Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Species-specific distribution of two sympatric Maculinea butterflies across different meadow edges

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

Abstract

An important consequence of habitat fragmentation is the increase of edge habitats. Environmental factors in the edges are different from those in the interiors, which causes changes in the distribution of plant and animal species. We aimed to study how edges affect the distribution of two butterfly species within meadow fragments. We therefore investigated the effect of distance from edge and edge type (road edge versus tree edge) on two sympatric large blue species (Maculinea teleius and M. nausithous). Our results showed that edge type had contrasting effects on the two species. M. teleius favoured both interiors and road edges, while M. nausithous preferred the tree edges. In the case of the latter species a strong positive edge effect was also found. This kind of within-habitat niche segregation is probably related to the different microenvironmental conditions at the edges. Foodplant density did not seem to limit the distribution of these species. Our results suggest that interiors of meadows are important for M. teleius, while tree edges maintain the habitats of the regionally rarer butterfly, M. nausithous.

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
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Als TD, Vila R, Kandul NP, Nash DR, Yen SH, Hsu YF, Mignault AA, Boomsma JJ, Pierce NE (2004) The evolution of alternative parasitic life histories in large blue butterflies. Nature 432:386–390

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Anton C, Musche M, Hula V, Settele J (2005) Which factors determine the population density of the predatory butterfly Maculinea nausithous. In: Settele J, Kühn E, Thomas JA (eds) Studies on the ecology and conservation of butterflies in europe. Vol 2. Species ecology along a European gradient: Maculinea butterflies as a model. Pensoft, Sofia, pp 57–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Anton C, Musche M, Hula V, Settele J (2008) Myrmica host-ants limit the density of the ant-predatory large blue Maculinea nausithous. J Insect Conserv (in press). doi: 10.1007/s10841-007-9091-8

  • Báldi A (1999) Microclimate and vegetation edge effects in a reedbed in Hungary. Biodivers Conserv 8:1697–1706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Báldi A, Kisbenedek T (1999) Species-specific distribution of reed-nesting passerine birds across reed-bed edges: effects of spatial scale and edge type. Acta Zool Acad Sci H 45:97–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Batáry P, Örvössy N, Kőrösi Á, Vályi Nagy M, Peregovits L (2007) Microhabitat preferences of Maculinea teleius (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in a mosaic landscape. Eur J Entomol 104:731–736

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergman K-O (1999) Habitat utilization by Lopinga achine (Nymphalidae: Satyrinae) larvae and ovipositing females: implications for conservation. Biol Conserv 88:69–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourn NAD, Thomas JA (1993) The ecology and conservation of the brown argus butterfly Aricia agestis in Britain. Biol Conserv 63:67–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conradt L, Roper TJ (2006) Nonrandom movement behavior at habitat boundaries in two butterfly species: implications for dispersal. Ecology 87:125–132

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dauber J, Wolters V (2004) Edge effects on ant community structure and species richness in an agricultural landscape. Biodivers Conserv 13:901–915

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Debinski DM, Holt RD (2000) A survey and overview of habitat fragmentation experiments. Conserv Biol 14:342–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeVries PJ, Murray D, Lande R (1997) Species diversity in vertical, horizontal, and temporal dimensions of a fruit-feeding butterfly community in an Ecuadorian rainforest. Biol J Linn Soc 62: 343–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duelli P, Studer M, Marchand I, Jakob S (1990) Population movements of arthropods between natural and cultivated areas. Biol Conserv 54:193–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elmes GW, Thomas JA, Wardlaw JC, Hochberg ME, Clarke RT, Simcox DJ (1998) The ecology of Myrmica ants in relation to the conservation of Maculinea butterflies. J Insect Conserv 2:67–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faraway JJ (2006) Extending the linear model with R: generalized linear, mixed effects and nonparametric regression models. Chapman Hall, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Figurny E, Woyciechowski M (1998) Flowerhead selection for oviposition by females of the sympatric butterfly species Maculinea teleius and M nausithous (Lepidoptera: Lycenidae). Entomol Gen 23:215–222

    Google Scholar 

  • Foley JA, DeFries R, Asner GP, Barford C, Bonan G, Carpenter SR, Chapin FS, Coe MT, Daily GC, Gibbs HK, Helkowski JH, Holloway T, Howard EA, Kucharik CJ, Monfreda C, Patz JA, Prentice IC, Ramankutty N, Snyder PK (2005) Global consequences of land use. Science 309:570–574

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Glinka U, Settele J (2005) The effect of ant communities and spatial pattern for Maculinea nausithous. In: Settele J, Kühn E, Thomas JA (eds) Studies on the ecology and conservation of butterflies in Europe. Vol 2. Species ecology along a European gradient: Maculinea butterflies as a model. Pensoft, Sofia, p 72

    Google Scholar 

  • Ide J-Y (2002) Mating behaviour and light conditions cause seasonal changes in the dispersal pattern of the satyrine butterfly Lethe diana. Ecol Entomol 27:33–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johst K, Drechsler M, Thomas JA, Settele J (2006) Influence of mowing on the persistence of two large blue butterfly species. J Appl Ecol 43:333–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jose S, Gillespie AR, George SJ, Kumar BM (1996) Vegetation responses along edge-to-interior gradients in a high altitude tropical forest in peninsular India. Forest Ecol Manage 87:51–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitahara M (2004) Butterfly community composition and conservation in and around a primary woodland of Mount Fuji, central Japan. Biodivers Conserv 13:917–942

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kőrösi Á (2005) Habitat-use of wetland Maculinea species—a case study. In: Settele J, Kühn E, Thomas JA (eds) Studies on the ecology and conservation of butterflies in Europe. Vol 2. Species ecology along a European gradient: Maculinea butterflies as a model. Pensoft, Sofia, p 132

    Google Scholar 

  • Krauss J, Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2003) How does landscape context contribute to effects of habitat fragmentation on diversity and population density of butterflies? J Biogeogr 30:889–900

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuefler D, Haddad NM (2006) Local versus landscape determinants of butterfly movement behaviors. Ecography 29:549–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kühn E, Gwillym S, Thomas J , Settele J (2005) Bibliography on Maculinea ecology and related topics (state: September 2005). In: Settele J, Kühn E, Thomas JA (eds) Studies on the ecology and conservation of butterflies in Europe. Vol 2. Species ecology along a European gradient: Maculinea butterflies as a model. Pensoft, Sofia, pp 259–283

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunin WE (1998) Biodiversity at the edge: a test of the importance of spatial ‘‘mass effects’’ in the Rothamsted Park Grass experiments. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:207–212

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Loritz H, Settele J (2005) Changing a butterfly’s landscape. persistence of the Dusky Large Blue in managed grasslands. In: Settele J, Kühn E, Thomas JA (eds) Studies on the ecology and conservation of butterflies in Europe. Vol 2. Species ecology along a European gradient: Maculinea butterflies as a model. Pensoft, Sofia, pp 221–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Magura T, Ködöböcz V. (2007) Carabid assemblages in fragmented sandy grasslands. Agric Ecosyst Environ 199: 396–400

    Article  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 

  • Meek B, Loxton D, Sparks T, Pywell R, Pickett H, Nowakowski M (2002) The effect of arable field margin composition on invertebrate biodiversity. Biol Conserv 106:259–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meffe GK, Carroll CR (1994) Principles of conservation biology. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowicki P, Pępkowska A, Kudłek J, Skórka P, Witek M, Woyciechowski M (2005a) Landscape scale research in butterfly population ecology. Maculinea case study. In: Settele J, Kühn E, Thomas JA (eds) Studies on the ecology and conservation of butterflies in Europe. Vol 2. Species ecology along a European gradient: Maculinea butterflies as a model. Pensoft, Sofia, pp 140–143

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowicki P, Witek M, Skórka P, Settele J, Woyciechowski M (2005b) Population ecology of the endangered butterflies Maculinea teleius and M nausithous and the implications for conservation. Popul Ecol 47:193–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowicki P, Pępkowska A, Kudłek J, Skórka P, Witek M, Settele J, Woyciechowski M (2007) From metapopulation theory to conservation recommendations: lessons from spatial occurrence and abundance patterns of Maculinea butterflies. Biol Conserv 140: 119–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2005) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www.R-project.org

  • 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 habitats. Landsc Ecol 20:127–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schtickzelle N, Baguette M (2003) Behavioural responses to habitat patch boundaries restrict dispersal and generate emigration-patch area relationships in fragmented landscapes. J Anim Ecol 72:533–545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz CB, Crone EE (2001) Edge-mediated dispersal behavior in a prairie butterfly. Ecology 82:1879–1892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Standovár T, Primack RB (2001) A természetvédelmi biológia alapjai (Principles of conservation biology). Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó, Budapest

    Google Scholar 

  • Tartally A, Csősz S (2004) Data on the ant hosts of the Maculinea butterflies (Lepidoptera: Lycenidae) of Hungary. Természetvédelmi Közlemények 11:309–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Tartally A, Varga Z (2005) Host-ant specificity of Maculinea species in Hungary, connections with parasitoids and host plants. In: Settele J, Kühn E, Thomas JA (eds) Studies on the ecology and conservation of butterflies in Europe. Vol 2. Species ecology along a European gradient: Maculinea butterflies as a model. Pensoft, Sofia, pp 94–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas JA (1984) The behaviour and habitat requirement of Maculinea nausithous (the Dusky Large Blue Butterfly) and M teleius (the Scarce Large Blue) in France. Biol Conserv 28:325–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas JA (1991) Relationship between butterflies and ants. In: Dennis RLH (ed) Ecology of butterflies in Britain. Oxford Scientific Publications, Oxford, pp 149–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas JA, Elmes GW (1998) Higher productivity at the cost of increased host-specificity when Maculinea butterfly larvae exploit ant colonies through trophallaxis rather than by predation. Ecol Entomol 23:454–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas JA, Elmes GW (2001) Food-plant niche selection rather than the presence of ant nests explains oviposition patterns in the myrmecophilous butterfly genus Maculinea. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol 268:471–477

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas JA, Settele J (2004) Evolutionary biology: butterfly mimics of ants. Nature 432:283–284

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas JA, Elmes GW, Wardlaw JC, Woyciechowski M (1989) Host specificity among Maculinea butterflies in Myrmica ant nests. Oecologia 79:452–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas JA, Clarke RT, Elmes GW, Hochberg ME (1998) Population dynamics in the genus Maculinea (Lepidoptera: Lycenidae). In: Dempster JP, McLean IFG (eds) Insect populations. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 261–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Tscharntke T, Steffan-Dewenter I, Kruess A, Thies C (2002) Characteristics of insect populations on habitat fragments: a mini review. Ecol Res 17:229–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urbina-Cardona JN, Olivares-Pérez M, Reynoso VH (2006) Herpetofauna diversity and microenvironment correlates across a pasture-edge-interior ecotone in tropical rainforest fragments in the Los Tuxtlas Biosphere Reserve of Veracruz, Mexico. Biol Conserv 132:61–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Swaay CAM, Warren MS (1999) Red data book of European butterflies (Rhopalocera). Nature and environment series no. 99. Council of Europe, Strasbourg

  • Wynhoff I (1998) The recent distribution of the European Maculinea species. J Insect Conserv 2:15–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are indebted to András Báldi, Piotr Nowicki and Josef Settele for valuable comments on the manuscript and Thomas Cooper for linguistic revision. We thank the Western Transdanubian Environmental and Nature Protection Authority and the Fertő-Hanság & Őrség National Park Directorate for permission and landowners for allowing us to work in their meadows. The study was supported by the Faunagenesis project (NKFP 3B023-04) and partly by the MacMan project (EVK2-CT-2001-00126). We thank Anais Rudolff, Szabolcs Sáfián and volunteers of the Butterfly Conservation Europe for help in the fieldwork.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Péter Batáry

    Present address: Agroecology, Georg-August University, Waldweg 26, 37073, Göttingen, Germany

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hungarian Natural History Museum, Ludovika tér 2, 1083, Budapest, Hungary

    Péter Batáry, Noémi Örvössy, Szilvia Kövér & László Peregovits

  2. Animal Ecology Research Group of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and the Hungarian Natural History Museum, Ludovika tér 2, 1083, Budapest, Hungary

    Ádám Kőrösi

Authors
  1. Péter Batáry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ádám Kőrösi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Noémi Örvössy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Szilvia Kövér
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. László Peregovits
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Péter Batáry.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Batáry, P., Kőrösi, Á., Örvössy, N. et al. Species-specific distribution of two sympatric Maculinea butterflies across different meadow edges. J Insect Conserv 13, 223–230 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-008-9158-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-008-9158-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation