS, Hill JK, Thomas JA, Asher J, Fox R, Huntley B, Roy DB, Telfer MG, Jeffcoate S, Harding P, Jeffcoate G, Willis SG, Greatorex-Davies JN, Moss D, Thomas CD (2001) Rapid responses of British butterflies to opposing forces of climate and habitat change. Nature 414:65–69PubMedGoogle Scholar
  130. Wilson RJ, Davies ZG, Thomas CD (2009) Modelling the effect of habitat fragmentation on range expansion of a butterfly. Proc R Soc B 276:1421–1427PubMedGoogle Scholar
  131. Wynhoff I (1998) Lessons from the reintroduction of Maculinea teleius and M. nausithous in the Netherlands. J Insect Conserv 2:47–57Google Scholar
  132. Wynhoff I (2001) At home on foreign meadows: the reintroduction of two Maculinea butterfly species. Dissertation, Wageningen Agricultural University, WageningenGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  2. 2.CEH WallingfordOxfordshireUK
  3. 3.Muséum National d’Histoire NaturelleBrunoyFrance

Personalised recommendations