Skip to main content

A forest–grassland boundary enhances patch quality for a grassland-dwelling butterfly as revealed by dispersal processes

Journal of Insect Conservation volume 19, pages 15–24 (2015)Cite this article

Abstract

Although patch isolation and patch size have long been considered the two primary parameters affecting metapopulation processes, patch quality is now recognized as a third factor. The extent to which patch quality influences between-patch migration processes and local population sizes, however, is poorly understood. Using a mark–recapture survey for the butterfly Minois dryas, which inhabits grasslands in a fragmented landscape, we investigated factors affecting immigration and emigration of female individuals between patches. For patch quality, we assessed the proportion of forest-edge length along the patch periphery, as well as nectar resource availability, as the former is known to provide shelter from heat stress for grassland butterflies in midsummer. Results revealed that immigration into patches was largely determined by patch quality represented by forest–grassland adjacency, in addition to patch isolation. Emigration was lower from patches with high-quality measured by nectar resource availability as well as the amount of surrounding forest. These results suggest that a forest–grassland boundary is important, even for grassland-dwelling butterflies, in fragmented landscapes, and that conservation priorities should be given to habitats having this structural feature, as well as large patch size and high connectivity.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  • Baguette M, Clobert J, Schtickzelle N (2011) Metapopulation dynamics of the bog fritillary butterfly: experimental changes in habitat quality induced negative density-dependent dispersal. Ecography 34:170–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartoń K (2014) MuMIn: multi-model inference. R package version 1.10.5

  • Brückmann SV, Krauss J, Steffan-Dewenter I (2010) Butterfly and plant specialists suffer from reduced connectivity in fragmented landscapes. J Appl Ecol 47:799–809

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess SC, Treml EA, Marshall DJ (2012) How do dispersal costs and habitat selection influence realized population connectivity? Ecology 93:1378–1387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cant ET, Smith AD, Reynolds DR, Osborne JL (2005) Tracking butterfly flight paths across the landscape with harmonic rader. Proc R Soc B 272:785–790

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Choquet R, Reboulet A-M, Pradel R, Gimenez O, Lebreton J-D (2005) M-SURGE 1.8 user’s manual, pp 1–50

  • Clinchy M, Haydon DT, Smith AT (2002) Pattern does not equal process: what does patch occupancy really tell us about metapopulation dynamics? Am Nat 159:351–362

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cooch E, White G (2010) Program MARK, pp 1–837

  • Cozzi G, Müller CB, Krauss J (2008) How do local habitat management and landscape structure at different spatial scales affect fritillary butterfly distribution on fragmented wetlands? Landsc Ecol 23:269–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dennis RLH, Shreeve TG, Van Dyck H (2003) Towards a functional resource-based concept for habitat: a butterfly biology viewpoint. Oikos 102:417–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleishman E, Ray C, Sjogren-Gulve P, Boggs CL, Murphy DD (2002) Assessing the roles of patch quality, area, and isolation in predicting metapopulation dynamics. Conserv Biol 16:706–716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1994) A practical model of metapopulation dynamics. J Anim Ecol 63:151–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson JA, Moilanen A, Thomas CD (2009) Metapopulation responses to patch connectivity and quality are masked by successional habitat dynamics. Ecology 90:1608–1619

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Imura O (2008) Evaluating potential risk of Japanese grassland butterflies for conservation by analyses of Red lists. Jpn J Grass Sci 54:45–56 (in Japanese)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Japan Butterfly Conservation Society (2012) Field guide to the butterflies of Japan. Seibun-do, Tokyo (in Japanese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaquiery J, Guelat J, Broquet T, Berset-Brandli L, Pellegrini E, Moresi R, Hirzel AH, Perrin N (2008) Habitat-quality effects on metapopulation dynamics in greater white-toothed shrew, Crocidura russula. Ecology 89:2777–2785

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kalarus K, Skórka P, Nowicki P (2013a) Resource use in two contrasting habitat types raises different challenges for the conservation of the dryad butterfly Minois dryas. J Insect Conserv 17:777–786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalarus K, Skórka P, Halecki W, Jirak A, Kajzer-Bonk J, Nowicki P (2013b) Within-patch mobility and flight morphology reflect resource use anddispersal potential in the dryad butterfly Minois dryas. J Insect Conserv 17:1221–1228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuroe M, Yamaguchi N, Kadoya T, Miyashita T (2011) Matrix heterogeneity affects population size of the harvest mice: Bayesian estimation of matrix resistance and model validation. Oikos 120:271–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lebreton J, Pradel R (2002) Multistate recapture models: modelling incomplete individual histories. J Appl Stat 29:353–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matter SF, Roland J, Moilanen A (2004) Migration and survival of Parnassius smintheus: detecting effects of habitat for individual butterflies. Ecol Appl 14:1526–1534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matter SF, Ezzeddine M, Duermit E, Mashburn J, Hamilton R, Lucas T, Roland J (2009) Interactions between habitat quality and connectivity affect immigration but not abundance or population growth of the butterfly, Parnassius smintheus. Oikos 118:1461–1470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mennechez G, Petit S, Schtickzelle N, Baguette M (2004) Modelling mortality and dispersal: consequences of parameter generalisation on metapopulation dynamics. Oikos 106:243–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moilanen A, Hanski I (1998) Metapopulation dynamics: effects of habitat quality and landscape structure. Ecology 79:2503–2515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moilanen A, Nieminen M (2002) Simple connectivity measures in spatial ecology. Ecology 83:1131–1145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mortelliti A, Amori G, Boitani L (2010) The role of habitat quality in fragmented landscapes: a conceptual overview and prospectus for future research. Oecologia 163:535–547

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols J, Kendall W (1995) The use of multi-state capture–recapture models to address questions in evolutionary ecology. J Appl Stat 22:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowicki P, Vrabec V (2011) Evidence for positive density-dependent emigtation in butterfly metapopulations. Oecologia 167:657–665

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Okubo K (2002) The present state in the study of biological diversity on semi-natural grassland in Japan. Jpn J Grass Sci 48:268–276 (in Japanese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pykälä J (2003) Effects of restoration with cattle grazing on plant species composition and richness of semi-natural grasslands. Biodivers Conserv 12:2211–2226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing

  • Rabasa SG, Gutierrez D, Escudero A (2007) Metapopulation structure and habitat quality in modelling dispersal in the butterfly Iolana iolas. Oikos 116:793–806

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schirozu T (2006) The butterflies of Japan in color. Gakken, Tokyo (in Japanese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Schooley RL, Branch LC (2009) Enhancing the area-isolation paradigm: habitat heterogeneity and metapopulation dynamics of a rare wetland mammal. Ecol Appl 19:1708–1722

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas JA, Bourn NAD, Clarke RT, Stewart 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 B 268:1791–1796

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton DH, Branch LC, Sunquist ME (2011) The influence of landscape, patch, and within-patch factors on species presence and abundance: a review of focal patch studies. Lands Ecol 26:7–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turgeon K, Kramer DL (2012) Compensatory immigration depends on adjacent population size and habitat quality but not on landscape connectivity. J Anim Ecol 81:1161–1170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Valimaki P, Itamies J (2003) Migration of the clouded Apollo butterfly Parnassius mnemosyne in a network of suitable habitats—effects of patch characteristics. Ecography 26:679–691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Halder I, Barbaro L, Jactel H (2011) Conserving butterflies in fragmented plantation forests: are edge and interior habitats equally important? J Insect Conserv 15:591–601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Swaay C, Warren M, Loïs G (2006) Biotope use and trends of European butterflies. J Insect Conserv 10:189–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanreusel W, Maes D, Van Dyck H (2007) Transferability of species distribution models: a functional habitat approach for two regionally threatened butterflies. Conserv Biol 21:201–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner HH, Fortin MJ (2005) Spatial analysis of landscapes: concepts and statistics. Ecology 86:1975–1987

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winfree R, Dushoff J, Crone EE, Schultz CB, Budny RV, Williams NM, Kremen C (2005) Testing simple indices of habitat proximity. Am Nat 165:707–717

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Korehisa Kaneko and members of the Laboratory of Biodiversity Science (The University of Tokyo) and the Laboratory of Community Ecology (Chiba University) for help with the field work. This study was in part financially supported by the GCOE program (Asian Conservation Ecology) from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan, and by the Ministry of the Environment, Japan (S-9).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Biodiversity Science, School of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, 113-8657, Japan

    A. Akeboshi & T. Miyashita

  2. Department of Environmental Science, Faculty of Science, Toho University, 2-2-1 Miyama, Funabashi, 274-8510, Japan

    S. Takagi

  3. Laboratory of Community Ecology, Faculty of Science, Chiba University, Chiba, 263-8522, Japan

    M. Murakami

  4. Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Toho University, 2-2-1 Miyama, Funabashi, 274-8510, Japan

    M. Hasegawa

Authors
  1. A. Akeboshi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Takagi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Murakami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Hasegawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. T. Miyashita
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Miyashita.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PPTX 58 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Akeboshi, A., Takagi, S., Murakami, M. et al. A forest–grassland boundary enhances patch quality for a grassland-dwelling butterfly as revealed by dispersal processes. J Insect Conserv 19, 15–24 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-014-9732-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-014-9732-7

Keywords

  • Metapopulation
  • Fragmentation
  • Connectivity
  • Mark–recapture
  • Population parameter