Advertisement

Biodiversity & Conservation

, Volume 7, Issue 6, pp 725–748 | Cite as

The macrolepidoptera of farm woodlands: determinants of diversity and community structure

  • Michael B. Usher
  • Scott W. J. Keiller
Article

Abstract

The Farm Woodland Scheme, which provided incentives to convert agricultural land to timber production, contained an implicit assumption that farm woodlands produce important benefits for wildlife. The moth fauna of 18 farm woodlands in the Vale of York was surveyed between May and November 1991. The aims were twofold. The first was to determine if there were benefits for moth species diversity. The second was to ascertain whether concepts of island biogeography and the plant species richness of the woods were related to the moth species composition.

Eleven families, 214 species and over 16 000 individuals of moths were recorded. Classification of the species presence/absence matrix indicated that small woods (less than 1ha) did not have characteristic woodland moth communities. Woods larger than 5ha were judged to be more valuable for the long-term conservation of woodland moth diversity. The best predictor of moth species richness was the herbaceous plant species richness within woodlands. Species richness of the family Geometridae was positively related to woodland area, as well as to woodland shape (compact shapes being preferable to elongated shapes). Characteristic woodland species are influenced by isolation (less isolated woods being richer in species). The implications of different powers of dispersal between moth families are discussed. Farm woodlands will be of more value for the conservation of the Macrolepidoptera if they are large, compact and incorporate remnants of existing woodland with extant herbaceous vegetation. These should be factors which are taken into consideration when providing incentives to establish and manage farm woodlands.

farm woodlands island biogeography Lepidoptera moths species richness woodlands 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Agassiz, D.J.L. (ed.) (1981) An Identification Guide to the British Pugs, Lepidoptera: Geometridae. London: British Entomological and Natural History Society.Google Scholar
  2. Blouin, M.S. and Connor, E.F. (1985) Is there a best shape for nature reserves? Biol. Conserv. 32, 277–88.Google Scholar
  3. Bradley, J.D. and Fletcher, D.S. (1979) A Recorder’s Log Book or Label List of British Butterflies and Moths. London: Curwen Books.Google Scholar
  4. Connor, E.F. and McCoy, E.D. (1979) The statistics and biology of the species-area relationship. Am. Nat. 113, 791–833.Google Scholar
  5. Dandy, J.E. (1961) Watsonian Vice-counties of Great Britain. London: Ray Society.Google Scholar
  6. Diamond, J.M. (1975) The island dilemma: lessons of modern biogeographic studies for the design of nature reserves. Biol. Conserv. 7, 3–15.Google Scholar
  7. Emmet, A.M. and Heath, J. (eds) (1991) The Moths and Butterflies of Great Britain and Ireland. Volume 7 part 2 Lasciocampidae to Thyatiridae, with Life History Chart of the British Lepidoptera. Colchester: Harley Books.Google Scholar
  8. Fisher, R.A., Corbet, A.S. and Williams, C.B. (1943) The relation between the number of species and the number of individuals in a random sample of an animal population. J. Anim. Ecol. 12, 42–58.Google Scholar
  9. Ford, E.B. (1955) Moths. London: Collins.Google Scholar
  10. Game, M. (1980) Best shape for nature reserves. Nature 287, 630–1.Google Scholar
  11. Heath, J. (1970) Insect Light Traps (AES leaflet No. 33). London: Ellis and Philips.Google Scholar
  12. Hill, M.O. (1979) TWINSPAN: A FORTRAN Program for Arranging Multivariate Data in an Ordered Two-way Table by Classification of the Individuals and Attributes. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University.Google Scholar
  13. Insley, H. (ed.) (1988) Farm Woodland Planting: Forestry Commission Bulletin No. 80. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  14. Kempton, R.A and Taylor, L.R. (1974) Log-series and log-normal parameters as diversity determinants for the Lepidoptera. J. Anim. Ecol. 43, 381–99.Google Scholar
  15. Key, R.S. (1985) The Provisional Status of Macrolepidoptera Species in North East England, Yorkshire and Humberside. Invertebrate Site Register Report Number 61A. Peterborough: Nature Conservancy Council.Google Scholar
  16. MacArthur, R.H. (1957) On the relative abundance of bird species. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 43, 293–5.Google Scholar
  17. MacArthur, R.H. and Wilson, E.O. (1967) The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Mader, H.J. (1984) Animal habitat isolation by roads and agricultural fields. Biol. Conserv. 29, 81–96.Google Scholar
  19. Magurran, A.E. (1985) The diversity of macrolepidoptera in two contrasting woodland habitats at Banagher, Northern Ireland. Proc. Royal Irish Acad. 85b, 121–32.Google Scholar
  20. Magurran, A.E. (1988) Ecological Diversity and its Measurement. London: Croom-Helm.Google Scholar
  21. May, R.M. (ed.) (1981) Patterns in multi-species communities. In Theoretical Ecology: Principles and Applications pp. 197–227. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  22. Peterken, G.F. and Game, M. (1984) Historical factors affecting the number and distribution of vascular plant species in the woodlands of Central Lincolnshire. J. Ecol. 72, 155–82.Google Scholar
  23. Pielou, E.C. (1975) Ecological Diversity. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  24. Skinner, B. (1988) Colour Identification Guide to Moths of the British Isles (Macrolepidoptera). London: Viking.Google Scholar
  25. South, R. (1920) The Moths of the British Isles. London: Frederick Warne.Google Scholar
  26. Southwood, T.R.E., Brown, V.K. and Reader, P.M. (1979) The relationship of plant and insect diversities in succession. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 12, 327–48.Google Scholar
  27. Sutton, S.L. and Beaumont, H.E. (eds) (1989) Butterflies and Moths of Yorkshire-Distribution and Conservation. Leeds: Yorkshire Naturalists Union and W.S. Maney.Google Scholar
  28. Taylor, L.R. (1978) Bates, Williams, Hutchinson-a variety of diversities. In Diversity of Insect Faunas (L.A. Mound and N. Waloff, eds) pp. 1–18. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  29. Taylor, L.R. (1986) Synoptic dynamics, migration and the Rothamsted Insect Survey. J. Anim. Ecol. 55, 1–33.Google Scholar
  30. Taylor, L.R. and French, R.A. (1974) Effects of light trap design and illumination on samples of moths in an English woodland. Bull. Entomol. Res. 63, 583–94.Google Scholar
  31. Taylor, L.R., Kempton, R.A. and Woiwod, I.P. (1976) Diversity statistics and the log-series model. J. Anim. Ecol. 45, 255–71.Google Scholar
  32. Thomas, J.A. (1984) The conservation of butterflies in temperate countries: past efforts and lessons for the future. In The Biology of Butterflies (R.I. Vane-Wright and P.R. Ackery, eds) pp. 333–5. London: Academic.Google Scholar
  33. Usher, M.B. (1997) Principles of nature conservation evaluation. In Freshwater Quality: Defining the Indefinable? (P.J. Boon and D.L. Howell, eds) pp. 199–214. Edinburgh: The Stationery Office.Google Scholar
  34. Usher, M.B., Brown, A.C. and Bedford, S.E. (1992) Plant species richness in farm woodlands. Forestry 65, 1–13.Google Scholar
  35. Usher, M.B., Field, J.P. and Bedford, S.E. (1993) Biogeography and diversity of ground-dwelling arthropods in farm woodlands. Biodivers. Lett. 1, 54–62.Google Scholar
  36. Woiwod, I.P. and Stewart, A.J.A. (1991) Butterflies and moths-migration in the agricultural environment. In Species Dispersal in Agricultural Habitats (R.G.H. Bunce and D.C. Howard, eds) pp. 189–202. London: Bellhaven.Google Scholar
  37. Whitcomb, B.L., Robbins, C.S., Lynch, J.F., Whitcomb, B.L., Klimkiwicz, M.K. and Bystrak, D. (1981) Effects of forest fragmentation on avifanua of the eastern deciduous forest. In Forest Island Dynamics in Man Dominated Landscapes (R.L. Burgess and D.M. Sharpe, eds) pp. 125–205. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  38. Zhang, Z. and Usher, M.B. (1991) Dispersal of woodmice and bank voles in an agricultural landscape. Acta Theriologica 36, 239–45.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael B. Usher
    • 1
  • Scott W. J. Keiller
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of YorkYorkUK

Personalised recommendations