Are butterflies and moths suitable ecological indicator systems for restoration measures of semi-natural calcareous grassland habitats?

The selection of suitable ecological indicator groups is of great importance for environmental assessments. To test and compare two such groups, we performed transect walks of butterflies and light traps of moths at eight sample localities in the Carinthian Alps. All of them were conducted with iden...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Ecological indicators 2011-09, Vol.11 (5), p.1040-1045
Hauptverfasser: Rákosy, László, Schmitt, Thomas
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1045
container_issue 5
container_start_page 1040
container_title Ecological indicators
container_volume 11
creator Rákosy, László
Schmitt, Thomas
description The selection of suitable ecological indicator groups is of great importance for environmental assessments. To test and compare two such groups, we performed transect walks of butterflies and light traps of moths at eight sample localities in the Carinthian Alps. All of them were conducted with identical methods in the years 2002 and 2004 allowing the evaluation of the response on the conservation measures performed on five of the eight sites in late 2002. We recorded a total of 2346 butterflies (including Zygaenidae and Sesiidae) representing 83 species and 7025 moths of 534 species. 150 of these species were listed in the Red Data Book of Carinthia. In general, butterflies increased from 2002 to 2004 while moths declined. The highest increase rates of butterflies were obtained for the numbers of individuals of calcareous grassland specialists at the conservation sites, while their numbers were unchanged at the control sites. Similar trend differences between conservation and control sites were obtained for the Red Data Book butterfly species. On the contrary, the development of moth individuals was more positive at the control than the conservation sites for calcareous grassland specialists (only macro-moths) and species of the Red Data Book. However, change rates of species numbers were positively correlated between butterflies and moths. Principal Component Analysis revealed strong differences between the different sites, but mostly consistent results for butterflies and moths; however, stronger differences between years were only detected for some of the conservation sites for the butterfly communities. Our results show that butterflies as well as moths are suitable ecological indicator groups, but they do not yield identical results. Thus, butterflies are more suitable for the analysis of open habitats, whereas moths are suitable for open and forested habitats as well. Furthermore, butterflies might be a more sensitive indicator group than moths for the short-term detection of conservation measures, especially for the restoration of open habitat types.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.10.010
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_918054394</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1470160X10001949</els_id><sourcerecordid>918054394</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-ec776a4264a7cc6665973e55f40b3f13915a44ce779a217bce0219d70246ca153</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUE1v1TAQjBBIlNKfUOEbpzzsxB_NqaoqaJEq9QCVuFkbZ_PqpyQuXgepv4C_zYbXe0-zGs3s7E5VnSu5U1LZL4cdhjTFZdg18j-3Y3hTnagL19ROtvotz9rJWln56331gegg2dd19qT6e5VR9GspmMcpIglYBjGn8kiC1lign1Bs29M-BpgEhzCWlAU9U8GZxMhzRmIKSkyLmBFoZUKkURDOsV6grJmtbA-QMa0k9hmIpi3pEXoOKXT5sXo3wkR49oKn1cO3rz-vb-u7-5vv11d3dWitKTUG5yzoxmpwIVhrTedaNGbUsm9H1XbKgNYBneugUa4PKBvVDU422gZQpj2tPh_3PuX0e-W7_Rwp4MTXbKf5Tl1Io9tOs9IclSEnooyjf8pxhvzslfRb7_7gX3r3W-8bzcC-T0ffCMnDPkfyDz9YYLbOG9s4VlweFciP_omYPYWIS8AhZgzFDym-kvEPHMCa3A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>918054394</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Are butterflies and moths suitable ecological indicator systems for restoration measures of semi-natural calcareous grassland habitats?</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Rákosy, László ; Schmitt, Thomas</creator><creatorcontrib>Rákosy, László ; Schmitt, Thomas</creatorcontrib><description>The selection of suitable ecological indicator groups is of great importance for environmental assessments. To test and compare two such groups, we performed transect walks of butterflies and light traps of moths at eight sample localities in the Carinthian Alps. All of them were conducted with identical methods in the years 2002 and 2004 allowing the evaluation of the response on the conservation measures performed on five of the eight sites in late 2002. We recorded a total of 2346 butterflies (including Zygaenidae and Sesiidae) representing 83 species and 7025 moths of 534 species. 150 of these species were listed in the Red Data Book of Carinthia. In general, butterflies increased from 2002 to 2004 while moths declined. The highest increase rates of butterflies were obtained for the numbers of individuals of calcareous grassland specialists at the conservation sites, while their numbers were unchanged at the control sites. Similar trend differences between conservation and control sites were obtained for the Red Data Book butterfly species. On the contrary, the development of moth individuals was more positive at the control than the conservation sites for calcareous grassland specialists (only macro-moths) and species of the Red Data Book. However, change rates of species numbers were positively correlated between butterflies and moths. Principal Component Analysis revealed strong differences between the different sites, but mostly consistent results for butterflies and moths; however, stronger differences between years were only detected for some of the conservation sites for the butterfly communities. Our results show that butterflies as well as moths are suitable ecological indicator groups, but they do not yield identical results. Thus, butterflies are more suitable for the analysis of open habitats, whereas moths are suitable for open and forested habitats as well. Furthermore, butterflies might be a more sensitive indicator group than moths for the short-term detection of conservation measures, especially for the restoration of open habitat types.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1470-160X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-7034</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.10.010</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Alps ; Butterflies ; Carinthia ; Conservation ; Conservation biology ; correlation ; Ecological monitoring ; forest habitats ; Grasslands ; Habitats ; Indicators ; Lepidoptera ; Light traps ; Moths ; principal component analysis ; Red Data Book ; Sesiidae ; Transect counts ; Turn-over rates ; Zygaenidae</subject><ispartof>Ecological indicators, 2011-09, Vol.11 (5), p.1040-1045</ispartof><rights>2010 Elsevier Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-ec776a4264a7cc6665973e55f40b3f13915a44ce779a217bce0219d70246ca153</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-ec776a4264a7cc6665973e55f40b3f13915a44ce779a217bce0219d70246ca153</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.10.010$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,3539,27911,27912,45982</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rákosy, László</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schmitt, Thomas</creatorcontrib><title>Are butterflies and moths suitable ecological indicator systems for restoration measures of semi-natural calcareous grassland habitats?</title><title>Ecological indicators</title><description>The selection of suitable ecological indicator groups is of great importance for environmental assessments. To test and compare two such groups, we performed transect walks of butterflies and light traps of moths at eight sample localities in the Carinthian Alps. All of them were conducted with identical methods in the years 2002 and 2004 allowing the evaluation of the response on the conservation measures performed on five of the eight sites in late 2002. We recorded a total of 2346 butterflies (including Zygaenidae and Sesiidae) representing 83 species and 7025 moths of 534 species. 150 of these species were listed in the Red Data Book of Carinthia. In general, butterflies increased from 2002 to 2004 while moths declined. The highest increase rates of butterflies were obtained for the numbers of individuals of calcareous grassland specialists at the conservation sites, while their numbers were unchanged at the control sites. Similar trend differences between conservation and control sites were obtained for the Red Data Book butterfly species. On the contrary, the development of moth individuals was more positive at the control than the conservation sites for calcareous grassland specialists (only macro-moths) and species of the Red Data Book. However, change rates of species numbers were positively correlated between butterflies and moths. Principal Component Analysis revealed strong differences between the different sites, but mostly consistent results for butterflies and moths; however, stronger differences between years were only detected for some of the conservation sites for the butterfly communities. Our results show that butterflies as well as moths are suitable ecological indicator groups, but they do not yield identical results. Thus, butterflies are more suitable for the analysis of open habitats, whereas moths are suitable for open and forested habitats as well. Furthermore, butterflies might be a more sensitive indicator group than moths for the short-term detection of conservation measures, especially for the restoration of open habitat types.</description><subject>Alps</subject><subject>Butterflies</subject><subject>Carinthia</subject><subject>Conservation</subject><subject>Conservation biology</subject><subject>correlation</subject><subject>Ecological monitoring</subject><subject>forest habitats</subject><subject>Grasslands</subject><subject>Habitats</subject><subject>Indicators</subject><subject>Lepidoptera</subject><subject>Light traps</subject><subject>Moths</subject><subject>principal component analysis</subject><subject>Red Data Book</subject><subject>Sesiidae</subject><subject>Transect counts</subject><subject>Turn-over rates</subject><subject>Zygaenidae</subject><issn>1470-160X</issn><issn>1872-7034</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFUE1v1TAQjBBIlNKfUOEbpzzsxB_NqaoqaJEq9QCVuFkbZ_PqpyQuXgepv4C_zYbXe0-zGs3s7E5VnSu5U1LZL4cdhjTFZdg18j-3Y3hTnagL19ROtvotz9rJWln56331gegg2dd19qT6e5VR9GspmMcpIglYBjGn8kiC1lign1Bs29M-BpgEhzCWlAU9U8GZxMhzRmIKSkyLmBFoZUKkURDOsV6grJmtbA-QMa0k9hmIpi3pEXoOKXT5sXo3wkR49oKn1cO3rz-vb-u7-5vv11d3dWitKTUG5yzoxmpwIVhrTedaNGbUsm9H1XbKgNYBneugUa4PKBvVDU422gZQpj2tPh_3PuX0e-W7_Rwp4MTXbKf5Tl1Io9tOs9IclSEnooyjf8pxhvzslfRb7_7gX3r3W-8bzcC-T0ffCMnDPkfyDz9YYLbOG9s4VlweFciP_omYPYWIS8AhZgzFDym-kvEPHMCa3A</recordid><startdate>20110901</startdate><enddate>20110901</enddate><creator>Rákosy, László</creator><creator>Schmitt, Thomas</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>KR7</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110901</creationdate><title>Are butterflies and moths suitable ecological indicator systems for restoration measures of semi-natural calcareous grassland habitats?</title><author>Rákosy, László ; Schmitt, Thomas</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-ec776a4264a7cc6665973e55f40b3f13915a44ce779a217bce0219d70246ca153</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Alps</topic><topic>Butterflies</topic><topic>Carinthia</topic><topic>Conservation</topic><topic>Conservation biology</topic><topic>correlation</topic><topic>Ecological monitoring</topic><topic>forest habitats</topic><topic>Grasslands</topic><topic>Habitats</topic><topic>Indicators</topic><topic>Lepidoptera</topic><topic>Light traps</topic><topic>Moths</topic><topic>principal component analysis</topic><topic>Red Data Book</topic><topic>Sesiidae</topic><topic>Transect counts</topic><topic>Turn-over rates</topic><topic>Zygaenidae</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rákosy, László</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schmitt, Thomas</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Ecological indicators</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rákosy, László</au><au>Schmitt, Thomas</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Are butterflies and moths suitable ecological indicator systems for restoration measures of semi-natural calcareous grassland habitats?</atitle><jtitle>Ecological indicators</jtitle><date>2011-09-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1040</spage><epage>1045</epage><pages>1040-1045</pages><issn>1470-160X</issn><eissn>1872-7034</eissn><abstract>The selection of suitable ecological indicator groups is of great importance for environmental assessments. To test and compare two such groups, we performed transect walks of butterflies and light traps of moths at eight sample localities in the Carinthian Alps. All of them were conducted with identical methods in the years 2002 and 2004 allowing the evaluation of the response on the conservation measures performed on five of the eight sites in late 2002. We recorded a total of 2346 butterflies (including Zygaenidae and Sesiidae) representing 83 species and 7025 moths of 534 species. 150 of these species were listed in the Red Data Book of Carinthia. In general, butterflies increased from 2002 to 2004 while moths declined. The highest increase rates of butterflies were obtained for the numbers of individuals of calcareous grassland specialists at the conservation sites, while their numbers were unchanged at the control sites. Similar trend differences between conservation and control sites were obtained for the Red Data Book butterfly species. On the contrary, the development of moth individuals was more positive at the control than the conservation sites for calcareous grassland specialists (only macro-moths) and species of the Red Data Book. However, change rates of species numbers were positively correlated between butterflies and moths. Principal Component Analysis revealed strong differences between the different sites, but mostly consistent results for butterflies and moths; however, stronger differences between years were only detected for some of the conservation sites for the butterfly communities. Our results show that butterflies as well as moths are suitable ecological indicator groups, but they do not yield identical results. Thus, butterflies are more suitable for the analysis of open habitats, whereas moths are suitable for open and forested habitats as well. Furthermore, butterflies might be a more sensitive indicator group than moths for the short-term detection of conservation measures, especially for the restoration of open habitat types.</abstract><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.10.010</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1470-160X
ispartof Ecological indicators, 2011-09, Vol.11 (5), p.1040-1045
issn 1470-160X
1872-7034
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_918054394
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete - AutoHoldings
subjects Alps
Butterflies
Carinthia
Conservation
Conservation biology
correlation
Ecological monitoring
forest habitats
Grasslands
Habitats
Indicators
Lepidoptera
Light traps
Moths
principal component analysis
Red Data Book
Sesiidae
Transect counts
Turn-over rates
Zygaenidae
title Are butterflies and moths suitable ecological indicator systems for restoration measures of semi-natural calcareous grassland habitats?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T13%3A47%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Are%20butterflies%20and%20moths%20suitable%20ecological%20indicator%20systems%20for%20restoration%20measures%20of%20semi-natural%20calcareous%20grassland%20habitats?&rft.jtitle=Ecological%20indicators&rft.au=R%C3%A1kosy,%20L%C3%A1szl%C3%B3&rft.date=2011-09-01&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1040&rft.epage=1045&rft.pages=1040-1045&rft.issn=1470-160X&rft.eissn=1872-7034&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.10.010&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E918054394%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=918054394&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S1470160X10001949&rfr_iscdi=true