Advertisement

Journal of Insect Conservation

, Volume 15, Issue 1–2, pp 301–309 | Cite as

What can sown wildflower strips contribute to butterfly conservation?: an example from a Swiss lowland agricultural landscape

  • Christine HaalandEmail author
  • Louis-Félix Bersier
Original Paper

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare butterfly abundances and diversity between wildflower strips and extensively used meadows to identify which butterfly species can be supported by establishing wildflower strips. Butterflies were recorded along transects during one season in twenty-five sown wildflower strips and eleven extensively used meadows in a Swiss lowland agricultural landscape (600 ha). In total 1,669 butterflies of 25 species were observed (25 in the strips, 18 in meadows). This can be related to 38 species recorded in the region (lowland part of Kanton Fribourg) within the Swiss Biodiversity Monitoring Programme. In wildflower strips the number of butterflies per transect meter was significantly higher than in the meadows, but there was no significant difference in species richness. Butterfly communities, though, were quite different between the two habitat types. Habitat type, abundances of flowering plants and presence of forest within 50 m were identified as factors influencing butterfly species richness. Butterfly abundances were affected by habitat type and abundance of flowering plants. In wildflower strips, 65% of all flower visits by butterflies were observed on Origanum. It can be concluded that sown wildflower strips can support a substantial part of a regions species pool. This is mostly true for common species, but can apply to rare species when, for example, larval food plant requirements are met.

Keywords

Agri-environmental schemes Flower visits Grassland management Larval food plant Larval habitat Regional species pool Switzerland 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We want to thank Jacques Studer and Christian Imesch from the Ökobüro in Fribourg for providing all information on ecological compensation areas in the study area including maps. We are also very thankful to Matthias Plattner, Hintermann & Weber AG, Basel, for the provision of the butterfly data from the Swiss Biodiversity Monitoring Programme (BDM). All farmers are thanked for allowing access to their land. Two anonymous reviewers have contributed to improve the manuscript. CH was financed by the Swedish Research Council FORMAS and LFB by the Swiss National Science Foundation (3100A0-113843).

References

  1. Aviron S, Herzog F, Klaus I, Luka H, Pfiffner L, Schupbach B, Jeanneret P (2007a) Effects of Swiss agri-environmental measures on arthropod biodiversity in arable landscapes. Aspects Appl Biol 81:101–109Google Scholar
  2. Aviron S, Jeanneret P, Schüpbach B, Herzog F (2007b) Effects of agri-environmental measures, site and landscape conditions on butterfly diversity of Swiss grassland. Agr Ecosyst Environ 122:295–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aviron S, Kindlmann P, Burel F (2007c) Conservation of butterfly populations in dynamic landscapes: The role of farming practices and landscape mosaic. Ecol Model 205:135–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aviron S, Herzog F, Klaus I, Schüpbach B, Jeanneret P (2010) Effects of wildflower strip quality, quantity, and connectivity on butterfly diversity in a Swiss arable landscape. Restor Ecol. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-100X.2010.00649.x
  5. Carvell C, Meek WR, Pywell RF, Nowakowski M (2004) The response of foraging bumblebees to successional change in newly created arable field margins. Biol Conserv 118:327–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carvell C, Roy DB, Smart SM, Pywell RF, Preston CD, Goulson D (2006) Declines in forage availability for bumblebees at a national scale. Biol Conserv 132:481–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carvell C, Meek WR, Pywell RF, Goulson D, Nowakowski M (2007) Comparing the efficacy of agri-environment schemes to enhance bumble bee abundance and diversity on arable field margins. J Appl Ecol 44:29–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ebert G (1993) Die Schmetterlinge Baden-Würtembergs. Band 2. Verlag Eugen Ulmer, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  9. ESRI (2006) ArcGISGoogle Scholar
  10. Feber RE, Smith H, Macdonald DW (1996) The effects on butterfly abundance of the management of uncropped edges of arable fields. J Appl Ecol 33:1191–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Frank T, Künzle I (2006) Effect of early succession in wildflower areas on bug assemblages (Insecta : Heteroptera). Eur J Entomol 103:61–70Google Scholar
  12. Gonseth Y (1994) Rote Liste der gefährdeten Tagfalter der Schweiz. In: Duelli P (ed) Rote Liste der gefährdeten Tierarten der Schweiz. Bundesamt für Umwelt, Wald und Landschaft. Bern, Switzerland, pp 48–51Google Scholar
  13. Haaland C, Gyllin M (2010) Butterflies and bumblebees in greenways and sown wildflower strips in southern Sweden. J Insect Conserv 10:125–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haaland C, Naisbit RE, Bersier, L-F (2010) Sown wildflower strips for insect conservation—a review. Insect Conserv Divers (in press). doi: 10.1111/j.1752-4598.2010.00098.x
  15. Heard MS, Carvell C, Carreck NL, Rothery P, Osborne J, Bourke AFG (2007) Landscape context not patch size determines bumble-bee density on flower mixtures sown for agri-environment schemes. Biol Lett 3:638–641CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Jacot K, Eggenschwiler L, Junge X, Luka H, Bosshard A (2007) Improved field margins for a higher biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Aspects Appl Biol 81:277–283Google Scholar
  17. Kohler F, Verhulst J, van Klink R, Kleijn D (2008) At what spatial scale do high-quality habitats enhance the diversity of forbs and pollinators in intensively farmed landscapes? J Appl Ecol 45:753–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Konvicka M, Benes J, Cizek O, Kopecek F, Konvicka O, Vitaz L (2008) How too much care kills species: Grassland reserves, agri-environmental schemes and extinction of Colias myrmidone (Lepidoptera : Pieridae) from its former stronghold. J Insect Conserv 12:519–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Koordinationsstelle Biodiversitäts-Monitoring Schweiz (2008) Anleitung für die Feldarbeit zum Indikator « Z7-Tagfalter » . Bern, Bundesamt für Umwelt. http://www.biodiversitymonitoring.ch/pdfs/downloads/875%20Anleitung%20Z7-Tagf%20v14.pdf
  20. Lye G, Park K, Osborne J, Holland J, Goulson D (2009) Assessing the value of Rural Stewardship schemes for providing foraging resources and nesting habitat for bumblebee queens (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Biol Conserv 142:2023–2032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Marshall EJP, West TM, Kleijn D (2006) Impacts of an agri-environment field margin prescription on the flora and fauna of arable farmland in different landscapes. Agr Ecosyst Environ 113:36–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Meek WM, Loxton D, Sparks TH, Pywell R, Pickett H, Nowakowski M (2002) The effect of arable filed margin composition on invertebrate biodiversity. Biol Conserv 106:259–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Merckx T, Feber RE, Riordan P, Townsend MC, Bourn NAD, Parsons MS, Macdonald DW (2009) Optimizing the biodiversity gain from agri-environment schemes. Agr Ecosyst Environ 130:177–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nentwig W (ed) (2000) Streifenförmige ökologische Ausgleichsflächen in der Kulturlandschaft: Ackerkrautstreifen, Buntbrachen, Feldränder. Verlag Agrarökologie, Bern Hannover, p 293 Google Scholar
  25. Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, O’Hara RG, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Wagner H (2010) vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 1:17Google Scholar
  26. Pfiffner L, Wyss E (2004) Use of sown wildflower strips to enhance natural enemies of agricultural pests. In: Gurr GM, Wratten SD, Altieri MA (eds) Ecological engineering for pest management: advances in habitat manipulation for arthropods. Collingwood Victoria, CSIRO Publishing, pp 165–186Google Scholar
  27. Pollard E, Yates TJ (1993) Monitoring butterflies for ecology and conservation. Chapman & Hall, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  28. Pywell RF, Warman EA, Carvell C, Sparks TH, Dicks LV, Bennett D, Wright A, Critchley CNR, Sherwood A (2005) Providing foraging resources for bumblebees in intensively farmed landscapes. Biol Conserv 121:479–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pywell RF, Warman EA, Hulmes L, Hulmes S, Nuttall P, Sparks TH, Critchley CNR, Sherwood A (2006) Effectiveness of new agri-environment schemes in providing foraging resources for bumblebees in intensively farmed landscapes. Biol Conserv 129:192–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pywell RF, Meek WM, Carvell C, Hulmes L, Nowakowski M (2007) The Buzz project: biodiversity enhancement on arable land under the new agri-environment schemes. Aspects Appl Biol 81:61–68Google Scholar
  31. R Development Core Team (2009) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org
  32. Schweizerischer Bund für Naturschutz (ed) (1994) Tagfalter und ihre Lebensräume. Arten—Gefährdung—Schutz. 4. Auflage. Holliger, Egg/ZH, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  33. Settele J, Dover J, Dolek M, Konvicka M (2009) Butterflies of European ecosystems: impact of land use and options for conservation management. In: Settele J, Shreeve T, Konvicka M, Van Dyck H (eds) Ecology of butterflies in Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 353–370Google Scholar
  34. StatSoft (1997) Statistica 5.1 StatSoft, Tusla, USAGoogle Scholar
  35. Van Dyck H, Van Strien AJ, Maes D, Van Swaay CAM (2009) Declines in common, widespread butterflies in a landscape under intense human use. Conserv Biol 23:957–965CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Van Swaay CAM, Warren MS, Lois G (2006) Biotope use and trends of European butterflies. J Insect Conserv 10:189–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Van Swaay CAM, Maes D, Warren MS (2009) Conservation status of European butterflies. In: Settele J, Shreeve T, Konvicka M, Van Dyck H (eds) Ecology of butterflies in Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 322–338Google Scholar
  38. Walter T, Schneider K, Gonseth Y (2007) Schnittzeitpunkt in Ökowiesen: Einfluss auf die Fauna. Agrarforschung 14:114–119Google Scholar
  39. Wermeille E, Carron G (2005) Value of fallows for the Mallow Skipper (Carcharodus alceae) and some other butterfly species. Revue Suisse d’Agricul 37:175–182Google Scholar
  40. Woodcock BA, Westbury DB, Potts SG, Harris SJ, Brown VK (2005) Establishing field margins to promote beetle conservation in arable farms. Agr Ecosyst Environ 107:255–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Woodcock BA, Westbury DB, Tscheulin T, Harrison-Cripps J, Harris SJ, Ramsey AJ, Brown VK, Potts SG (2008) Effects of seed mixture and management on beetle assemblages of arable field margins. Agr Ecosyst Environ 125:246–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Landscape Management, Design and ConstructionSwedish University of Agricultural SciencesAlnarpSweden
  2. 2.Department of Biology, Unit Ecology and EvolutionUniversity of FribourgFribourgSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations