Advertisement

Journal of Insect Conservation

, Volume 20, Issue 6, pp 1107–1112 | Cite as

Sex-specific spatial patterns in the threatened damselfly Coenagrion ornatum: implications for the species’ conservation and monitoring

  • Filip Tichanek
  • Robert Tropek
SHORT COMMUNICATION

Abstract

The damselfly Coenagrion ornatum is a threatened species, specialized for lowland headwater streams. As the species is declining and protected across Europe, it represents a species of particular conservation interest. This work aims to provide the first evaluation of fine-scale spatial ecology in this species, especially to assess its general mobility and distribution of adults in relation to larval habitats, and to suggest implications for conservation and efficient monitoring of this species. Adults were captured-recaptured along four distinct streams (5.2 km together) in the Radovesická spoil heap, Czech Republic. Immature adults and breeding individuals were recorded simultaneously. Larvae were sampled in 64 sections of 27 m, evenly distributed across the studied streams. In total, 1152 adult individuals were marked; from these, 240 individuals were recaptured at least once. Larvae were detected in 21 sites with a total number of 61 individuals. The adults were highly sedentary, with a median lifetime dispersal of 11 m. Only one male was reported to move between two distinct streams. Model comparisons revealed that female and breeding pair abundances are a significantly more reliable indicator of larval abundance than male and total adult abundances, especially when used along with records of the immature adults. Moreover, the weighted least square models showed that the female abundances are spatially more specific (i.e., less autocorrelated) than male abundances. These results imply that surveying the adult females, along with the breeding and immature adults, offers the best method for local habitat quality assessment for this Natura 2000 species.

Keywords

Dispersal Habitat quality assessment Natura 2000 Odonate sampling Spatial ecology 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Iveta Patková for her assistance during our fieldwork, Matthew Sweney for English proofreading, and David Boukal and Martin Černý for commenting on an earlier draft. This study was financed by the Czech Science Foundation (P504/12/2525).

References

  1. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Soft 67:1–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bohonak AJ, Jenkins DG (2003) Ecological and evolutionary significance of dispersal by freshwater invertebrates. Ecol Lett 6:783–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boudot JP (2014) Coenagrion ornatum. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2014: e.T165520A19158182. doi: 10.2305/IUCN.UK.2014-1.RLTS.T165520A19158182.en
  4. Bried JT, D’Amico F, Samways MJ (2012a) A critique of the dragonfly delusion hypothesis: why sampling exuviae does not avoid bias. Insect Conserv Divers 5:398–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bried JT, Hager BJ, Hunt PD et al (2012b) Bias of reduced-effort community surveys for adult Odonata of lentic waters. Insect Conserv Divers 5:213–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bried JT, Dillon AM, Hager BJ et al (2015) Criteria to infer local species residency in standardized adult dragonfly surveys. Freshw Sci 34:1105–1113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burnham K, Anderson D (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a pratical information-theoric approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Core TEAM R (2016) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  9. Dijkstra KDB, Lewington R (2006) Field guide to the dragonflies of Britain and Europe including western Turkey and north-western Africa. British Wildlife Publishing, DorsetGoogle Scholar
  10. Dolný A, Mižičová H, Harabiš F (2013) Natal philopatry in four European species of dragonflies (Odonata: Sympetrinae) and possible implications for conservation management. J Insect Conserv 17:821–829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dolný A, Harabiš F, Mižičová H (2014) Home range, movement, and distribution patterns of the threatened dragonfly Sympetrum depressiusculum (Odonata: Libellulidae): a thousand times greater territory to protect? PLoS One 9:e100408Google Scholar
  12. Dolný A, Harabiš F, Bárta D (2016) Vážky (Insecta: Odonata) České republiky. Academia, PragueGoogle Scholar
  13. Dutra S, De Marco P (2015) Bionomic differences in odonates and their influence on the efficiency of indicator species of environmental quality. Ecol Ind 49:132–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fric Z, Hula V, Klimova K, Zimmermann K, Konvicka M (2010) Dispersal of four fritillary butterflies within identical landscape. Ecol Res 25:543–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Harabiš F, Dolný A (2015) Necessity for the conservation of drainage systems as last refugia for threatened damselfly species, Coenagrion ornatum. Insect Conserv Divers 8:143–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Harabiš F, Tichanek F, Tropek R (2013) Dragonflies of freshwater pools in lignite spoil heaps: restoration management, habitat structure and conservation value. Ecol Eng 55:51–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Horváth G, Malik P, Kriska G, Wildermuth H (2007) Ecological traps for dragonflies in a cemetery: the attraction of Sympetrum species (Odonata: Libellulidae) by horizontally polarizing black gravestones. Freshw Biol 52:1700–1709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kalkman VJ, Boudot JP, Bernard R, Conze KJ, de Knijf G, Dyatlova E, Ferreira S, Jović M, Ott J, Riservato E, Sahlén G (2010) European red list of dragonflies. Publications Office of the European Union, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  19. Keller D, Holderegger R (2013) Damselflies use different movement strategies for short- and long-distance dispersal. Insect Conserv Divers 6:590–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lichstein JW, Simons TR, Shriner SA, Franzreb KE (2002) Spatial autocorrelation and autoregressive models in ecology. Ecol Monogr 72:445–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mazerolle MJ (2016) AICcmodavg: Model selection and multimodel inference based on (Q)AIC(c). R package version 2.0-4 Google Scholar
  22. Odendaal FJ, Turchin P, Stermitz FR (1988) An incidental-effect hypothesis explaining aggregation of males in a population of Euphydryas anica. Am Nat 132:735–749Google Scholar
  23. Patten MA, Bried JT, Smith-Patten BD (2015) Survey data matter: predicted niche of adult vs breeding Odonata. Freshw Sci 34:1114–1122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Purse BV, Hopkins GW, Day KJ, Thompson DJ (2003) Dispersal characteristics and management of a rare damselfly. J Appl Ecol 40:716–728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Raebel EM, Merckx T, Riordan P et al (2010) The dragonfly delusion: why it is essential to sample exuviae to avoid biased surveys. J Insect Conserv 14:523–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ribeiro PJ, Diggle PJ (2001) geoR: a package for geostatistical analysis. R News 1(2):15–18Google Scholar
  27. Rouquette JR, Thompson DJ (2007) Patterns of movement and dispersal in an endangered damselfly and the consequences for its management. J Appl Ecol 44:692–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Šigutová H, Šigut M, Dolný A (2015) Intensive fish ponds as ecological traps for dragonflies: an imminent threat to the endangered species Sympetrum depressiusculum (Odonata: Libellulidae). J Insect Conserv 19:961–974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tichanek F, Tropek R (2015) Conservation value of post-mining headwaters: drainage channels at a lignite spoil heap harbour threatened stream dragonflies. J Insect Conserv 19:975–985CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tichanek F, Tropek R (2016) The endangered damselfly Coenagrion ornatum in post-mining streams: population size, habitat requirements and restoration. J Insect Conserv 20:701–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Venables WN, Ripley BD (2002) Modern applied statistics with S-PLUS. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wood SN (2011) Fast stable restricted maximum likelihood and marginal likelihood estimation of semiparametric generalized linear models. J R Stat Soc B 73:3–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zebsa R, Khelifa R, Kahalerras A (2015) Adult movement pattern and habitat preferences of the Maghribian endemic Gomphus lucasii (Odonata: Gomphidae). J Insect Sci 15:151CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Zoology, Faculty of ScienceUniversity of South BohemiaCeske BudejoviceCzech Republic
  2. 2.Biology Centre, Institute of EntomologyCzech Academy of SciencesCeske BudejoviceCzech Republic
  3. 3.Department of Ecology, Faculty of ScienceCharles UniversityPragueCzech Republic
  4. 4.Department of Pathological Physiology, Faculty of Medicine in PilsenCharles UniversityPilsenCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations