Abstract
Matrix contrasts affect communities in patchy landscapes by influencing resources, abiotic conditions and spill-over effects. However, current knowledge is significantly biased towards forest and rural communities. We examined the effects of three different matrix types, i.e., low, intermediate and high contrasts, on carabid beetle assemblages at urban railway verges in two climatic regions. Study sites were located in Finland and in Slovenia. Using pitfall trapping, non-metric multidimensional scaling and generalised linear mixed models, we investigated carabid assemblages at railway verges and in differently contrasting adjacent matrices, i.e. built-up, grassland and forest. The matrix influenced carabid assemblages at railway verges. Assemblages grouped with adjacent matrix types, although some Finnish railway assemblages included a characteristic set of open dry habitat species. Abundances of generalist species at railway verges were higher when next to grassland or forest than urban matrices. Habitat specialists responded negatively to high contrast matrices, resulting in lower abundances of open habitat specialists in railway verges when next to forests and nearly no spill-over of forest specialists into railway verges. These patterns were consistent in both countries, i.e. irrespective of climatic region. Our study emphasises effects of the adjacent matrix and matrix contrasts on communities in linear open habitat patches in cities. Knowledge on matrix effects in patchy landscapes, such as urban environments, is essential in understanding the distribution and composition of communities in discrete patches. This knowledge can be used in conservation planning. If habitat specialists are negatively affected by high matrix contrasts, high contrasts should be avoided.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2014) lme4: linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R Packag Version 1:1–7 http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4. Accessed 21 March 2016
Brearley G, Bradley A, Bell S, McAlpine G (2010) Influence of contrasting urban edges on the abundance of arboreal mammals: a study of squirrel gliders (Petaurus norfolcensis) in Southeast Queensland, Australia. Biol Conserv 143:60–71
Brose U (2003) Bottom-up control of carabid beetle communities in early successional wetlands: mediated by vegetation structure or plant diversity? Oecologia 135:407–413
Cadenasso ML, Traynor MM, Pickett STA (1997) Functional location of forest edges: gradients of multiple physical factors. Can J For Res 27:774–782
Campbell RE, Harding JS, Ewers RM, Thorpe S, Didham RK (2011) Production land use alters edge response functions in remnant forest invertebrate communities. Ecol Appl 21:3147–3161
Chen J, Franklin JF, Spies TA (1995) Growing-season microclimatic changes from Clearcut edges into old-growth Douglas-fir forests. Ecol Appl 5:74–86
DeGraaf RM, Yamasaki M (2002) Effects of edge contrast on Redback salamander distribution in even-aged northern hardwoods. For Sci 48:351–363
Delgado JN, Arroyo NL, Arevalo JR, Fernandez-Palacios JM (2007) Edge effects of roads on temperature, light, canopy closure, and canopy height in laurel and pine forests (Tenerife, Canary Islands). Landsc Urban Plan 81:328–340
Elek Z, Lövei GL (2007) Patterns in carabid beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) assemblages along an urbanization gradient in Denmark. Acta Oecol 32:104–111
Esri (2014) ArcGIS for Desktop 10.2.1. Esri, Redlands, California, United States. http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arcgis-for-desktop. Accessed 21 March 2016
Eurostat (2012) LUCAS – land use/cover area frame survey. Statistical Office of the European Communities, Luxemburg http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/lucas/data/database. Accessed 28 December 2016
Eversham BC, Telfer MG (1994) Conservation value of roadside verges for stenotopic heathland Carabidae: corridors or refugia? Biodivers Conserv 3:538–545
Eversham BC, Roy DB, Telfer MG (1996) Urban, industrial and other manmade sites as analogues of natural habitats for Carabidae. Ann Zool Fenn 33:149–156
Ewers RM, Didham RK (2006) Confounding factors in the detection of species responses to habitat fragmentation. Biol Rev 81:117–142
Fagan W, Cantrell R, Cosner C (1999) How Habitat Edges Change Species Interactions. Am Nat 153:165–182
Fletcher RJ Jr, Ries L, Battin J, Chalfoun AD (2007) The role of habitat area and edge in fragmented landscapes: definitively distinct or inevitably intertwined? Can J Zool 85:1017–1030
Gaublomme E, Hendrickx F, Dhuyvetter H, Desender K (2008) The effects of forest patch size and matrix type on changes in carabid beetle assemblages in an urbanized landscape. Biol Conserv 141:2585–2596
González-Varo JP, Biesmeijer JC, Bommarco R, Potts SG, Schweiger O, Smith HG, Steffan-Dewenter I, Szentgyörgyi H, Woyciechowski M, Vilà M (2013) Combined effects of global change pressures on animal-mediated pollination. Trends Ecol Evol 28:524–530
Hamberg L, Lehvävirta S, Kotze DJ (2009) Forest edge structure as a shaping factor of understorey vegetation in urban forests in Finland. For Ecol Manag 257:712–722
Harper KA, Macdonald SE, Burton PJ, Chen J, Brosofske KD, Saunders SC, Euskirchen ES, Roberts D, Jaiteh MS, Esseen P-A (2005) Edge influence on Forest structure and composition in fragmented landscapes. Conserv Biol 19:768–782
Harrison XA (2014) Using observation-level random effects to model overdispersion in count data in ecology and evolution. Peer J 2:e616
Koivula MJ, Punttila P, Haila Y, Niemelä J (1999) Leaf litter and the small-scale distribution of carabid beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in the boreal forest. Ecography 22:424–435
Koivula MJ, Hyyryläinen V, Soininen E (2004) Carabid beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) at forest-farmland edges in southern Finland. J Insect Conserv 8:297–309
Koivula MJ, Kotze DJ, Salokannel J (2005) Beetles (Coleoptera) in central reservations of three highway roads around the city of Helsinki, Finland. Ann Zool Fenn 42:615–626
Korpela E-L, Hyvönen T, Kuussaari M (2015) Logging in boreal field-forest ecotones promotes flower-visiting insect diversity and modifies insect community composition. Insect Conserv Diver 8:152–162
Kotze DJ, Brandmayr P, Casale A, Dauffy-Richard E, Dekoninck W, Koivula MJ, Lövei GL, Mossakowski D, Noordijk J, Paarmann W, Pizzolotto R, Saska P, Schwerk A, Serrano J, Szyszko J, Taboada A, Turin H, Venn S, Vermeulen R, Zetto T (2011) Forty years of carabid beetle research in Europe - from taxonomy, biology, ecology and population studies to bioindication, habitat assessment and conservation. Zoo Keys 100:55–148
Kotze DJ, O’Hara RB, Lehvävirta S (2012) Dealing with varying detection probability, unequal sample size and clumped distributions in count data. PLoS One 7:e40923
Lacasella F, Gratton C, De Felici S, Isaia M, Zapparoli M, Marta S, Sbordoni V (2015) Asymmetrical responses of forest and “beyond edge” arthropod communities across a forest–grassland ecotone. Biodivers Conserv 24:447–465
Lindroth CH (1985) The Carabidae (Coleoptera) of Fennoscandia and Denmark, part I and II. Scandinavian Science Press, Copenhagen
Lizée MH, Manel S, Mauffrey JF, Tatoni T, Deschamps-Cottin M (2011) Matrix configuration and patch isolation influences override the species–area relationship for urban butterfly communities. Landsc Ecol 27:159–169
Lomolino MV, Riddle BR, Whittaker RJ, Brown JH (2010) Biogeography, 4th edn. Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland
Lövei GL, Sunderland KD (1996) Ecology and behavior of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Annu Rev Entomol 41:231–256
Luck M, Wu J (2002) A gradient analysis of urban landscape pattern: a case study from the phoenix metropolitan region, Arizona, USA. Landsc Ecol 17:327–339
Luff ML (2007) The Carabidae (ground beetles) of Britain and Ireland. RES Handbook Volume 4, Part 2 (2nd edition). Field Studies Council, Shrewsbury
Mader HJ (1984) Animal habitat isolation by roads and agricultural fields. Biol Conserv 29:81–96
Müller J (1930/31) Bestimmungstabelle der Harpalus-Arten Mitteleuropas, Italiens und der Balkanhalbinsel. Coleopterologisches Centralblatt 5, Berlin
Müller-Motzfeld G (2006) Band 2, Adephaga 1: Carabidae (Laufkäfer). In: Freude H, Harde KW, Lohse GA, Klausnitzer B (eds) Die Käfer Mitteleuropas. Spektrum-Verlag, Heidelberg
Murcia C (1995) Edge effects in fragmented forests: implications for conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 10:58–62
National Land Survey of Finland (2009) Ortho image, normal color: greater Helsinki and Lahti. Scale 1(10):000
Niemelä J, Kotze DJ (2009) Carabid beetle assemblages along urban to rural gradients: a review. Landsc Urban Plan 92:65–71
Noordijk J, Schaffers AP, Sykora KV (2008) Diversity of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) and spiders (Araneae) in roadside verges with grey hair-grass. Eur J Entomol 105:257–265
Noreika N, Kotze DJ (2012) Forest edge contrasts have a predictable effect on the spatial distribution of carabid beetles in urban forests. J Insect Conserv 16:867–881
O’Hara RB, Kotze DJ (2010) Do not log-transform count data. Methods Ecol Evol 1:118–122
Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O'Hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Wagner H (2013) Vegan: community ecology package. R Packag Version 2:0–10 http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan. Accessed 21 March 2016
Paje F, Mossakowski D (1984) pH-preferences and habitat selection in carabid beetles. Oecologia 64:41–46
Peyras M, Vespa NI, Bellocq MI, Zurita GA (2013) Quantifying edge effects: the role of habitat contrast and species specialization. J Insect Conserv 17:807–820
Polis GA, Anderson WB, Holt RD (1997) Toward an integration of landscape and food web ecology: the dynamics of spatially subsidized food webs. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 28:289–316
R Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria http://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 21 March 2016
RABA (2012) Grafični podatki RABA za celo Slovenijo. Ministry of agriculture, forestry and food, Republic of Slovenia. http://rkg.gov.si/GERK/. Accessed 21 March 2016
Rand TA, Louda SM (2006) Spillover of agriculturally subsidized predators as a potential threat to native insect herbivores in fragmented landscapes. Conserv Biol 20:1720–1729
Rebele F (1994) Urban ecology and special features of urban ecosystems. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 4:173–187
Reino L, Beja P, Osborne PE, Morgado R, Fabião A, Rotenberry JT (2009) Distance to edges, edge contrast and landscape fragmentation: interactions affecting farmland birds around forest plantations. Biol Conserv 142:824–838
Ricketts TH (2001) The matrix matters: effective isolation in fragmented landscapes. Am Nat 158:87–99
Ries L, Debinski D (2001) Butterfly responses to habitat edges in the highly fragmented prairies of Central Iowa. JAnim Ecol 70:840–852
Ries L, Fagan WF (2003) Habitat edges as a potential ecological trap for an insect predator. Ecol Entomol 28:567–572
Ries L, Sisk TD (2004) A predictive model of edge effects. Ecology 85:2917–2926
Ries L, Sisk TD (2008) Butterfly edge effects are predicted by a simple model in a complex landscape. Oecologia 156:75–86
Ries L, Fletcher RJ Jr, Battin J, Sisk TD (2004) Ecological responses to habitat edges: mechanisms, models, and variability explained. Annu Rev Ecol Evol S 35:491–522
Saarinen K, Valtonen A, Jantunen J, Saarnio S (2005) Butterflies and diurnal moths along road verges: does road type affect diversity and abundance? Biol Conserv 123:403–412
Schneider NA, Low M, Arlt D, Pärt T (2012) Contrast in edge vegetation structure modifies the predation risk of natural ground nests in an agricultural landscape. PLoS One 7:e31517
Schneider NA, Krauss J, Steffan-Dewenter I (2013) Predation rates on semi-natural grasslands depend on adjacent habitat type. Basic Appl Ecol 14:614–621
Sisk TD, Haddad NM, Ehrlich PR (1997) Bird assemblages in patchy woodlands: modeling the effects of edge and matrix habitats. Ecol Appl 7:1170–1180
Stoate C, Báldi A, Boatman ND, Herzon I, van Doorn A, de Snoo GR, Rakosy L, Ramwell C (2009) Ecological impacts of early twenty-first century agricultural change in Europe – a review. J Environ Manag 91:22–46
Tscharntke T, Rand TA, Bianchi FJJA (2005) The landscape context of trophic interactions: insect spillover across the crop–noncrop interface. Ann Zool Fenn 42:421–432
Vermeulen HJW (1993) The composition of the carabid fauna on poor sandy road-side verges in relation to comparable open areas. Biodivers Conserv 2:331–350
Vermeulen HJW (1995) Road-side verges: habitat and corridor for carabid beetles of poor sandy and open areas. University of Wageningen, Dissertation
Wiens JA, Stenseth NC, Van Horne B, Ims A (1993) Ecological mechanisms and landscape ecology. Oikos 66:369–380
Winter M, Johnson DH, Faaborg J (2000) Evidence for edge effects on multiple levels in tallgrass prairie. Condor 102:256–266
Acknowledgements
The project was partly funded by the Department of Environmental Sciences and the Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, the Slovenian Research Agency through the research programme “Communities, relations and communications in the ecosystems (P1-0255)” and a bilateral Finland-Slovenia project (BI-FI/12-13-017). We are grateful to Prof. Jyrki Muona, Dr. Stephen Venn, Norbertas Noreika and Andrej Kapla for their help in identifying some of the carabid beetle species, to Andrej Kapla, Mateja Deržič and Jasna Mladenovič for field and laboratory assistance. Dr. Stephen Venn and Dr. Matti Koivula provided useful comments to an earlier draft of the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Online Resource 1
(DOCX 36 kb)
Online Resource 2
(DOCX 23 kb)
Online Resource 3
(DOCX 24 kb)
Online Resource 4
(DOCX 22 kb)
Online Resource 5
(DOCX 29 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Prass, M., Vrezec, A., Setälä, H. et al. The matrix affects carabid beetle assemblages in linear urban ruderal habitats. Urban Ecosyst 20, 971–981 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-017-0650-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-017-0650-9