Urban Ecosystems

, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 375–378 | Cite as

Tales of urban conservation: Eumaeus butterflies and their threatened cycad hostplants

  • Lorena Ramírez-Restrepo
  • Sandy Koi
  • Ian MacGregor-Fors
Article

Abstract

Urbanization has caused the local extinction of several butterfly species around the world, while others have managed to thrive in urban areas. Butterflies of the genus Eumaeus are among the most striking and colorful lycaenid butterflies in the Americas, but their neurotoxic hostplants, cycads, are a highly threatened plant group. The main threats for cycads are the loss and modification of their habitats and their removal for ornamental purposes, which in addition to their slow growth rate, make them highly vulnerable. Ornamental cycads are taken from natural habitats to urban areas, where they are playing an important role for Eumaeus reproduction. We here report two cases in which two Eumaeus species (E. childrenae, E. atala) are following and utilizing ornamental cycads to reproduce in urban areas, showing how significant urban areas can be, ecologically speaking. Aside from having enormous potential as flagship species for conservation in urban areas, these butterfly and plant species, and their interactions, shed encouraging light on the idea of putting reconciliation ecology ideas into action.

Keywords

Cycads Hostplants Urban ecology Lycaenidae Eumaeus childrenae Eumaeus atala 

References

  1. (INEGI) Instituto Nacional de Estadística Geografía e Informática (2011) Censo de Población y Vivienda 2010. INEGI, AguascalientesGoogle Scholar
  2. Aronson MFJ et al. (2014) A global analysis of the impacts of urbanization on bird and plant diversity reveals key anthropogenic drivers. Proc R Soc B 281:20133330CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Castillo-Campos G (1991) Vegetación y flora del municipio de Xalapa. Veracruz. INECOL, XalapaGoogle Scholar
  4. Czech B, Krausman PR (1997) Distribution and causation of species endangerment in the United States. Science 277:1116–1117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davis AM, Glick TF (1978) Urban ecosystems and island biogeography. Environ Conserv 5:299–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fattorini S (2011) Insect extinction by urbanization: a long term study in Rome. Biol Conserv 144:370–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Graves SD, Shapiro AM (2003) Exotics as host plants of the California butterfly fauna. Biol Conserv 110:413–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Grimm NB, Faeth SH, Golubiewski NE, Redman CL, Wu J, Bai X, Briggs JM (2008) Global change and the ecology of cities. Science 319:756–760CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Güneralp B, Seto KC (2013) Futures of global urban expansion: uncertainties and implications for biodiversity conservation. Environ Res Lett 8:014025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hammer RL (1996) New food plants for Eumaeus atala in Florida. News Lepidopterists Soc 38:10Google Scholar
  11. Hernández-Baz F, Rodríguez-Vargas DU (2014) Libro rojo de la fauna del estado de Veracruz. Gobierno del Estado de Veracruz, Procuraduría Estatal de Protección al Medio Ambiente. Universidad Veracruzana, XalapaGoogle Scholar
  12. Koi S (2013) Ecology and conservation of Eumaeus atala Poey 1832 (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). University of Florida, Gainesville, Master’s ThesisGoogle Scholar
  13. Koi S, Daniels J (2015) New and revised life history of the Florida hairstreak Eumaeus atala (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) with notes on its current conservation status. Fla Entomol 98:1134–1147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kowarik I (2011) Novel urban ecosystems, biodiversity, and conservation. Environ Pollut 159:1974–1983CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Lemoine R (2012) Cambios en la cobertura vegetal de la ciudad de Xalapa-Enríquez, Veracruz y zonas circundantes entre 1950 y 2010. Universidad Veracruzana, Xalapa, BSc ThesisGoogle Scholar
  16. McDonnell MJ, MacGregor-Fors I (2016) The ecological future of cities. Science 352:936–938CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. McKinney ML (2002) Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation. Bioscience 52:883–890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McKinney ML (2008) Effects of urbanization on species richness: a review of plants and animals. Urban Ecosyst 11:161–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Minno MC (2010) Butterfly extinctions in South Florida. Am Butterflies 18:16–22Google Scholar
  20. New TR, Sands DPA (2002) Conservation concerns for butterflies in urban areas of Australia. J Insect Conserv 6:207–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pauchard A, Aguayo M, Peña E, Urrutia R (2006) Multiple effects of urbanization on the biodiversity of developing countries: the case of a fast-growing metropolitan area (Concepción, Chile). Biol Conserv 127:272–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ramírez-Restrepo L, Halffter G (2013) Butterfly diversity in a regional urbanization mosaic in two Mexican cities. Landsc Urban Plan 115:39–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ramírez-Restrepo, L, MacGregor-Fors I (2016) Butterflies in the city: a review of urban diurnal Lepidoptera. Urban Ecosystems, doi: 10.1007/s11252-016-0579-4
  24. Ramírez-Restrepo L, Cultid-Medina CA, MacGregor-Fors I (2015) How many butterflies are there in a city of circa half a million people? Sustain 7:8587–8597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rosenzweig ML (2003) Win-win ecology–how the Earth’s species can survive in the midst of human enterprise. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Ruszczyk A (1986) Mortality of Papilio scamander scamander (Lep., Papilionidae) pupae in four districts of Porto Alegre (S. Brazil) and the causes of superabundance of some butterflies in urban areas. Rev Bras Biol 46:567–579Google Scholar
  27. Sanderson EW, Huron A (2011) Conservation in the city. Conserv Biol 25:421–423CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Shapiro AM (2002) The Californian urban butterfly fauna is dependent on alien plants. Divers Distrib 8:31–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Smith E (2000) A field study and re-establishment of the butterfly Eumaeus atala (Lycenidae) in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Florida International University, Miami, Master's ThesisGoogle Scholar
  30. Tilden J (1956) San Francisco’s vanishing butterflies. Lepidoptera News 10:133–145Google Scholar
  31. US Census Bureau (2016a) QuickFacts - Miami-Dade County, Florida. Retrieved from: http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/12086US
  32. US Census Bureau (2016b) QuickFacts - Broward County, Florida. Retrieved from: http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/12011US
  33. US Census Bureau (2016c) QuickFacts - Palm Beach County, Florida. Retrieved from: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/12099/accessible
  34. Vitousek PM, Mooney HA, Lubchenco J, Melillo JM (1997) Human domination of Earth’s ecosystems. Science 277:494–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Williams-Linera G, Manson RH, Isunza-Vera E (2002) La fragmentación del bosque mesófilo de montaña y patrones de uso del suelo en la región oeste de Xalapa, Veracruz, México. Madera Bosques 8:73–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lorena Ramírez-Restrepo
    • 1
  • Sandy Koi
    • 2
  • Ian MacGregor-Fors
    • 1
  1. 1.Red de Ambiente y Sustentabilidad, Instituto de EcologíaVeracruzMexico
  2. 2.McGuire Center for Lepidoptera and BiodiversityGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations