Eur. J. Entomol. 102 (4): 699-706, 2005

Adult demography, dispersal and behaviour of Brenthis ino (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae): how to be a successful wetland butterfly

Kamil ZIMMERMANN1, Zdeněk FRIC1,2, Ladislava FILIPOVÁ3, Martin KONVIČKA*,1,2
1 Department of Zoology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Southern Bohemia, Branišovská 31, 370 05 České Budějovice, Czech Republic
2 Department of Ecology and Conservation, Institute of Entomology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Branišovská 31, 370 05 České Budějovice, Czech Republic
3 Department of Botany, Faculty of Sciences, Palacký University Olomouc, Šlechtitelů 13, Olomouc, Czech Republic.

Continent-wide loss of traditionally managed humid meadows is raising concern for associated butterfly specialists across Europe. However, not all species associated with this biotope are threatened, and the Lesser Marbled Fritillary (Brenthis ino) has even spread locally. We employed mark-recapture and transect walks to study its population structure and patterns of landscape occupancy in a hilly region of western Bohemia, Central Europe, to determine which life history or demography traits might be responsible for its success. A population studied by mark-recapture harboured more than 1000 individuals and was interconnected with other populations. This was further supported by a fit of the inverse power function to dispersal data. Observations of adult behaviour revealed a broad host plant range: at least three species of plants were used by the single population. On a landscape scale, the butterfly exhibited an aggregated distribution matching its host plants. It was associated with the distribution of characteristic plants and butterflies of semi-natural humid meadows, but its frequency exceeded those of other humid grasslands specialists. The relatively broad host range coupled with varying biotope requirements of individual host plant species results in a wide biotope range for the butterfly, explaining its persistence in fragmented Central European landscapes.

Keywords: Argynnini, Nymphalidae, Brenthis ino, behaviour, butterfly ecology, dispersal, habitat quality, grasslands, host plant range, metapopulation

Received: March 3, 2005; Revised: April 24, 2005; Accepted: April 24, 2005; Published: November 3, 2005  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
ZIMMERMANN, K., FRIC, Z., FILIPOVÁ, L., & KONVIČKA, M. (2005). Adult demography, dispersal and behaviour of Brenthis ino (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae): how to be a successful wetland butterfly. EJE, 102(4), 699-706
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. AGNES G. 2000: SchmetterlingszGnosen des Feuchtgruenlandes in der Deutsch-Belgischen Hocheifel und Untersuchungen zur Eignung von Indikatorarten fuer die Differenzierung vernaesster Standorte. Diploma thesis, Institut fuer Evolutionsbiologie und Okologie, Universitaet Bonn, Bonn, 83 pp. On-line: http://www.gregoragnes.de/Diplom/Diplomarbeit.pdf
    2. ANTHES N., FARTMANN T., HERMANN G. & KAULE G. 2003: Combining larval habitat quality and metapopulation structure - the key for successful management of pre-alpine Euphydryas aurinia colonies. J. Insect Conserv. 7: 175-185 Go to original source...
    3. BAGUETTE M. 2003: Long distance dispersal and landscape occupancy in a metapopulation of the cranberry fritillary butterfly. Ecography 26: 153-160 Go to original source...
    4. BAGUETTE M. & SCHTICKZELLE N. 2003: Local population dynamics are important to the conservation of metapopulations in highly fragmented landscapes. J. Appl. Ecol. 40: 404-412 Go to original source...
    5. BENES J., KONVICKA M., DVORAK J., FRIC Z., HAVELDA Z., PAVLICKO A., VRABEC V. & WEIDENHOFFER Z. 2002: [Butterflies of the Czech Republic: Distribution and Conservation] I., II. SOM, Prague, 857 pp. (in Czech, English summaries)
    6. BOGGS C.L. 1997: Reproductive allocation from reserves and income in butterfly species with differing adult diets. Ecology 78: 181-191 Go to original source...
    7. BOGGS C.L. & ROSS C.L. 1993: The effect of adult food limitation on life history traits in Speyeria mormonia (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae). Ecology 74: 433-441 Go to original source...
    8. EBERT G. & RENNWALD E. 1991: Die Schmetterlinge BadenWuerttembergs, Band 1: Tagfalter 1. Eugen Ulmer, Hohenheim, 552 pp
    9. FISHER K., BEINLICH B. & 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 Go to original source...
    10. FRIC Z., KLIMOVA M., HULA V. & KONVICKA M. 2005: Caterpillars of Argynnis aglaja (Linnaeus, 1758) (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae) feeding on Bistorta major. Atalanta 36: 119-121
    11. HEINRICH B. 1986: Comparative thermoregulation of 4 montane butterflies of different mass. Physiol. Zool. 59: 616-626 Go to original source...
    12. HENRIKSEN H.J. & KREUTZER I. 1982: The Butterflies of Scandinavia in Nature. Skandinavisk, Bogforlag A/S, Odense, 215 pp Go to original source...
    13. HILL J.K., THOMAS C.D. & LEWIS O.T. 1996: Effects of habitat patch size and isolation on dispersal by Hesperia comma butterflies: Implications for metapopulation structure. J. Anim. Ecol. 65: 725-735 Go to original source...
    14. HOVESTADT T., MESSNER S. & POETHKE H. J. 2001: Evolution of reduced dispersal mortality and "fat-tailed" dispersal kernels in autocorrelated landscapes. Proc. R. Soc. London (B) 268: 385-391 Go to original source...
    15. HRUBY K. 1964: Prodromus Lepidopterorum Slovaciae. SAV, Bratislava, 962 pp
    16. HULA V., KONVICKA M., PAVLICKO A. & FRIC Z. 2004: Marsh Fritillary (Euphydryas aurinia) in the Czech Republic: Monitoring, metapopulation structure, and conservation of the endangered butterfly. Entomol. Fenn. 15: 231-241 Go to original source...
    17. KARSHOLT O. & RAZOWSKI J. 1996: The Lepidoptera of Europe, a Distributional Checklist. Apollo Books, Stenstrup, 380 pp Go to original source...
    18. KONVICKA M., HULA V. & FRIC Z. 2003: Habitat of prehibernating larvae of the endangered butterfly Euphydryas aurinia (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae): What can be learned from vegetation composition and architecture? Eur. J. Entomol. 100: 313-322 Go to original source...
    19. KONVICKA M., CIzEK O., FILIPOVA L., FRIC Z., BENES J., KRUPKA M., ZAMECNIK J. & DOCKALOVA Z. 2005: For whom the bells toll: Demography of the last population of the butterfly Euphydryas maturna in the Czech Republic. Biologia (in press)
    20. KOPPER B.J., MARGOLIES D.C. & CHARLTON R.E. 2001: Life history notes on the regal fritillary, Speyeria idalia (Drury) (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae), in Kansas tallgrass prairie. J. Kans. Entomol. Soc. 74: 172-177
    21. KREBS C.J. 1989: Ecological Methodology. Harper & Collins, New York, 654 pp
    22. KUBAT K. (ed.) 2002: Klic ke kvetene Ceske republiky [Key to Flora of the Czech Republic]. Academia, Praha, 927 pp. (in Czech)
    23. KURAS T., BENES J., FRIC Z. & KONVICKA M. 2003: Dispersal patterns of endemic alpine butterflies with contrasting population structures: Erebia epiphron and E. sudetica. Popul. Ecol. 45: 115-123 Go to original source...
    24. KUUSSAARI M., SINGER M. & HANSKI I. 2000: Local specialization and landscape-level influence on host use in an herbivorous insect. Ecology 81: 2177-2187 Go to original source...
    25. MAES D. & VAN DYCK H. 2001: Butterfly diversity loss in Flanders (north Belgium): Europe's worst case scenario? Biol. Conserv. 99: 263-276 Go to original source...
    26. NEVE G., BARASCUD B., HUGHES R., AUBERT J., DESCIMON H., LEBRUN P. & BAGUETTE M. 1996: Dispersal, colonization power and metapopulation structure in the vulnerable butterfly Proclossiana eunomia (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). J. Appl. Ecol. 33: 14-22 Go to original source...
    27. NORBERG U., ENFJALL K. & LEIMAR O. 2002: Habitat exploration in butterflies - an outdoor cage experiment. Evol. Ecol. 16: 1-14 Go to original source...
    28. O'BRIEN D.M., BOGGS C.L. & FOGEL M.L. 2004: Making eggs from nectar: the role of life history and dietary carbon turn over in butterfly reproductive resource allocation. Oikos 105: 279-291 Go to original source...
    29. PAVLICKO A. 1996: Rozsireni perletovce mokradniho (Proclossiana eunomia) na Sumave a jeho vztah k hospodareni v krajine [The distribution of Proclossiana eunomia in the Sumava Mts and impacts of landscape management]. Silva Gabreta 1: 197-202 (in Czech)
    30. POLLOCK K.H., NICHOLS J.D., BROWNIE C. & HINES J.E. 1990: Statistical inference for capture-recapture experiments. Wildlife Monogr. 107: 1-97
    31. SAARINEN K., LAHTI T. & MARTILLA O. 2003: Population trends of Finnish butterflies (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea, Papilionoidea) in 1991-2000. Biodivers. Conserv. 12: 2147-2159 Go to original source...
    32. SAWCHIK J., DUFRENE M. & LEBRUN P. 2003: Estimation of habitat quality based on plant community, and effects of isolation in a network of butterfly habitat patches. Acta Oecol. 24: 25-33 Go to original source...
    33. SCHNEIDER C., DOVER J. & FRY G.L.A. 2003: Movement of two grassland butterflies in the same habitat network: the role of adult resources and size of the study area. Ecol. Entomol. 28: 219-227 Go to original source...
    34. SCHWEIZERISCHER BUND FUR NATURSCHUTZ [= SBN] 1987: Tagfalter und ihre Lebensraeume. Fotorotar, Egg, 516 pp
    35. SCHTICKZELLE N. & BAGUETTE M. 2004: Metapopulation viability analysis of the bog fritillary butterfly using RAMAS/GIS. Oikos 104: 277-290 Go to original source...
    36. SETTELE J., FELDMANN R. & REINHARDT R. 1999: Die Tagfalter Deutschlands. Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, 452 pp
    37. SUTCLIFFE O.L., THOMAS C.D. & PEGGIE D. 1997: Areadependent migration by ringlet butterflies generates a mixture of patchy population and metapopulation attributes. Oecologia 109: 229-234 Go to original source...
    38. SVESTKA M. 1992: Perletovec koprivovy, Brenthis ino (Rottemburg 1775), novy druh motyli fauny Jihozapadni Moravy [Lesser-Marbled Fritillary, a new butterfly for south-western Moravia]. Prirodovedny Sbornik Zapadomoravskeho Muzea v Trebici 18: 25-29 (in Czech)
    39. TABASHNIK B.E. 1980: Population structure of pierid butterflies, 3. Pest population of Colias philodice eriphyle. Oecologia 47: 175-183 Go to original source...
    40. TER BRAAK C.J.F. & SMILAUER P. 2002: CANOCO Reference Manual and User's Guide to Canoco for Windows: Software for Canonical Community Ordination (version 4.52). Microcomputer Power (Ithaca, NY, USA), 500 pp
    41. THOMAS C.D. 2000: Dispersal and extinction in fragmented landscapes. Proc. R. Soc. London (B) 267: 139-145 Go to original source...
    42. TOLMAN T. & LEWINGTON R. 1997: Butterflies of Britain and Europe. Harper and Collins, London, 320 pp
    43. VANDEWOESTIJNE S. & BAGUETTE M. 2004: Demographic versus genetic dispersal measures. Popul. Ecol. 46: 281-285 Go to original source...
    44. VAN SWAAY C.A.M. & WARREN M.S. 1999: Red Data Book of European Butterflies (Rhopalocera). Nature and Environment Series No. 99. Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 260 pp
    45. WAHLBERG N. 2001: On the status of the scarce fritillary Euphydryas maturna (Lepidoptera : Nymphalidae) in Finland. Entomol. Fenn. 12: 244-250 Go to original source...
    46. ZAR J.H. 1999: Biostatistical Analysis. 4th ed. Prentice-Hall, New York, 663 pp

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content