Skip to main content
Log in

Sensitivity of Cerambycid Biodiversity Indicators to Definition of High Diversity

  • Original paper
  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The cutoff used to determine sites of high biological diversity has the potential to influence which species are identified as relevant biological indicators. I␣used data on longhorned beetles and the IndVal program to conduct a sensitivity analysis by varying the definition of high diversity sites from the upper 50% of sites to the upper 5% of sites. The analysis was carried out at all levels of a site typology based on the tree species present at the forested sites. Three species emerged as strong indicators of high diversity sites. Although the indicator values for these species were almost always statistically significant within the upper level of the site typology (all forested sites) the definition of high diversity had a large impact on these values. All three species showed an increase in their indicator values with higher cutoffs for high diversity sites suggesting a relatively nested set of species.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldenderfer MS, Blashfield RK (1984) Cluster analysis. Sage Publications Inc., Beverly Hills, California

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbalat S (1998) Importance of forest structures on four beetle families (Col.: Buprestidae, Cerambycidae, Lucanidae and phytophagous Scarabaeidae) in the Areuse Gorges (Neuchâtel, Switzerland). Revue Suisse de Zoologie 105:569–580

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackman MW, Stage HH (1924) On the succession of insects living in the bark and wood of dying, dead and decaying hickory. New York State College of Forestry at Syracuse University, Technical Publication No. 17, 3–269

  • Bray JR, Curtis JT (1957) An ordination of the upland forest communities of southern Wisconsin. Ecol Monogr 27:325–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brommit AG, Charbonneau N, Contreras TA, Fahrig L (2004) Crown loss and subsequent branch sprouting of forest trees in response to a major ice storm. J Torrey Bot Soc 131:169–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dajoz R (2000) Insects and forests. Intercept Ltd., Lavoisier Publishing, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Duelli P, Obrist MK (1998) In search of the best correlates for local organismal biodiversity in cultivated areas. Biodivers Conserv 7:297–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dufrêne M, Legendre P (1997) Species assemblages and indicator species: the need for a flexible asymmetrical approach. Ecol Monogr 67:345–366

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanks LM (1999) Influence of the larval host plant on reproductive strategies of cerambycid beetles. Annu Rev Entomol 44:483–505

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Holland JD, Bert D, Fahrig L (2004) Determining the spatial scale of species’ response to habitat. BioScience 54:227–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linsley EG (1954) Ecology of Cerambycidae. Annu Rev Entomol 4:99–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linsley EG, Chemsak JA (1997) The Cerambycidae of North America, part VIII: bibliography, index, and host plant index. University of California Press, California

  • Maeto K, Shigeho S, Miyata H (2002) Species diversity of longicorn beetles in humid temperate forests: the impact of forest management practices on old-growth forest species in southwestern Japan. Biodivers Conserv 11:1919–1937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGeoch MA (1998) The selection, testing and application of terrestrial insects as bioindicators. Biol Rev Cambridge Philos Soc 73:181–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson SG, Hedin J, Niklasson M (2001) Biodiversity and its assessment in boreal and nemoral forests. Scand J Forest Res 16(Supplement 3):10–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohsawa M (2004) Species richness of Cerambycidae in larch plantations and natural broad-leaved forests of the central mountainous regions of Japan. Forest Ecol Manage 189:375–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Økland B, Bakke A, Hågvar S, Kvamme T (1996) What factors influence the diversity of saproxylic beetles? A multiscaled study from a spruce forest in southern Norway. Biodivers Conserv 5:75–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver I, Beattie AJ (1996) Designing a cost-effective invertebrate survey: a test of methods for rapid assessment of biodiversity. Ecol Appl 6:594–607

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulze CH, Waltert M, Kessler PJA, Pitopang R, Shahabuddin, Veddeler D, Muhlenberg M, Gradstein SR, Leuschner C, Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2004) Biodiversity indicator groups of tropical land-use systems: comparing plants, birds, and insects. Ecol Appl 14:1321–1333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shibata E, Sato S, Sakuratani Y, Sugimoto T, Kimura F, Ito F (1996) Cerambycid beetles (Coleoptera) lured to chemicals in forests of Nara Prefecture, central Japan. Ann Entomol Soc Am 89:835–842

    Google Scholar 

  • Speight MCD (1989) Saproxylic invertebrates and their conservation. Council of Europe, Strasbourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Yanega D (1996) Field guide to northeastern longhorned beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, Illinois

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author thanks Marc Dufrêne for help with implementing the IndVal program, and Amanda North and Jacob Rowland for assistance summarizing the results. The manuscript was improved by reviews by Pat McCafferty and Yssa DeWoody. This is Purdue Agricultural Research Programs manuscript number 2005-17731.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey D. Holland.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Holland, J.D. Sensitivity of Cerambycid Biodiversity Indicators to Definition of High Diversity. Biodivers Conserv 16, 2599–2609 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-006-9066-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-006-9066-1

Keywords

Navigation