Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The value of open power line habitat in conservation of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) associated with mires

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

Abstract

The draining of mires for silvicultural purposes has caused one of the most dramatic changes in the landscape during the last century in Finland. To study the effects of mire drainage, carabid beetle assemblages were sampled using pitfall trapping in three different mire habitat types. Carabids were sampled from mires in their natural state, drained mires and drained mires with an open power line to see whether the cleared power line can serve as an alternative habitat for mire dependent carabids. The draining of mires greatly increases the species richness of the carabid assemblages. Yet, the conservation value of the environment has dropped following the draining, since only common and abundant forest carabids have benefited from human impact. The role of the open power line as an alternative habitat for mire specialists remains questionable. A few carabid species have, however, benefited from the open habitat of the power line. The vegetation structure had a significant effect in determining the compositions of the carabid assemblages on the studied habitat types. It seems that mire dwelling carabids cannot survive on the drained mires, unless at least some characteristics, other than the mere openness of the cleared power lines, of natural mires remain.

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

  • Abildsnes J, Tømmerås BÅ (2000) Impacts of experimental habitat fragmentation on ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in a boreal spruce forest. Ann Zool Fenn 37:201–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahti T, Hämet-Ahti L, Jalas J (1968) Vegetation zones and their section in Nothwestern Europe. Ann Bot Fenn 5:169–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen AN (1999) My bioindicator or yours? Making the selection. J Insect Conserv 3:61–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angus RB, Brown RE, Bryant LJ (2000) Chromosomes and identification of the sibling species Pterostichus nigrita (Paykull) and P. rhaeticus Heer (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Syst Entomol 25:325–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Assmann T, Janssen J (1999) The effects of habitat changes on the endangered ground beetle Carabus nitens (Coleoptera: Carabidae). J Insect Conserv 3:107–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atlegrim O, Sjöberg K, Ball JP (1997) Forestry effects on a boreal ground beetle community in spring: selective logging and clear-cutting compared. Entomol Fennica 8:19–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausden M, Treweek J (1995) Grasslands. In: Sutherland WJ, Hill DA (eds) Managing habitats for conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Baars MA (1979) Catches in pitfall traps in relation to mean densities of Carabid beetles. Oecologia 41:25–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barber HS (1931) Traps for cave-inhabiting insects. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society 46:259–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Butterfield J, Coulson JC (1983) The carabid communities on peat and upland grasslands in northern England. Holarct Ecol 6:163–174

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies KF, Margules CR (1998) Effects of habitat fragmentation on carabid beetles: experimental evidence. J Anim Ecol 67:460–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Vries HH, den Boer PJ (1990) Survival of populations of Agonum ericeti Panz (Col, Carabidae) in relation to fragmentation of habitats. Neth J Zool 40:484–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eurola S, Aapala K, Kokko A, Nironen M (1991) Mire type statistics in the bog and southern aapa mire areas of Finland (60–66°N). Ann Bot Fennici 28:15–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Eyre MD, Rushton SP (1989) Quantification of conservation criteria using invertebrates. J Appl Ecol 26:159–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eyre MD, Lott DA, Garside A (1996) Assessing the potential for environmental monitoring using ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) with riverside and Scottish data. Ann Zool Fenn 33:157–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Främbs H (1990) Changes in Carabid beetle populations on a regenerating excavated peat bog in Northwest Germany. In: Stork NE (ed) The role of ground beetles in ecological and environmental studies. Athenaeum Press, Newcastle upon Tyne

    Google Scholar 

  • Garson J, Aggarwal A, Sarkar S (2002) Birds as surrogates for biodiversity: an analysis of a data set from southern Quebec. J Biosci 27:347–360

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Geiger R (1965) The climate near the ground. Harward University Press, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenslade PJM (1964) Pitfall trapping as a method for studying populations of Carabidae (Coleoptera). J Anim Ecol 33:301–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halme E, Niemelä J (1993) Carabid beetles in fragments of coniferous forest. Ann Zool Fenn 30:17–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski K, Ovaskainen O (2003) Metapopulation theory for fragmented landscapes. Theor Popul Biol 64:119–127

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hertz M (1927) Huomioita petokuoriaisten olinpaikoista (in Finnish). Luonnon Ystävä 31:218–222

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes PR, Fowles AP, Boyce DC, Reed DK (1993) The ground beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) fauna of Welsh peatland biotopes-species assemblages in relation to peatland habitats and management. Biol Conserv 65:61–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horn HS (1966) Measurement of “overlap” in comparative ecological studies. Am Nat 100:419–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson DA (1995) Protest—a Procrustean randomization test of community environment concordance. Ecoscience 2:297–303

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalliola R (1973) Suomen Kasvimaantiede (in Finnish). WSOY, Porvoo

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapos V (1989) Effects of isolation on the water status of forest patches in the Brazilian Amazon. J Trop Ecol 5:173–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koivula M, Kukkonen J, Niemelä J (2002) Boreal carabid-beetle (Coleoptera, Carabidae) assemblages along the clear-cut originated succesion gradient. Biodivers Conserv 11:1269–1288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koivula M, Kotze DJ, Hiisivuori L et al (2003) Pitfall trap efficiency: do trap size, collecting fluid and vegetation structure matter? Entomol Fennica 14:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Krebs CJ (1999) Ecological methodology. Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park California

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuussaari M, Ryttäri T, Heikkinen R et al (2003) Significance of power line areas for grassland plants and butterflies (in Finnish with English summary). The Finnish Environment 638:1–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Lappalainen E (1996) General review on world peatland and peat resources. In: Lappalainen E (ed) Global peat resources. International Peat Society, Jyskä

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindroth CH (1985) The Carabidae (Coleoptera) of Fennoscandia and Denmark Fauna Entomologica Scandinavica 15, part 1. Scandinavian Science Press Ltd., Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindroth CH (1986) The Carabidae (Coleoptera) of Fennoscandia and Denmark Fauna Entomologica Scandinavica 15, part 2. Scandinavian Science Press Ltd, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • Luff ML (1975) Some features influencing the efficiency of pitfall traps. Oecologia 19:345–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Luff ML (1996) Use of Carabids as environmental indicators in grasslands and cereals. Ann Zool Fenn 33:185–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Luff ML, Eyre MD, Rushton SP (1992) Classification and prediction of grassland habitats using ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae). J Environ Manage 35:301–315

    Google Scholar 

  • Lövei GL, Sunderland KD (1996) Ecology and behaviour of ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae). Annu Rev Entomol 41:231–256

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Matlack GR (1993) Microenvironment variation within and among forest edge sites in the eastern United States. Biol Conserv 66:185–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikkola K, Jalas I, Peltonen O (1985) Suomen perhoset: Mittarit I (in Finnish). Suomen Perhostutkijain Seura, Tampere

    Google Scholar 

  • Minchin PR (1987) An evaluation of the relative robustness of techniques for ecological ordination. Vegetatio 69:89–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murcia C (1995) Edge effects in fragmented forests: implications for conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 10:58–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakagawa S (2004) A farewell to Bonferroni: the problems of low statistical power and publication bias. Behav Ecol 15:1044–1045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J (2000) Biodiversity monitoring for decision-making. Ann Zool Fenn 37:307–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J (2001) Carabid beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) and habitat fragmentation: a review. Eur J Entomol 98:127–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä J, Haila Y, Halme E et al (1988) The distribution of carabid beetles in fragments of old coniferous taiga and adjacent managed forest. Ann Zool Fenn 25:107–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss RF (1990) Indicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchial approach. Conserv Biol 4:355–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nuutinen T, Hirvelä H, Hynynen J et al (2000) The role of peatlands in finnish wood production—an analysis based on large-scale forest scenario modelling. Silva Fenn 34:130–153

    Google Scholar 

  • Peres-Neto PR, Jackson DA (2001) How well do multivariate data sets match? The advantages of a Procrustean superimposition approach over the Mantel test. Oecologia 129:169–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prendergast JR, Quinn RM, Lawton JH et al (1993) Rare species, the coincidence of diversity hotspots and conservation strategies. Nature 365:335–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn GP, Keough MJ (2002) Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Rainio J, Niemelä J (2003) Ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) as bioindicators. Biodivers Conserv 12:487–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rassi P (ed) (1993) Suomen kovakuoriaisten (Coleoptera) frekvenssipisteet 1.1.1960–1.1.1990 (in Finnish). Viestipaino Oy, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Rassi P, Alanen A, Kanerva T et al (2001) Suomen lajien uhanalaisuus 2000 (in Finnish). Ympäristöministeriö & Suomen ympäristökeskus, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Rykken JJ, Capen DE, Mahabir SP (1997) Ground beetles as indicators of land type diversity in the Green Mountains of Vermont. Conserv Biol 11:522–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salminen P (1983) Soiden suojelu. In: Ruuhijärvi R, Häyrinen U (eds) Ympäristönsuojelu 2 (in Finnish). Kirjayhtymä, Helsinki

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders DA, Hobbs RJ, Margules CR (1991) Biological consequenses of ecosystem fragmentation: a review. Conserv Biol 5:18–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silfverberg H (2004) Enumeratio nova Coleopterorum Fennoscandiae, Daniae et Baltiae. Sahlbergia 9:1–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence JR, Niemelä JK (1994) Sampling Carabid assemblages with pitfall traps: the madness and the method. Can Entomol 126:881–894

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spitzer K, Bezdík A, Jaroš J (1999) Ecological succession of a relict Central European peat bog and variability of its insect biodiversity. J Insect Conserv 3:97–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thiele H-U (1977) Carabid beetles in their environments. Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heiderberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams P, Gibbons D, Margules C et al (1996) A comparison of richness hotspots, rarity hotspots and complementary areas for conserving diversity of British birds. Conserv Biol 10:155–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Riikka Nevalainen and Mikko Pentinsaari for their contribution to collecting of data on plants and beetles and for valuable comments on the earlier draft of the manuscript. We are indebted to Ari Levula for assistance and Fingrid Oyj for financial support.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Antti Hollmen

    Present address: , Kangasrouskuntie 2 B 6, Oulu, 90650, Finland

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, University of Oulu, P. O. Box 3000, Oulu, 90014, Finland

    Antti Hollmen, Panu Välimäki, Juhani Itämies & Jari Oksanen

Authors
  1. Antti Hollmen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Panu Välimäki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Juhani Itämies
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jari Oksanen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antti Hollmen.

 

 

Appendix The percentage coverages of the plant species found from the sampling sites (DP = drained mires + power line; D = drained mires; M = mires and mires + power lines)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hollmen, A., Välimäki, P., Itämies, J. et al. The value of open power line habitat in conservation of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) associated with mires. J Insect Conserv 12, 163–177 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-007-9076-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-007-9076-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation