Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Restoration ecology meets carabidology: effects of floodplain restitution on ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae)

  • Published:
Biodiversity & Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The effects of different restoration activities on floodplain-inhabiting ground beetles were studied at a lowland river in northwestern Germany. In the 6-km2 project area the bank reinforcement was stopped, the dikes that bordered the river on both sides were removed and two oxbows (disconnected parts of the main stream course) were reconnected to the river. We investigated the banks at two sites at the main river, at the two reconnected oxbows and at two unconnected oxbows as reference sites. To analyse the effects of the removal of the dikes we chose three floodplain sites in front and two reference sites behind the new dike. As a consequence of the lack of bank reinforcement and the reconnection of the oxbows, the area of open river banks, a rare bank structure at rivers in northwestern Germany, increased by a factor of 4.6 during the 4 years of investigation. Numerous stenotopic ground beetle species colonized the newly developed habitats at the main river and at the reconnected oxbows quickly, during several weeks or months, and established new populations as indicated by newly hatched individuals. The removal of the dikes should lead to a rewetting of the floodplain area that is incorporated in the flood dynamics, an important aspect of the development of typical floodplain habitats such as wet meadows, reeds and alluvial forests, while reference sites on the other side of the removed dike remained uninfluenced. Four years after the removal of the dikes no species turnover at the sites with a potentially changed water regime was recorded that indicated a shift of the carabid assemblages towards hygrophilous species. One reason could be the low frequency of inundations and their short duration during the investigation period. The flood dynamics could be sustained by the elevation and enlargement of the river bed, and periodic floods are the key factor for a development of floodplain habitats.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Assmann T. and Terlutter H. 1999. Die längszonale Gliederung der Laufkäferfauna an der Ems. Angewandte Carabidologie Supplement I, Laufkäfer in Auen: 30–40.

  2. T. Assmann W. Dormann H. Främbs S. Gürlich K. Handke T. Huk (2003) ArticleTitleRote Liste der in Niedersachsen und Bremen gefährdeten Sandlaufkäfer und Laufkäfer (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae et Carabidae) mit Gesamtartenverzeichnis Informationsdienst Naturschutz Niedersachsen 2 70–95

    Google Scholar 

  3. Z. Babinski (1992) ArticleTitleHydromorphological consequences of regulating the lower VistulaPoland Regulated Rivers 7 337–348

    Google Scholar 

  4. M. Baguette (2003) ArticleTitleLong distance dispersal and landscape occupancy in a metapopulation of the cranberry fritillary butterfly Ecography 26 153–160 Occurrence Handle10.1034/j.1600-0587.2003.03364.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. K.G. Bernhardt (1998) ArticleTitleAuswirkungen der Wiederzulassung von Überflutungsdynamik auf die Vegetation und Pflanzenpopulation im Grünlandkomplex ȁ8Karrendorfer Wiesenȁ9 bei Greifswald Schriftenreihe für Landschaftspflege und Naturschutz 56 251–262

    Google Scholar 

  6. A. Bonn (2000) Flight activity of carabid beetles on a river margin in relation to fluctuating water levels P. Brandmayr G. Lövei T. Zetto Brandmayr A. Casale A. Vigna Taglianti (Eds) Natural History and Applied Ecology of Carabid Beetles Pensoft Publishers SofiaMoscow 145–158

    Google Scholar 

  7. A. Bonn M. Kleinwächter (1999) ArticleTitleMicrohabitat distribution of spider and ground beetle assemblages (AraneaeCarabidae) on frequently inundated river banks of the river Elbe Zeitschrift für Ökologie und Naturschutz 8 109–123

    Google Scholar 

  8. G. Bornette G. Heiler (1994) ArticleTitleEnvironmental and biological responses of former channels to river incision: a diachronic study on the upper Rhône River Regulated Rivers 9 79–92

    Google Scholar 

  9. G. Bornette C. Amoros H. Piegay J. Tachet T. Hein (1998) ArticleTitleEcological complexity of wetlands within a river landscape Biological Conservation 85 35–45 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0006-3207(97)00166-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. A. Boscaini A. Franceschini B. Maiolini (2000) ArticleTitleRiver ecotones: carabid beetles as a tool for quality assessment Hydrobiologia 422–423 173–181 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1017011209061

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bräunicke M. and Trautner J. 1999. Die Ahlenläufer-Arten der Bembidion-Untergattungen Bracteon und Odontium – Verbreitung, Bestandssituation, Habitate und Gefährdung charakteristischer Flussaue-Arten in Deutschland. Angewandte Carabidologie Supplement I, Laufkäfer in Auen: 79–94.

  12. M. Church (1992) Channel morphology and typology P. Calow G.E. Petts (Eds) The River Handbook Blackwell London 126–143

    Google Scholar 

  13. Desender K. 1989. Ecomorphological adaptations of riparian carabid beetles. Proceedings of the Symposium ȁ8Invertebraten van Belgieȁ9, pp. 309–314.

  14. K. Desender M. Pollet R. Segers (1984) ArticleTitleCarabid beetle distribution along humidity gradients in rivulet-associated grasslands (ColeopteraCarabidae) Biol. Jb. Dodonaea 52 64–75

    Google Scholar 

  15. K. Desender H. Turin (1989) ArticleTitleLoss of habitats and changes in the composition of the ground and tiger beetle fauna in four West European countries since 1950 (Coleoptera: CarabidaeCicindelidae) Biology Conservation 48 277–294 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0006-3207(89)90103-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. U. Detering (2000) ArticleTitleThe floodplain programme NRW – the Upper Lippe example Angewandte Landschaftsökologie 37 153–162

    Google Scholar 

  17. M.D. Eyre M.L. Luff S.P. Rushton (1990) ArticleTitleThe ground beetle (Coleoptera Carabidae) fauna of intensively managed agricultural grasslands in northern England and southern Scotland Pedobiologia 34 11–18

    Google Scholar 

  18. M.D. Eyre D.A. Lott A. Garside (1996) ArticleTitleAssessing the potential for environmental monitoring using ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) with riverside and Scottish data Annales Zoologici Fennici 33 157–163

    Google Scholar 

  19. M.D. Eyre M.L. Luff D.A. Phillips (2001) ArticleTitleThe ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) of exposed riverine sediments in Scotland and northern England Biodiversity and Conservation 10 403–426 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1016618610949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. U. Fuellhaas (2000) Restoration of degraded fen grassland – effects of long-term inundation and water logging on ground beetle populations (ColeopteraCarabidae) P. Brandmayr G.L. Lövei T. Zetto Brandmayr A. Casale A. Vigna Taglianti (Eds) Natural History and Applied Ecology of Carabid Beetles Pensoft Publishers SofiaMoscow 251–263

    Google Scholar 

  21. F. Grevilliot L. Krebs S. Muller (1998) ArticleTitleComparative importance and interference of hydrological conditions and soil nutrient gradients in floristic biodiversity in flood meadows Biodiversity and Conservation 7 1495–1520 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1008826629011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. J. Guenther B. Hoelscher F. Prußner T. Assmann (2004) ArticleTitleSurvival at river banks – Power of dispersal and population structure of Elaphrus aureusOmophron limbatum in north-western Germany (ColeopteraCarabidae) Mitt. Dtsch. Ges. allg. angew. Ent. 14 517–520

    Google Scholar 

  23. I. Hanski (1994) ArticleTitleA practical model of metapopulation dynamics Journal of Animal Ecology 63 151–162

    Google Scholar 

  24. S. Harrison (1989) ArticleTitleLong-distance dispersal and colonization in the Bay Ceckerspot butterfly, Euphydryas editha bayensis Ecology 70 1236–1243

    Google Scholar 

  25. T.H. Heijerman H. Turin (1994) Towards a method for biological assessment for habitat quality using carabid samples (ColeopteraCarabidae) K. Desender M. Dufrene M. Loreau M.L. Luff J.-P. Maelfait (Eds) Carabid Beetles: Ecology and Evolution Kluwer Academic Publishers DordrechtThe Netherlands 305–312

    Google Scholar 

  26. D. Hering (1998) ArticleTitleRiparian beetles (Coleoptera) along a small stream in the Oregon coast range and their interactions with the aquatic environment Coleopterists Bulletin 52 161–170

    Google Scholar 

  27. J.K. Hill C.D. Thomas O.T. Lewis (1996) ArticleTitleEffects of habitat patch size and isolation on dispersal by Hesperia comma butterflies: implications for metapopulation structure Journal of Animal Ecology 65 725–735

    Google Scholar 

  28. Horion A. 1941. Faunistik der deutschen Käfer. Bd I: Adephaga-Caraboidea. KrefeldGermany.

  29. T. Huk (1997) ArticleTitleAuswirkungen eines langfristigen Überstaus auf die Laufkäferfauna einer extensiv genutzten Niedermoorwiese Arbeitsberichte Landschaftsökologie Münster 18 147–160

    Google Scholar 

  30. T. Hübner P. Pavlovic (1998) ArticleTitleDie Berkelaue zwischen Stadtlohn und Vreden (Nordrhein-Westfalen) – Ort eines Erprobungs- und Entwicklungsvorhabens Angewandte Landschaftsökologie 23 109–128

    Google Scholar 

  31. U. Irmler K. Heller H. Meyer H.-D. Reinke (2002) ArticleTitleZonation of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) and spiders (Araneida) in salt marshes at the North and Baltic Sea and the impact of the predicted sea level increase Biodiversity and Conservation 11 1129–1147 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1016018021533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. U. Irmler U. Hoernes (2003) ArticleTitleAssignment and evaluation of ground beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) assemblages to sites on different scales in a grassland landscape Biodiversity and Conservation 12 1405–1419 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1023681827758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. IUCN 1998. Guidelines for re-introductions. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group. IUCNGlandSwitzerland and CambridgeUK.

  34. C.B. Joyce M. Wade (1998a) European Wet Grasslands: Biodiversity and Restoration John Wiley & Sons Ltd New York

    Google Scholar 

  35. C.B. Joyce M. Wade (1998b) Wet grasslands: a European perspective C.B. Joyce M. Wade (Eds) European Wet Grasslands: Biodiversity and Restoration John Wiley & Sons Ltd New York 1–12

    Google Scholar 

  36. A. Kaiser (1993) ArticleTitleZur Geschichte der Ems – Natur und Ausbau Veröffentlichungen aus dem Kreisarchiv Gütersloh 1 IssueID1 1–181

    Google Scholar 

  37. D.J. Kotze R.B. Oȁ9Hara (2003) ArticleTitleSpecies decline – but why? Explanations of carabid beetle (ColeopteraCarabidae) declines in Europe Oecologia 135 138–148 Occurrence Handle12647113

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. C.J. Krebs (1999) Ecological Methodology, 2nd ed Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc. Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  39. C.H. Lindroth (1985) The Carabidae (Coleoptera) of Fennoskandia and Denmark. Fauna Entomologica Scandinavica. Scand Science Press Leiden, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  40. C.H. Lindroth (1986) The Carabidae (Coleoptera) of Fennoskandia and Denmark. Fauna Entomologica Scandinavica. Scand Science Press Leiden, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  41. G.L. Lövei K.D. Sunderland (1996) ArticleTitleEcology and behaviour of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) Annual Review of Entomology 41 231–256 Occurrence Handle15012329

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. A.R.G. Large G. Petts (1996) Rehabilitation of river margins G. Petts P. Calow (Eds) River Restoration: Selected Extracts from the Rivers Handbook Blackwell OxfordUK 124–143

    Google Scholar 

  43. M.L. Luff (1996) ArticleTitleUse of Carabids as environmental indicators in grasslands and cereals Annales Zoologici Fennici 33 185–195

    Google Scholar 

  44. M.L. Luff M.D. Eyre S.P. Rushton (1992) ArticleTitleClassification and prediction of grassland habitats using ground beetles (ColeopteraCarabidae) Journal of Environmental Management 35 301–315

    Google Scholar 

  45. J.P. Maelfait K. Desender M. Dufrene (1994) Carabid beetles and nature conservation research in Belgium: a review K. Desender M. Dufrene M. Loreau M.L. Luff J.-P. Maelfait (Eds) Carabid Beetles: Ecology and Evolution Kluwer Academic Publishers DorrechtThe Netherlands 319–323

    Google Scholar 

  46. B. Maiolini A. Franceschini A. Boscaini (1998) The role of invertebrate communities as indicators of environmental characteristics of European river margins C.B. Joyce M. Wade (Eds) European Wet Grasslands: Biodiversity and Restoration John Wiley & Sons Ltd New York 151–162

    Google Scholar 

  47. R. Manderbach M. Reich (1995) Auswirkungen großer Querbauwerke auf die Laufkäferzönosen (ColeopteraCarabidae) von Umlagerungsstrecken der Oberen Isar Archiva Hydrobiologica Suppl. ␣ ␣ 573–578

    Google Scholar 

  48. W.A. Marggi (1992) Faunistik der Sandlaufkäfer und Laufkäfer der Schweiz (Cicindelidae and Carabidae) ColeopteraTeil I/Text Documenta Faunistika Helvetica ␣ ␣ 463

    Google Scholar 

  49. W.M. Murdoch (1967) ArticleTitleLife history patterns of some British Carabidae (Coleoptera) and their ecological significance Oikos 18 25–32

    Google Scholar 

  50. P.H. Nienhuis R.S.E.W. Leuven (2001) ArticleTitleRiver restoration and flood protection: controversy or synergism? Hydrobiologia 444 85–99 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1017509410951

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. G. Petts (1992) Impounded Rivers: Perspectives for Ecological Management John Wiley & Sons ChichesterUK

    Google Scholar 

  52. G. Petts H. Möller A.L. Roux (1989) Historical Change of Large Alluvial Rivers: Western Europe John Wiley & Sons ChichesterUK

    Google Scholar 

  53. H. Plachter (1986) Composition of the carabid beetle fauna of natural riverbanks and of man-made secondary habitats P.J. Den Boer M.L. Luff D. Mossakowski F. Weber (Eds) Carabid Beetles – Their Adaptions and Dynamics Guster Fisher Verlag StuttgartGermany 509–535

    Google Scholar 

  54. R. Pott D. Remy (2000) Gewässer des Binnenlandes Ulmer Stuttgart (Hohenheim), Germany

    Google Scholar 

  55. J. Rainio J. Niemelä (2003) ArticleTitleGround beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) as bioindicators Biodiversity and Conservation 12 487–506 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1022412617568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. K. Renner (1980) ArticleTitleFaunistisch-ökologische Untersuchungen der Käferfauna pflanzensoziologisch unterschiedlicher Biotope im Evessell-Bruch bei Bielefeld-Sennestadt Berichte des Naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins BielefeldSonderheft 2 145–176

    Google Scholar 

  57. S.P. Rushton M.L. Luff M.D. Eyre (1991) ArticleTitleHabitat characteristics of grassland Pterostichus species (ColeopteraCarabidae) Ecological Entomology 16 91–104

    Google Scholar 

  58. K. Stein (1998) ArticleTitleZum Erprobungs- und Entwicklungsvorhaben Renaturierung der Oster Angewandte Landschaftsökologie 23 129–147

    Google Scholar 

  59. C. Stelter M. Reich V. Grimm C. Wissel (1997) ArticleTitleModelling persistence in dynamic landscapes: lessons from a metapopulation of the grasshopper Bryodema tuberculata Journal of Animal Ecology 66 508–518

    Google Scholar 

  60. F. Westhoff (1881) ArticleTitleDie Käfer Westfalens I. Verh. naturhist. Ver. preuß Reinl. Westf. Suppl. 38 1–140

    Google Scholar 

  61. J. Trautner (1994) ArticleTitleZielformulierung und Erfolgskontrolle für die Belange des Artenschutzes bei Planungen in Auen – am Beispiel der Laufkäfer (Col.; Carabidae) Deutsche Bundesstiftung UmweltInitiativen zum Umweltschutz 1 289–303

    Google Scholar 

  62. J. Trautner G. Müller-Motzfeld M. Bräunicke (1996) ArticleTitleRote Liste der Sandlaufkäfer und Laufkäfer Deutschlands (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae et Carabidae). 2. Fassung. Stand Dezember 1996 Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung 29 IssueID9 261–273

    Google Scholar 

  63. L. Truus A. Tönisson (1998) The ecology of floodplain grasslands in Estonia C.B. Joyce M. Wade (Eds) European Wet Grasslands: Biodiversity and Restoration John Wiley & Sons Ltd New York 49–60

    Google Scholar 

  64. H. Turin (2000) De Nederlandse loopkevers, verspreiding en oecologie (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Nederlands Fauna 3 National Natuurhistorisch Museum Naturalis Leiden, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Ecology, University of Lüneburg, Scharnhorststr. 1, D-21335, Luneburg, Germany

    Jens Günther & Thorsten Assmann

Authors
  1. Jens Günther
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thorsten Assmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jens Günther.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Günther, J., Assmann, T. Restoration ecology meets carabidology: effects of floodplain restitution on ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae). Biodivers Conserv 14, 1583–1606 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-004-0531-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-004-0531-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation