Skip to main content
Log in

Combining larval habitat quality and metapopulation structure – the key for successful management of pre-alpine Euphydryas aurinia colonies

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

Abstract

This study aims to analyse larval habitat preferences and landscape level population structure of the threatened Marsh Fritillary butterfly, Euphydryas aurinia, and discusses implications for the conservation and management of this strongly declining species in central Europe. Whereas current management strategies are mainly based on studies of habitat requirements of adult individuals, we intend to emphasise larval habitat quality and population processes at the landscape level as additional key factors. Microhabitat preference analysis of egg-laying females showed that eggs were predominantly laid on prominent large-sized host plant individuals. Additionally, when Succisa pratensis was used as a host plant (as opposed to Gentiana asclepiadea), host individuals in open vegetation structure were preferred. Optimal oviposition conditions were present in recently abandoned calcareous fen meadows and at the edges of such meadows currently in use. A two-year patch-occupancy study in the northern pre-alpine region of south-west Germany indicated that E. aurinia lives in a metapopulation. In a logistic-regression model, patch size, isolation, and habitat quality explained 82% of the observed patch-occupancy pattern in 2001. Our data suggest that a suitable conservation strategy must incorporate both the conservation of a network of suitable habitat patches, and efforts to maximise local habitat quality by ensuring that host plants can grow to a large size and are surrounded by sparse and low vegetation cover.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anthes N., Hermann G. and Fartmann T.2003. Wie lässt sich der Rückgang des Goldenen Scheckenfalters (Euphydryas aurinia) in Mitteleuropa stoppen? Erkenntnisse aus populationsökologischen Studien in voralpinen Niedermoorgebieten und der Arealentwicklung in Deutschland. Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung35: 279–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asher J., Warren M., Fox R., Harding P., Jeffcoate G. and Jeffcoate S.2001. The millenium atlas of butterflies in Britain and Ireland. Oxford University Press.

  • Boughton D.A.1999. Empirical evidence for complex source-sink dynamics with alternative states in a butterfly metapopulation. Ecology80: 2727–2739.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bühler C. and Schmid B.2001. The influence of management regime and altitude on the population of Succisa pratensis: implications for vegetation monitoring. J. Appl. Ecol.38: 689–698.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis R.L.H. and Eales H.T.1997. Patch occupancy in Coenonympha tullia (Muller, 1764) (Lepidoptera: Satyrinae): habitat quality matters as much as patch size and isolation. J. Insect Conserv.1: 167–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dierschke H.1994. Pflanzensoziologie, Ulmer Verlag, Stuttgart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolek M.2000. Der Einsatz der Beweidung in der Landschaftspflege: Untersuchungen an Tagfaltern als Zeigergruppe. Laufener Seminarbeiträge4/2000: 63–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolek M. and Geyer A.1997. Influence of management on butterflies of rare grassland ecosystems in Germany. J. Insect Conserv.1: 125–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolek M., Radlmair S. and Geyer A.1999. Der Einfluss der Nutzung (Weide, Mahd, Brache) voralpiner Moorgebiete auf die Insektenfauna (Tagfalter, Heuschrecken). Schriftenreihe des Bayerischen Landesamts für Umweltschutz150: 133–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebert G. and Rennwald E.1991. Die Schmetterlinge Baden-Württembergs. Band 1, Tagfalter I. Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fartmann T.1997. Biozönologische Untersuchungen zur Heuschreckenfauna auf Magerrasen im Naturpark Märkische Schweiz (Ostbrandenburg). Arbeiten aus dem Institut für Landschaftsökologie, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster3: 1–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fartmann T., Hafner S. and Hermann G.2001. Skabiosen-Scheckenfalter (Euphydryas aurinia). In: Fartmann T., Gunnemann H., Salm P. and Schröder E. (eds), Berichtspflichten in Natura-2000-Gebieten. Empfehlungen zur Erfassung der Arten des Anhangs II und Charakterisierung der Lebensraumtypen des Anhangs I der FFH-Richtlinie (= Angewandte Landschaftsökologie, Heft 42), Bundesamt für Naturschutz, Bonn, pp. 363–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer K.1997. Zur ökologie des Skabiosen-Scheckenfalters Euphydryas aurinia (Rottemburg, 1775) (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Nachr. Entomol. Ver. Apollo18: 287–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer K., Beinlich B. and Plachter H.1999. Population structure, mobility and habitat preferences of the violet copper Lycaena helle (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in Western Germany: implications for conservation. J. Insect Conserv.3: 43–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford H.D. and Ford E.B.1930. Fluctuation in numbers, and its influence on variation in Melitaea aurinia, Rott. (Lepidoptera). Trans. Entomol. Soc. Lond.78: 345–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I.1994. A practical model of metapopulation dynamics. J. Anim. Ecol.63: 151–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I.1999. Metapopulation Ecology, 1st edn, Oxford University Press.

  • Hermann G.1998. Erfassung von Präimaginalstadien bei Tagfaltern–Ein notwendiger Standard für Bestandsaufnahmen zu Planungsvorhaben. Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung30: 133–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hermann G. and Steiner R.1997. Eiablage-und Larvalhabitat des Komma-Dickkopffalters (Hesperia comma Linné 1758). Carolinea55: 35–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuussaari M., Nieminen M. and Hanski I.1996. An experimental study of migration in the glanville fritillary butterfly Melitaea cinxia. J. Anim. Ecol.65: 791–801.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavery T.A.1993. A review of the distribution, ecology and status of the marsh fritillary Euphydryas aurinia Rottemburg, 1775 (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) in Ireland. Ir. Nat. J.24: 192–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis O.T. and Hurford C.1997. Assessing the status of the marsh fritillary butterfly (Eurodryas aurinia): an example from Glamorgan, UK. J. Insect Conserv.1: 159–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis O.T., Thomas C.D., Hill J.K., Brookes M.I., Crane T.P.R., Graneau Y.A., Mallet J.L.B. and Rose O.C.1997. Three ways of assessing metapopulation structure in the butterfly Plebejus argus.Ecol. Entomol.22: 283–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazel R.1984. Trophisme, hybridation et Speciation chez Eurodryas aurinia Rottemburg (Lepidoptera–Nymphalidae). PhD thesis, University of Perpignan, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moilanen A. and Hanski I.2001. On the use of connectivity measures in spatial ecology. Oikos95: 147–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munguira M.L., Martin J., Garcia-Barros E. and Viejo J.L.1997. Use of space and resources in a Mediterranean population of the butterfly Euphydryas aurinia. Acta Oecologica18: 597–612.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oates M.R. and Warren M.S.1990. A Review of Butterfly Introductions in Britain and Ireland. World Wide Fund for Nature, Godalming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppermann R.1987. Tierökologische Untersuchungen zum Biotopmanagement in Feuchtwiesen. Ergebnisse einer Feldstudie an Schmetterlingen und Heuschrecken im württembergischen Alpenvorland. Natur und Landschaft62: 235–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter K.1982. Basking behaviour in larvae of the butterfly Euphydryas aurinia. Oikos38: 308–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter K.1983. Multivoltinism in Apanteles bignelli and the influence of weather on synchronisation with its host Euphydryas aurinia. Ent. exp. & appl.34: 155–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter K.1992. Eggs and egg-laying. In: Dennis R.L.H. (Ed.)The ecology of butterflies in Britain, Oxford University Press, pp. 46–72.

  • Reich M. and Grimm V.1995. Das Metapopulationskonzept in ökologie und Naturschutz: Eine kritische Bestandsaufnahme. Z. ökologie u. Naturschutz5: 123–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • SBN (Schweizer Bund für Naturschutz), 1991. Tagfalter und ihre Lebensräume. Arten, Gefährdung, Schutz. Band 1. Fotorotar, Basel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholle D., Hofmann C., Kaule G., Lederbogen D., Rosenthal G., Thumm U. and Trautner J.2002. Co-operative grazing systems ('Allmende'): An alternative concept for the management of endangered open and semi-open landscapes. In: Redecker B., Fink P., Härdtle W., Riecken U. and Schröder E. (eds), Pasture Landscapes and Nature Conservation, Springer, Berlin, pp. 387–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Settele J.1998. Metapopulationsanalyse auf Rasterdatenbasis. Teubner Verlagsgesellschaft, Stuttgart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg K.1995. Populationsökologische Untersuchungen an einer Metapopulation der Hochmoor-Mosaikjungfer (Aeshna subarctica elisabethaea Djakonov, 1922) (Odonata, Aeshnidae) im Schwarzwald. Z. ökologie u. Naturschutz4: 53–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundermeier A.1999. Zur Vegetationsdichte der Xerothermrasen nordwestlich von Halle/Saale–Erfassungsmethoden, strukturelle Vegetationstypen und der Einfluß der Vegetationsdichte auf das reproduktive Potential von Xerothermrasenarten. Dissertationes Botanicae316: 1–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas C.D., Wilson R.J. and Lewis O.T.2002. Short-term studies underestimate 30-generation changes in a butterfly metapopulation. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B269: 563–569.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas J.A., Bourn N.A.D., Clarke R.T., Stewart K.E., Simcox D.J., Pearman G.S., Curtis R. and Goodger B.2001. The quality and isolation of habitat patches both determine where butterflies persist in fragmented landscapes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B268: 1791–1796.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas J.A. and Morris M.G.1994. Patterns, mechanisms and rates of decline among UK invertebrates. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B344: 47–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Swaay C. and Warren M.1999. Red data book of European butterflies (Rhopalocera). In: Council of Europe, Nature and Environment, No. 99, Strasbourg, France.

  • Wahlberg N.2001. The phylogenetics and biochemistry of host-plant specialization in Melitaeine butterflies (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Evolution55: 522–537.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wahlberg N., Klemetti T. and Hanski I.2002a. Dynamic populations in a dynamic landscape: the metapopulation structure of the marsh fritillary butterfly. Ecography25: 224–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wahlberg N., Klemetti T., Selonen V. and Hanski I.2002b. Metapopulation structure and movements in five species of checkerspott butterflies. Oecologia130: 33–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren M.S.1994. The UK status and suspected metapopulation structure of a threatened European butterfly, the marsh fritillary (Eurodryas aurinia). Biol. Conserv.67: 239–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren M.S., Munguira M.L. and Ferrin J.1994. Notes on the distribution, habitats and conservation of Eurodryas aurinia (Rottemburg) (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) in Spain. Entomologists' Gazette45: 5–12.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Anthes, N., Fartmann, T., Hermann, G. et al. Combining larval habitat quality and metapopulation structure – the key for successful management of pre-alpine Euphydryas aurinia colonies. Journal of Insect Conservation 7, 175–185 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1027330422958

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1027330422958

Navigation