Journal of Insect Conservation

, Volume 5, Issue 2, pp 71–75 | Cite as

Biodiversity and Conservation of Diptera in Heterogeneous Land Mosaics: A Fly's Eye View

  • John R. Haslett
Article

Abstract

Classical landscape ecology views spatial heterogeneity of habitats at relatively large 'human scales', and it is at such scales that most decisions of land management and nature conservation are made. The present paper makes use of a wider range of spatial scales to examine land mosaics from the 'fly point of view'. Taking examples from the Diptera faunas of mountainous land mosaics, it is demonstrated that: (i) large scale, 'patch content' landscape management has a direct bearing on Diptera community structure, (ii) borders between large scale patches are not necessarily perceived by flies (or other insects) in the same way as we perceive them, (iii) border complexity between patches at any scale may be as important as patch content as an axis of habitat definition. In this sense, 'border' is not to be confused with 'edge effects'. It is concluded that attention to both patch content and patch border complexity of land mosaics, viewed at the relevant spatial scales, is necessary for future successful conservation of Diptera biodiversity and for the efficient use of these insects in environmental assessment studies.

habitat mosaics landscape ecology mountains Muscidae Sciomyzidae Syrphidae 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Collins, N.M. and Thomas, J.A. (eds) (1991) The conservation of insects and their habitats. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Forman, R.T.T. (1995) Land Mosaics: The ecology of landscapes and regions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Hansson, L., Fahrig, L. and Merriam, G. (eds) (1995) Mosaic Landscapes and ecological processes. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  4. Haslett, J.R. (1990) Conservation of invertebrates within protected areas: Bern Convention species in the Berchtesgaden National Park. In: Colloquy on the Bern Convention invertebrates and their conservation. Environmental Encounters Series No. 10. pp. 67-70. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
  5. Haslett, J.R. (1994a) The landscape approach in ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 9, 486-7.Google Scholar
  6. Haslett, J.R. (1994b) Community structure and the fractal dimensions of mountain habitats. J. Theor. Biol. 167, 407-11.Google Scholar
  7. Haslett, J.R. (1996) Landscape ecology diversifies. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11, 521-2.Google Scholar
  8. Haslett, J.R. (1997) Insect communities and the spatial complexity of mountain habitats. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. Lets. 6. 49-56.Google Scholar
  9. 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: Section of Ecology and Systematics, Cornell University.Google Scholar
  10. Moertelmaier, T. (1996) Struktur und Dynamik von Syrphidengemeinschaften (Insecta/Diptera/Syrphidae) ausgewählter walddominierter Habitat-und Landnutzungsmosaike im Nationalpark Berchtesgaden. Diploma thesis, University of Salzburg.Google Scholar
  11. Samways, M.J. (1994) Insect Conservation Biology. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  12. Sugihara, G. and May, R.M. (1990) Applications of fractals in ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 5, 79-86.Google Scholar
  13. Vala, J.C. (1989) Diptères Sciomyzidae Euro-Méditerranéens. Faune de France 72. Paris: Fédération Francaise des Sociétés de Science Naturelles.Google Scholar
  14. Wiens, J.A. (1995) Landscape mosaics and ecological theory. In Mosaic landscapes and ecological processes. (L. Hansson, L. Fahrig and G. Merriam, eds), pp. 1-26. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • John R. Haslett
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of ZoologyUniversity of SalzburgSalzburgAustria

Personalised recommendations