Match!

Long-term land-use changes and extinction of specialised butterflies

Published on Sep 1, 2008in Insect Conservation and Diversity2.31
· DOI :10.1111/j.1752-4598.2008.00027.x
Sven G. Nilsson39
Estimated H-index: 39
(Lund University),
Markus Franzén19
Estimated H-index: 19
(Lund University),
Emma Jönsson1
Estimated H-index: 1
Abstract
1. Land-use change in 450 ha in southern Sweden between 1814 and 2004 was recorded. Butterflies and burnet moths were surveyed in 1904–1913 and 2001–2005. 2. We explore if local extinctions were related to land-use changes and species attributes. 3. Land use changed drastically over the 190-year period, and the largest relative change occurred for hay meadows with late harvest, which decreased from 28% to 0%. The area changed from grasslands and grazed forests to being dominated by timber forests. Previous open grazed mixed woodlands changed to spruce plantations with clear-cuts. 4. Of the 48 resident butterfly and burnet moths found a century ago, 44% have become extinct. The extinct Aporia crataegi, Colias palaeno, and Leptidea sinapis were abundant 100 years ago and had their highest densities in flower-rich glades in forest, a habitat which no longer exists. 5. The butterfly extinctions could be predicted from species-specific attributes as a short flight length period (P < 0.02), narrow habitat breadth (P < 0.02), small distribution area in Europe (P = 0.033) and possibly larvae food plant nitrogen class (P < 0.06). In a multiple logistic regression, the flight length period was the only significant variable because the independent variables were intercorrelated. 6. We conclude that the most important factor explaining the high extinction rate is that flower-rich habitats have disappeared from both woodlands as well as from open farmlands. The most sensitive species are specialised species with a short summer flight which have gone extinct. Only the most unspecialised species still persist in the current landscape. (Less)
  • References (52)
  • Citations (51)
References52
Newest
#1Jiri BenesH-Index: 12
#2Oldrich Cizek (Sewanee: The University of the South)H-Index: 11
Last.Martin Konvicka (Sewanee: The University of the South)H-Index: 32
view all 4 authors...
#1Kelvin F. Conrad (Rothamsted Research)H-Index: 7
#2Martin Warren (Butterfly Conservation)H-Index: 27
Last.Ian P. Woiwod (Rothamsted Research)H-Index: 33
view all 5 authors...
#1Johan Wretenberg (SLU: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences)H-Index: 5
#2Åke Lindström (Lund University)H-Index: 42
Last.Tomas Pärt (SLU: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences)H-Index: 40
view all 5 authors...
#1Chris van Swaay (Butterfly Conservation)H-Index: 23
#2Martin Warren (Butterfly Conservation)H-Index: 27
Last.Grégoire LoïsH-Index: 1
view all 3 authors...
#1Jacobus C. Biesmeijer (University of Leeds)H-Index: 37
#2Stuart Roberts (University of Reading)H-Index: 26
Last.Chris D. Thomas (Ebor: University of York)H-Index: 84
view all 12 authors...
Cited By51
Newest
#1Livia de Felici (UG: University of Groningen)
#2Theunis Piersma (UG: University of Groningen)H-Index: 73
Last.Ruth A. Howison (UG: University of Groningen)H-Index: 6
view all 3 authors...
#1Brice Hanberry (USDA: United States Department of Agriculture)
#2Frank R. Thompson (USDA: United States Department of Agriculture)H-Index: 45
#1Manisha Bhardwaj (University of Melbourne)H-Index: 2
#2Kylie Soanes (University of Melbourne)H-Index: 6
Last.Rodney van der Ree (University of Melbourne)H-Index: 25
view all 5 authors...
#1Pedro I. Chiquetto-Machado (USP: University of São Paulo)H-Index: 2
#2Felipe W. Amorim (UNESP: Sao Paulo State University)H-Index: 9
Last.Marcelo Duarte (USP: University of São Paulo)H-Index: 9
view all 3 authors...
View next paperRapid responses of British butterflies to opposing forces of climate and habitat change