Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing movement of four butterfly species in experimental grassland strips

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Insect Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In contrast to many studies on the habitat quality of road verges for butterflies in relation to management regimes, little is known about whether road verges also function as corridors linking fragmented grassland habitats. We experimentally compared movements of four model species, two small blues and two medium browns, with one habitat specialist and one habitat generalist in each size and phylogenetic category. A total of 425 individual butterflies were caught and translocated to an experimental arena with three 2 × 30 m grassland strips that approximated road verges; one with adult feeding resources, one sheltered from the wind, and one without food and shelter. Movements in grassland strips were compared to movements in continuous grassland habitat. Results indicated that (1) individuals did not use the low-quality strip, (2) only specialists used strips but not in the same way according to their size and phylogenic category, and (3) strip use could not be predicted from habitat selection. This finding supports the idea that corridors of intermediate quality are the most efficient to promote dispersal rates in fragmented landscapes. Road verges cover 250,000 ha in Sweden, which is nearly the total amount of seminatural grasslands. Our results suggest that, to benefit butterfly dispersal among grassland patches, road verges should be managed to create a more favourable microclimate (e.g. sheltered from wind, high temperatures).

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beier P, Noss RF (1998) Do habitat corridors provide connectivity? Conserv Biol 12:1241–1252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binzenhöfer B, Schröder B, Strauss B et al (2005) Habitat models and habitat connectivity analysis for butterflies and burnet moths – the example of Zygaena carniolica and Coenonympha arcania. Biol Conserv 126:247–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JH, Kodric-Brown A (1977) Turnover rates in insular biogeography: effect of immigration on extinction. Ecology 58:445–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunzel S, Elligsen H, Frankl R (2004) Distribution of the Cinnabar moth Tyria jacobaeae L. at landscape scale: use of linear landscape structures in egg laying on larval hostplant exposures. Landscape Ecol 19:21–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clausen HD, Holbeck HB, Reddersen J (2001) Factors influencing abundance of butterflies and burnet moths of an organic farm in Denmark. Biol Conserv 98:167–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dover JW (1997) Conservation headlands: effects on butterfly distribution and behaviour. Agric Ecosyst Environ 63:31–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dover JW, Fry GLA (2001) Experimental simulation of some visual and physical components of a hedge and the effects on butterfly behaviour in an agricultural landscape. Ent Exp Appl 100:221–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dover JW, Sparks TH, Greatorex-Davies JN (1997) The importance of shelter for butterflies in open landscapes. J Ins Cons 1:89–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eliasson CU, Ryrholm N, Holmer M et al (2005) Nationalnyckeln till Sveriges flora och fauna. Fjärilar: Dagfjärilar. Hesperiidae-Nymphalidae. ArtDatabanken, SLU, Uppsala

  • Fahrig L, Merriam G (1994) Conservation of fragmented populations. Conserv Biol 8:50–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fry GLA, Robson WJ (1994) The effects of field margins on butterfly movement. BCPC Monogr 58:111–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerell R (1997) Management of roadside vegetation: effects on density and species diversity of butterflies in Scania, south Sweden. Ent Tidskr 118:171–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilliam JF, Fraser DF (2001) Movement in corridors: enhancement by predation threat, disturbance, and habitat structure. Ecology 82:258–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haddad NM (1999) Corridor use predicted from behaviours at habitat boundaries. Am Nat 153:215–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haddad NM, Baum KA (1999) An experimental test of corridor effects on butterfly densities. Ecol Appl 9:623–633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haddad NM, Tewksbury JJ (2005) Low-quality habitat corridors as movement conduits for two butterfly species. Ecol Appl 15:250–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haddad NM, Rosenberg DK, Noon BR (2000) On experimentation and the study of corridors: response to Beier and Noss. Conserv Biol 14:1543–1545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess GR (1994) Conservation corridors and contagious disease: a cautionary note. Conserv Biol 8:256–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudgens BR, Haddad NM (2003) Predicting which species will benefit from corridors in fragmented landscapes from population growth models. Am Nat 161:808–820

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mech SH, Hallett JG (2001) Evaluating the effectiveness of corridors: a genetic approach. Conserv Biol 15:467–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merckx T, Van Dyck H, Karlsson B et al (2003) The evolution of movements and behaviour at boundaries in different landscapes: a common arena experiment with butterflies. Proc Roy Soc Lond B 270:1815–1821

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munguira ML, Thomas JA (1992) Use of road verges by butterfly and burnet populations, and the effects of roads on adult dispersal and mortality. J Appl Ecol 29:316–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norberg U, Enfjäll K, Leimar O (2002) Habitat exploration in butterflies – an outdoor cage experiment. Evol Ecol 16:1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norusis MJ (1994) SPSS for Macintosh Release 6.1.1. SPSS. Chicago, IL

  • Noss RF, Beier P (2000) Arguing over little things: response to Haddad et al. Conserv Biol 14:1546–1548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollard E, Eversham BC (1995) Butterfly monitoring: interpreting the changes. In: Pullin AS (ed), Ecology and conservation of butterflies. Chapman and Hall in Association with Butterfly Conservation, London, pp 23–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Pryke SR, Samways MJ (2001) Width of grassland linkages for the conservation of butterflies in South African afforested areas. Biol Conserv 101:85–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ries L, Debinski DM (2001) Butterfly responses to habitat edges in the highly fragmented prairies of Central Iowa. J Anim Ecol 70:840–852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross JA, Matter SF, Roland J (2005) Edge avoidance and movement of the butterfly Parnassius smintheus in matrix and non-matrix habitat. Land.scape Ecol 20:127–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saarinen K, Valtonen A and Jantunen J et al (2005) Butterflies and diurnal moths along road verges: does road type affect diversity and abundance? Biol Conserv 123:403–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schtickzelle N, Mennechez G, Baguette M (2006) Dispersal depression with habitat fragmentation in the bog fritillary butterfly. Ecology 87:1057–1065

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D, Farr JA, Cox J et al (1992) Movement corridors: conservation bargains or poor investments? Conserv Biol 6:493–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sisk TD, Haddad NM (2002) Incorporating the effects of habitat edges into landscape models: effective area models or cross-boundary management. In: Liu J, Taylor WW (eds) Integrating landscape ecology into natural resource management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 208–240

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjölund A, Eriksson O, Persson T et al (1999) Vägkantsfloran. Vägverket, Borlänge

  • Söderström B (2006) Swedish butterflies – a field guide. Albert Bonniers Förlag, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • Söderström B, Svensson B, Vessby K et al (2001) Plants, insects and birds in seminatural pastures in relation to local habitat and landscape factors. Biodiv Conserv 10:1839–1863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart KEJ, Bourn NAD, Thomas JA (2001) An evaluation of three quick methods commonly used to assess sward height in ecology. J Appl Ecol 38:1148–1154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutcliffe OL, Thomas CD, Peggie P (1997) Area-dependent migration by ringlet butterflies generates a mixture of patchy population and metapopulation attributes. Oecologia 109:229–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Système d’Informations sur la Biodiversité en Wallonie (2004) http://mrW.wallonie.be/cgi/dgrne/sibw/sibw.esp.list2.pl?VAR = papillons_diurnes. Cited 9 June 2006

  • Van Dyck H, Baguette M (2005) Dispersal behaviour in fragmented landscapes: routine or special movements? Basic Appl Ecol 6:535–545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Swaay CAM, Warren MS (1999) Red data book of European butterflies (Rhopalocera). Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Swaay CAM, Warren MS (2003) Prime butterfly areas in Europe: priority sites for conservation. National Reference Center for Agriculture, Nature and Fisheries, Wageningen, The Netherlands

  • Wiens JA, Stenseth NC, van Horne B, Ims RA (1993) Ecological mechanisms and landscape ecology. Oikos 66:369–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood BC, Pullin AS (2002) Persistence of species in a fragmented urban landscape: the importance of dispersal ability and habitat availability for grassland butterflies. Biodiv Conserv 11:1451–1468

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to M. Franzén for validating data on habitat generalists and specialists. Å. Berg, T. Pärt and M. Baguette provided useful comments on the manuscript. This work was funded by the Swedish Research Council Formas.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Conservation Biology, SLU, P. O. Box 7002, SE-750 07, Uppsala, Sweden

    Bo Söderström & Marcus Hedblom

Authors
  1. Bo Söderström
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marcus Hedblom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bo Söderström.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Söderström, B., Hedblom, M. Comparing movement of four butterfly species in experimental grassland strips. J Insect Conserv 11, 333–342 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-006-9046-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-006-9046-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation