Characterizing urban butterfly populations: the case for purposive point-count surveys

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - 2019
Bret J. Lang1, Philip M. Dixon2, Robert W. Klaver3, Jan R. Thompson1, Mark P. Widrlechner4
1Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, Iowa, USA
2Department of Statistics, Iowa State University, Iowa, USA
3U.S. Geological Survey, Iowa Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Iowa, USA
4Department of Horticulture and Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Organismal Biology, Iowa State University, Iowa, USA

Tóm tắt

Developing effective butterfly monitoring strategies is key to understanding how butterflies interact with urban environments, and, in turn, to developing local conservation practices. We investigated two urban habitat types (public gardens and restored/reconstructed prairies) and compared three survey methods (Pollard transects, purposive point counts, and random point counts) to determine which was most productive for detecting butterflies and assessing family diversity. We conducted 66 butterfly surveys by using each method (198 total) from May through September in 2015 and 2016 at six sites (three public gardens and three prairies) in Ames, Ankeny and Des Moines, Iowa. All survey methods were used on 11 sampling dates at each site. Overall, we observed 2,227 butterflies representing 38 species: 1,076 in public gardens and 1,151 in prairie areas. We used a smaller data set standardized for survey effort, including 1,361 of these sightings, to compare survey methods and habitat types. Although there were no significant differences in number of butterfly sightings between the two habitats, more sightings (798) were documented by using purposive point counts when compared to Pollard transects (297) or random point counts (266) (for both comparisons, p < 0.0001). Occupancy modeling also indicated that purposive point counts were most effective in detecting certain species of butterflies, most notably those within the Pieridae (whites, sulphurs) and Papilionidae (swallowtails). We conclude that public gardens and restored/reconstructed prairies in urban settings can provide important butterfly habitat, and that purposive point-count surveys are most effective for detecting butterflies in these relatively small-scale landscape features.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans Auto Control 19:716–723

Alcock J (1994) Alternative mate-locating tactics in Chlosyne californica (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae). Ethology 97:103–118

Battin J (2004) When good animals love bad habitats: ecological traps and the conservation of animal populations. Conserv Biol 18:1482–1491

Bitzer RJ, Shaw KC (1979) Territorial behavior of the red admiral, Vanessa atalanta (L.) (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). J Res Lepid 18:36–49

Blair RB (1999) Birds and butterflies along an urban gradient: surrogate taxa for assessing biodiversity? Ecol Appl 9:164–170

Bolund P, Hunhammar S (1999) Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecol Econ 29:293–301

Botham MS, Fernandez-Ploquin EC, Brereton T, Harrower CA, Roy DB, Heard MS (2015) Lepidoptera communities across an agricultural gradient: how important are habitat area and habitat diversity in supporting high diversity? J Insect Conserv 19:403–420

Brown JA, Boyce MS (1998) Line transect sampling of Karner blue butterflies (Lycaeides melissa samuelis). Environ Ecol Stat 5:81–91

Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer-Verlag, New York

Cameron SA, Lozier JD, Strange JP, Koch JB, Cordes N, Solter LF, Griswold TL (2011) Patterns of widespread decline in north American bumblebees. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:662–667

Carneiro E, Mielke OHH, Casagrande MM, Fiedler K (2014) Skipper richness (Hesperiidae) along elevational gradients in Brazilian Atlantic forest. Neotrop Ent 43:27–38

Clark PJ, Reed JM, Chew FS (2007) Effects of urbanization on butterfly species richness, guild structure, and rarity. Urban Ecosyst 10:321–337

Collier N, Mackay DA, Benkendorff K, Austin AD, Carhew SM (2006) Butterfly communities in south Australian urban reserves: estimating abundance and diversity using the Pollard walk. Austral Ecol 31:282–290

Collinge SK, Prudic KL, Oltver AC (2003) Effects of local habitat characteristics and landscape context on grassland butterfly diversity. Conserv Biol 17:178–187

Concepción ED, Moretti M, Altermatt F, Nobis MP, Obrist MK (2015) Impacts of urbanisation on biodiversity: the role of species mobility, degree of specialisation and spatial scale. Oikos 124:1571–1582

Concepción ED, Obrist MK, Moretti M, Altermatt F, Baur B, Nobis MP (2016) Impacts of urban sprawl on species richness of plants, butterflies, gastropods and birds: not only built-up area matters. Urban Ecosyst 19:225–242

Debinski DM, Kelly L (1998) Decline of Iowa populations of the regal fritillary (Speyeria idalia). J Iowa Acad Sci 105:16–22

Delaney JT, Jokela K, Debinski DM (2015) Seasonal succession of pollinator floral resources in four grassland types in the tallgrass prairie ecoregion. Ecosphere 6(11):1–14

Dennis EB, Morgan BJT, Roy DB, Brereton TM (2017) Urban indicators for UK butterflies. Ecol Indic 76:184–193

Di Mauro D, Dietz T, Rockwood L (2007) Determining the effect of urbanization on generalist butterfly species diversity in butterfly gardens. Urban Ecosyst 10:427–439

Dirzo R, Young HS, Galetti M, Ceballos G, Isaac NJ, Collen B (2014) Defaunation in the anthropocene. Science 345:401–406

ESRI (2015) ArcGIS desktop: release 10.1 Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, CA

ESRI (2016) ArcGIS desktop: release 10.2 Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, CA

Gallant AG, Sadinski W, Roth MF, Rewa CA (2011) Changes in historical Iowa land cover as context for assessing the environmental benefits of current and future conservation efforts on agricultural land. J Soil Water Cons 66(3):67–77

Giuliano W, Accamando A, McAdams E (2004) Lepidoptera-habitat relationships in urban parks. Urban Ecosyst 7:361–370

Hardy PB, Dennis RL (1999) The impact of urban development on butterflies within a city region. Biodivers Conserv 8:1261–1279

Hartzler RG (2010) Reduction in common milkweed (Asclepias syriaca) occurrence in Iowa cropland from 1999 to 2009. Crop Prot 29:1542–1544

Hartzler RG, Buhler DD (2000) Occurrence of common milkweed (Asclepias syriaca) in cropland and adjacent areas. Crop Prot 19:363–366

Henry EH, Haddad NM, Wilson J, Hughes P, Gardner B (2015) Point-count methods to monitor butterfly populations when traditional methods fail: a case study with Miami blue butterfly. J Insect Conserv 19:519–529

Houseal G, Smith D (2000) Source-identified seed: the Iowa roadside experience. Ecol Rest 18:173–183

Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) (2006) Butterfly monitoring protocol. In: Iowa multiple species inventory and monitoring program technical manual, pp 65–70

Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) (2007) Securing a future for fish and wildlife: The Iowa wildlife action plan. Available at IDNR, www.iowadnr.gov/Environment/WildlifeStewardship/IowaWildlifeActionPlan (Accessed 28 October 2014)

Iowa State University (ISU) Extension (2016) Crops and land use: statewide data. Available at ISU Extension, https://www.extension.iastate.edu/soils/crop-and-land-use-statewide-data (Accessed 11 July 2017)

Isaac NJB, Cruickshanks KL, Weddle AM, Marcus Rowcliffe J, Brereton TM, Dennis RLH, Shuker DM, Thomas CD (2011) Distance sampling and the challenge of monitoring butterfly populations. Methods Ecol Evol 2:585–594

Kadlec T, Benes J, Jarosik V, Konvicka M (2008) Revisiting urban refuges: changes of butterfly and burnet fauna in Prague reserves over three decades. Landsc Urban Plann 85:1–11

Kéry M, Plattner M (2007) Species richness estimation and determinants of species detectability in butterfly monitoring programmes. Ecol Entomol 32:53–61

Kral K, Harmon J, Limb R, Hovick T (2018) Improving our science: the evolution of butterfly sampling and surveying methods over time. J Insect Conserv 22:1–14

Laake, JL (2013) RMark: An R interface for analysis of capture-recapture data with MARK. AFSC Proc Rep 2013–01, 25 p. Alaska Fish. Sci. Cent., NOAA, Natl. Mar. Fish. Serv., Seattle, WA

MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Lachman GB, Droege S, Royle JA, Langtimm CA (2002) Estimating site occupancy rates when detection probabilities are less than one. Ecology 83:2248–2255

Maes D, Van Dyck H (2001) Butterfly diversity loss in Flanders (North Belgium): Europe’s worst case scenario? Biol Conserv 99:263–276

Matteson KC, Langellotto G (2010) Determinants of inner city butterfly and bee species richness. Urban Ecosyst 13:333–347

Matteson KC, Grace JB, Minor ES (2013) Direct and indirect effects of land use on floral resources and flower-visiting insects across an urban landscape. Oikos 122:682–694

McKinney M (2008) Effects of urbanization on species richness: a review of plants and animals. Urban Ecosyst 11:1573–1642

Menninger HL, Palmer MA (2006) Restoring ecological communities: from theory to practice. In: Falk DA, Palmer MA, Zedler JB (eds) Foundations of restoration ecology. Island Press, Washington, D.C., pp 88–112

Moranz RA, Debinski DM, McGranahan DA, Engle DM, Miller JR (2012) Untangling the effects of fire, grazing, and land-use legacies on grassland butterfly communities. Biodivers Conserv 21:2719–2746

Myers MC, Hoksch BJ, Mason JT (2012) Butterfly response to floral resources during early establishment at a heterogeneous prairie biomass production site in Iowa, USA. J Insect Conserv 16:457–472

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (2017) National Centers for Environmental Information – U.S. Agricultural Belts. Accessed at: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/maps/us-ag-belts.php, 11/20/2017

Öckinger E, Dannestam Å, Smith HG (2009) The importance of fragmentation and habitat quality of urban grasslands for butterfly diversity. Landsc Urban Plann 93:31–37

Panzer R, Gnaedinger K, Derkovitz G (2010) The prevalence and status of conservative prairie and sand savanna insects in the Chicago wilderness region. Nat Areas J 1:73–81

Pellet J (2008) Seasonal variation in detectability of butterflies surveyed with Pollard walks. J Insect Conserv 12:155–162

Pleasants JM, Zalucki MP, Oberhauser KS, Brower LP, Taylor OR, Thogmartin WE (2017) Interpreting surveys to estimate the size of the monarch butterfly population: pitfalls and prospects. PLoS ONE 12(7): e0181245Pollard E (1977) a method for assessing changes in the abundance of butterflies. Biol Conserv 12:115–134

Pollard E, Yates T (1994) Monitoring butterflies for ecology and conservation: the British monitoring scheme. Chapman & Hall, London

Posa MRC, Sodhi NS (2006) Effects of anthropogenic land use on forest birds and butterflies in Subic Bay, Philippines. Biol Conserv 129:256–270

R Core Team (2013) R (Version 3.0.2): A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria

Reeder KF, Debinski DM, Danielson BJ (2005) Factors affecting butterfly use of filter strips in Midwestern USA. Agric Ecosyst Environ 109:40–47

Ries LD, Debinski DM, Wieland M (2001) Conservation value of roadside prairie restoration to butterfly communities. Conserv Biol 15:401–411

Robertson BA, Hutto RL (2006) A framework for understanding ecological traps and an evaluation of existing evidence. Ecology 87:1075–1085

Royer RA, Austin JE, Newton WE (1998) Checklist and “Pollard walk” butterfly survey methods on public lands. Am Midl Nat 140:358–371

SAS (2017) JMP 12.0.1. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC

Schlicht DW, Downey JC, Nekola JC (2007) The butterflies of Iowa. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City

Scott JA (1973) Convergence of population biology and adult behaviour in two sympatric butterflies, Neominois ridingsii (Papilionoidea: Nymphalidae) and Amblyscirtes simius (Hesperioidea: Hesperiidae). J Anim Ecol 42:663–672

Shepherd S, Debinski DM (2005) Evaluation of isolated and integrated prairie reconstructions as habitat for prairie butterflies. Biol Conserv 126:51–61

Shuey J, Szymanski J (2012) Modified Pollard transects do not predict estimated daily population size for the secretive butterfly, Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii French. J Lepid Soc 66:221–224

Stefanescu C, Herrando S, Páramo F (2004) Butterfly species richness in the north-West Mediterranean Basin: the role of natural and human-induced factors. J Biogeogr 31:905–915

Stigler SM (1982) Poisson on the Poisson distribution. Stat Prob Letters 1:33–35

Swengel SR, Schlicht D, Olsen F, Swengel AB (2011) Declines of prairie butterflies in the midwestern USA. J Insect Conserv 15:327–339

Van Dyck H, Van Strien AJ, Maes D, Van Swaay CAM (2009) Declines in common, widespread butterflies in a landscape under intense human use. Conserv Biol 23:957–965

Van Swaay CAM, Brereton T, Kirkland P, Warren MS (2012) Manual for butterfly monitoring. Report VS2012.010. De Vlinderstichting/Dutch butterfly conservation, butterfly conservation UK and butterfly conservation Europe, Wageningen, the Netherlands

Vogel JA, Koford RR, Debinski DM (2010) Direct and indirect responses of tallgrass prairie butterflies to prescribed burning. J Insect Conserv 14:663–677

Wagenmakers EJ, Farrell S (2004) AIC model selection using Akaike weights. Psychon Bull Rev 11:192–196

Warren MS, Hill JK, Thomas JA, Asher J, Fox R, Huntley B, Thomas CD (2001) Rapid responses of British butterflies to opposing forces of climate and habitat change. Nature 414:65–69

Yahner RH (2001) Butterfly communities in residential landscapes of Central Pennsylvania. Northeast Nat 8:113–118

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Thông tin tác giả