Journal of Insect Conservation

, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp 557–564 | Cite as

Beyond vegetation-based habitat restoration for a threatened giant Spirostreptid millipede

  • James M. Lawrence
  • Michael J. Samways
  • Janine A. Kelly
  • Jock Henwood


Vegetation-based restoration efforts often fail to provide suitable habitat for many invertebrates. Restoring habitat for target invertebrates requires an understanding of their resource and condition requirements. The Seychelles giant millipede (SGM), Sechelleptus seychellarum, is a functionally important millipede which is Red Listed as ‘Vulnerable’. Here, we studied the habitat requirements of this macro-detritivore in relation to the ongoing forest restoration programme on Cousine Island, Seychelles. SGM spatial density did not significantly correlate with edaphic and litter properties, but did positively correlate with the toposcape (i.e. elevation and granitic rock cover). Granite rock crevices in forest covered areas were important diurnal refuges for the SGM, as microclimate conditions in non-forest covered rock refuges were unsuitable. SGM physical condition was significantly lower in non-shaded crevices compared to those shaded by forest. Low granite rock cover in the restored forest limited the SGM colonisation of this area in large numbers, despite canopy cover in the restored forest being comparable with that in the reference natural forest. As most restoration practices are primarily vegetation-based, this study demonstrates that such an approach can be inadequate for restoring habitat for target invertebrates, as many species habitat requirements extend beyond that of vegetation. For the SGM, selecting restoration sites that already have abundant rock cover would be the most practical way to increase SGM habitat through forest restoration practices. Taking into consideration the habitat requirements of target invertebrates can help in setting or redirecting restoration goals and thus enhance the conservation value of such practices.


Microclimate Resource Rock refuges Sechelleptus seychellarum Site selection Spatial density 


  1. Berġholz NGR (2007) Ecological traits and genetic variation in Amazonian populations of the neotropical millipede Poratia obliterate (Kraus, 1960) (Diplopoda: Pyrġodesmidae) (Brazil). Pensoft, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  2. Dangerfield JM (1990) Abundance, biomass and diversity of soil macrofauna in savanna woodland and associated managed habitats. Pedobiologia 34:141–150Google Scholar
  3. Dangerfield JM (1993) Ingestion of mineral soil/litter mixtures and faecal pellet production in the southern African millipede Alloporus uncinatus (Attems). Pedobiologia 37:159–166Google Scholar
  4. Dangerfield JM, Chipfunde L (1995) Stress tolerance and burrowing behaviour in the southern African millipede Alloporus uncinatus. J Zool 236:17–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. David J, Handa IT (2010) The ecology of saprophagous macroarthropods (millipedes, woodlice) in the context of global change. Biol Rev 85:881–895PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Dennis RLH (2010) A resource-based habitat view for conservation: butterflies in the British landscape. Blackwell, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Evans AM, Clinton PW, Allen RB, Frampton CM (2003) The influence of logs on the spatial distribution of litter-dwelling invertebrates and forest floor processes in New Zealand forests. For Ecol Manag 184:251–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ferreira RL, Soares SM, Barros FA (2009) Biodiversity under rocks in disturbed habitats: the role of microhabitats in landscape heterogeneity and community maintenance. Rev Bras Zooctecn 11:129–136Google Scholar
  9. Gerlach J (2008) Key biodiversity areas of the Seychelles Islands. Blackhuys Publishers, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  10. Golovatch S, Gerlach J (2010) Class Diplopoda de Blainville in Gervais, 1844. In: Gerlach J, Marusik Y (eds) Arachnida and Myriapoda of the Seychelles Islands. Siri Scientific Press, Manchester, pp 387–402Google Scholar
  11. Golovatch SI, Kime RD (2009) Millipede (Diplopoda) distributions: a review. Soil Org 81:565–597Google Scholar
  12. Grimbacher PS, Catterall CP (2007) How much do site age, habitat structure and spatial isolation influence the restoration of rainforest beetle species assemblages? Biol Conserv 135:107–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Holmstrup M, Bayley M, Pedersen SA, Zachariassen KE (2010) Interactions between cold, desiccation and environmental toxins. In: Denlinger DL, Lee RE (eds) Low temperature biology of insects. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 166–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hopkin SP, Read HJ (1992) The biology of millipedes. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  15. IUCN (2011) Species on the edge of survival. International Union for Conservation and Nature, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  16. Kang S, Kim S, Oh S, Lee D (2000) Predicting spatial and temporal patterns of soil temperature based on topography, surface cover and air temperature. For Ecol Manag 136:173–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Karjalainen H (2005) Active restoration of boreal forest habitats for target species. In: Mansourian S, Vallauri D, Dudley N (eds) Forest restoration in landscapes: beyond planting trees. Springer, New York, pp 197–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kelly JA, Samways MJ (2003) Diversity and conservation of forest-floor arthropods on a small Seychelles Island. Biodivers Conserv 12:1793–1813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kime RD, Golovatch SI (2000) Trends in the ecological strategies and evolution of millipedes (Diplopoda). Biol J Linn Soc 69:333–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lawrence JM (1999) Ecology and behaviour of the Seychelles giant millipede. Dissertation, University of Natal, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  21. Lawrence JM, Samways MJ (2003) Litter breakdown by the Seychelles giant millipede and the conservation of soil processes on Cousine Island, Seychelles. Biol Conserv 113:125–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lawrence JM, Samways MJ, Kelly JA, Henwood J (2012) Response of a threatened giant millipede to forest restoration. J Insect Conserv. doi:10.1007/s10841-012-9518-8 Google Scholar
  23. Majer JD (2009) Animals in the restoration process—progressing the trends. Restor Ecol 17:315–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McMonigle O (2005) Giant millipedes: the enthusiast’s handbook. Elytra and Antenna, OhioGoogle Scholar
  25. Monteith JL, Unsworth MH (2008) Principles of environmental physics, 3rd edn. Elsevier, Academic Press, Amsterdam, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Murry FW (1967) On the computation of saturation vapour pressure. J Appl Meteorol 6:203–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, da Fonseca GAB, Kent J (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nakamura A, Catterall CP, Burwell CJ, Kitching RL, House APN (2009) Effects of shading and mulch depth on the colonisation of habitat patches by arthropods of rainforest soil and litter. Insect Conserv Diver 2:221–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. New TR (2009) Insect species conservation. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Reddy MV (1995) Litter arthropods. In: Reddy MV (ed) Soil organisms and litter decomposition in the tropics. Westview Press, Boulder, pp 113–140Google Scholar
  31. Rosenberg NJ (1974) Micro-climate: the biological environment. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Samways MJ (1994) Insect conservation biology. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  33. Samways MJ (2000) A conceptual model of ecosystem restoration triage based on experiences from three remote oceanic islands. Biodivers Conserv 9:1073–1083CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Samways MJ, McGeoch MA, New TR (2010a) Insect conservation: a handbook of approaches and methods. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  35. Samways MJ, Hitchins P, Bourquin O, Henwood J (2010b) Tropical island recovery, Cousine Island, Seychelles. Blackwell, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Siegel S, Castellan NJ (1988) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioural sciences. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. Snyder BA, Hendrix PF (2008) Current and potential roles of soil macroinvertebrates (earthworms, millipedes and isopods) in ecological restoration. Restor Ecol 16:629–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Stokland JN, Siitonen J, Jonsson BG (eds) (2012) Biodiversity in dead wood. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  39. Ulyshen MD, Hanula JL (2009) Litter-dwelling arthropod abundance peaks near coarse woody debris in Loblolly pine forests of the Southeastern United States. Fla Entomol 92:163–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • James M. Lawrence
    • 1
  • Michael J. Samways
    • 1
  • Janine A. Kelly
    • 2
  • Jock Henwood
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Conservation Ecology and Entomology, Faculty of AgriSciencesStellenbosch UniversityStellenboschSouth Africa
  2. 2.Agricultural Research CouncilPlant Protection InstituteQueenswoodSouth Africa
  3. 3.Boca RatonUSA

Personalised recommendations