liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Butterflies in Swedish grasslands benefit from forest and respond to landscape composition at different spatial scales
Linköping University, Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Biology. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering.
Linköping University, Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Biology. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering. Swedish Univ Agr Sci, Sweden.
Linköping University, Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Biology. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6128-1051
Swedish Univ Agr Sci, Sweden.
Show others and affiliations
2018 (English)In: Landscape Ecology, ISSN 0921-2973, E-ISSN 1572-9761, Vol. 33, no 12, p. 2189-2204Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

ContextLoss and fragmentation of semi-natural grasslands has critically affected many butterfly species in Europe. Habitat area and isolation can have strong effects on the local biodiversity but species may also be strongly affected by the surrounding matrix.ObjectivesWe explored how different land cover types in the landscape explained the occurrence of butterfly species in semi-natural grasslands.MethodsUsing data from 476 semi-natural grasslands in Sweden, we analysed the effect of matrix composition on species richness and occurrence. Additionally, we analysed at which spatial scales butterflies responded to matrix types (forests, semi-natural grasslands, arable land and water).ResultsForest cover showed the strongest positive effect on species richness, followed by semi-natural grasslands. Forest also had a positive effect on red-listed species at local scales. Responses to matrix composition were highly species-specific. The majority of the 30most common species showed strong positive responses to the amount of forest cover within 200-500m. There was a smaller group of species showing a positive response to arable land cover within 500-2000m. Thirteen species showed positive responses to the amount of semi-natural grasslands, generally at larger scales (10-30km).ConclusionsOur study showed that surrounding forest is beneficial for many grassland butterfly species and that forests might mitigate the negative effects of habitat loss caused by agricultural intensification. Also, semi-natural grasslands were an important factor for species richness at larger spatial scales, indicating that a landscape consisting mainly of supporting habitats (i.e. forests) are insufficient to sustain a rich butterfly fauna.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
SPRINGER , 2018. Vol. 33, no 12, p. 2189-2204
Keywords [en]
Conservation; Forest; Grassland; Landscape composition; Lepidoptera; Spatial scale
National Category
Ecology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-153517DOI: 10.1007/s10980-018-0732-yISI: 000451749800010OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-153517DiVA, id: diva2:1274603
Note

Funding Agencies|WWF Sweden [500131]; Swedish Research Council Formas [942-2015-988]; Swedish Environmental Protection Agency - Swedish Board of Agriculture

Available from: 2019-01-02 Created: 2019-01-02 Last updated: 2019-01-02

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Bergman, Karl-OlofDaniel Ferreira, Juliana DanielMilberg, PerWesterberg, Lars
By organisation
BiologyFaculty of Science & Engineering
In the same journal
Landscape Ecology
Ecology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 33 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf