1. bookVolume 8 (2009): Issue 2 (December 2009)
Journal Details
First Published
10 Jul 2007
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Open Access

Determinants of Within-Patch Microdistribution and Movements of Endangered Butterfly Coenonympha Oedippus (Fabricius, 1787) (Nymphalidae: Satyrinae)

Published Online: 14 Jan 2010
Volume & Issue: Volume 8 (2009) - Issue 2 (December 2009)
Page range: 115 - 128
Journal Details
First Published
10 Jul 2007
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Determinants of Within-Patch Microdistribution and Movements of Endangered Butterfly <italic>Coenonympha Oedippus</italic> (Fabricius, 1787) (Nymphalidae: Satyrinae)

The within-patch microdistribution and movements of adults of the critically endangered butterfly, Coenonympha oedippus, were studied using mark-recapture data from an isolated patch network, which consisted of 8 patches in central Slovenia. The impact of patch characteristics on both parameters was analyzed. Males fly longer distances and spend more time flying than females. The distances and seasonal pattern of male movements were dependent on the patch size, and on the microdistribution and density of freshly emerged (receptive) females. The spatial and temporal pattern of female microdistribution was influenced by vegetation height, the homogeneity of host plant stands and the shading of the ground and/or the lowest parts of herb layer. In the case of near continuous distribution of host plants within a patch, the structure of herb vegetation appears to be the major determinant of adult microdistribution. It affects the dynamics of butterfly emergence and the selection of oviposition sites. The per cent cover of the nectar plant, Potentilla erecta, does not play an important role in butterfly microdistribution.


Abadijev, S.P. 2001: An Atlas of the Distribution of the Butterflies in Bulgaria (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea & Papilionoidea). Pensoft, Sofia-Moscow, 335 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Aistleitner, U., Mayr, T. & Siegel, C. 2006: Nachweise von neuen, verschollenen un stark gefährdeten Grossschmetterlingen aus Vorarlberg, Austria occ. (Lepidoptera). Zeitschrift der Arbeitsgemeinschaft österreichischer Entomologen, 58: 1-10.Search in Google Scholar

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. Journal of Insect Conservation, 7: 175-185.Search in Google Scholar

Auckland, J.N., Debinski, D.M. & Clark, W.R. 2004: Survival, movement, and resource use of the butterfly Parnassius clodius.Ecological Entomology, 29: 139-149.Search in Google Scholar

Baguette, M., Vansteenwegen, C., Convi, I. & Neve, G. 1998: Sex-biased density-dependent migration in a metapopulation of the butterfly Proclossiana eunomia.Acta Oecologica, 19: 17-24.Search in Google Scholar

Balleto, E., Bonelli S. & Cassulo L. 2005: Mapping the Italian Butterfly Diversity for Conservation. In: Kühn, E., Feldmann, R., Thomas, J. & Settele, J. (eds.): Studies in the ecology and conservation of butterflies in Europe. Vol. 1: General concepts and case studies. Pensoft, Sofia-Moscow, pp. 71-76.Search in Google Scholar

Balleto, E. & Kudrna, O. 1985: Some Aspects of the Conservation of Butterflies in Italy, with Recommendations for a future Strategy (Lepidoptera Hesperiidae & Papilionoidea). Bolletino della Società Entomologica Italiana, 117: 39-59.Search in Google Scholar

Bozano, G.C. 2002: Guide to the butterflies of the Palearctic region. Satyrinae part III. Omnes Artes, Milano, 71 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Brakefield, P.M. 1982: Ecological studies on the butterfly Maniola jurtina in Britain. I. Adult behaviour, microdistrbution and dispersal. Journal of Animal Ecology, 51: 713-726.Search in Google Scholar

Braun-Blanquet, J. 1964: Pflanzensoziologie. Grundzüge der Vegetations Kunde. 3. Auflage. Springer, Wien-New York, 865 pp.10.1007/978-3-7091-8110-2Search in Google Scholar

Brommer, J.E. & Fred, M.S. 1999: Movement of the Apollo butterfly Parnassius apollo related to host plant and nectar plant patches. Ecological Entomology, 24: 125-131.Search in Google Scholar

Brown, I.L. & Ehrlich, P.R. 1980: Population biology of the checkerspot butterfly, Euphydras chalcedona.Structure of the Jasper Ridge colony. Oecologia, 47: 239-251.Search in Google Scholar

Buszko, J. 2005: Coenonympha oedippus (Fabricius, 1787). In Polska Czerwona Księga Zwierząt - Bezkręgowce http://www.iop.krakow.pl/pckz/opis.asp?id=99&je=plSearch in Google Scholar

Chew, F.S. & Robbins, R.K. 1989: Egg-laying in Butterflies. In: Vane-Wright, R.I. & Ackery, P. R. (eds.): The biology of Butterflies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, pp. 65-79.Search in Google Scholar

Chrétien, M.P. 1886: Une note sur les premiers ćtats du Coenonympha oedippus. In: Bourgeois, M.J. (ed.): Séance du 13 octobre 1886 (Bulletin entomologique). Annales de la Societe Entomologique de France, 6: 638 (157).Search in Google Scholar

Cooch, E. & White, G. 2008: Program MARK. "A Gentle Introduction". 7th Edition.Search in Google Scholar

Čelik, T. 1997: Ecological researches of endangered species Coenonympha oedippus Fabricius, 1787 (Lepidoptera: Satyridae) on the Ljubljansko barje. Msc Thesis, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, 67 pp. (In Slovene with English summary)Search in Google Scholar

Čelik, T. 2003: Population structure, migration and conservation of Coenonympha oedippus Fabricius, 1787 (Lepidoptera: Satyridae) in a fragmented landscape. PhD Thesis, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, 100 pp. (In Slovene with English summary)Search in Google Scholar

Čelik, T. 2004: Population dynamics of endangered species Coenonympha oedippus Fabricius, 1787 (Lepidoptera: Satyridae) on the Ljubljansko barje. Acta Entomologica Slovenica, 12: 99-114.Search in Google Scholar

Čelik, T., Verovnik, R., Gomboc, S. & Lasan, M. 2005: Natura 2000 in Slovenia: Lepidoptera. Založba ZRC SAZU, ZRC SAZU, Ljubljana, 288 pp. (In Slovene with English summary)Search in Google Scholar

Dennis, L.H.R. 2004: Just how important are structural elements as habitat components? Indications from a declining lycaenid butterfly with priority conservation status. Journal of Insect Conservation, 8: 37-45.Search in Google Scholar

Dierks, K. 2006: Beobachtungen zur Larvalbiologie von Coenonympha oedippus (Fabricius, 1787) im Südwesten Frankreichs (Lepidoptera: Satyridae). Entomologische Zeitschrift, 116 (4): 186-188.Search in Google Scholar

Drouet, E. 1989: La situation de Coenonympha oedippus Fabricius dans le département de l'Isère (Lepidoptera Nymphalidae Satyrinae). Bulletin Mensuel de la Société Linnéenne de Lyon, 58: 345-349.Search in Google Scholar

Ehrlich, P.R. 1989: The structure and dynamics of butterfly populations. In: Vane-Wright, R.I. & Ackery, P.R. (eds.): The biology of Butterflies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, pp. 25-40.Search in Google Scholar

Elligsen, H., Beinlich B. & Plachter, H. 1997: Effects of large-scale cattle grazing on populations of Coenonympha glycerion and Lasiommata megera (Lepidoptera: Satyridae). Journal of Insect Conservation, 1: 13-23.Search in Google Scholar

ESRI, 1999-2006: Arc GIS 9, ArcMap version 9.2. ESRI Inc.Search in Google Scholar

Fischer, 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. Journal of Insect Conservation, 3: 43-52.Search in Google Scholar

Fleishman, E., Ray, C., Sjörgen-Gulve, P., Boggs, C.L. & Murphy, D.D. 2002: Assessing the roles of patch quality, area, and isolation in predicting metapopulation dynamics. Conservation Biology, 16: 1-11.Search in Google Scholar

Fowler, J. & Cohen, L. 1992: Practical statistics for field biology. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, New York, Brisbane, Toronto, Singapore, 227 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Gibbs, M., Lace, L.A., Jones, M.J. & Moore, A.J. 2004: Intraspecific competition in the speckled wood butterfly Pararge aegeria: Effect of rearing density and gender on larval life history. Journal of Insect Science, 4: 16, 6 pp.10.1673/031.004.1601Search in Google Scholar

Gorbunov, P. 2001: The butterflies of Russia: classification, genitalia, keys for identification (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea and Papilionoidea). Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Plant and Animal Ecology, Publishers Thesis, Ekaterinburg, 320 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Gutiérrez, D., Thomas, C.D. & Cortes-Leon, J.L. 1999: Dispersal, distribution, patch network and metapopulation dynamics of the dingy skipper butterfly (Erynnis tages). Oecologia, 121: 506-517.Search in Google Scholar

Habeler, H. 1972: Zur Kenntnis der Lebensräume von Coenonympha oedippus F. (Lep. Satyridae). Nachr. Bayer. Ent. 21, 3: 51-54.Search in Google Scholar

Hafner, J. 1910: Makrolepidopteren von Görz und Umgebung. Entomologischen Zeitschrift, XXIV Jahrgang, Sonder-Abdruck: 1-40.Search in Google Scholar

Heath, J. 1981: Threatened Rhopalocera (Butterflies) in Europe. European Committee for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Council of Europe, 157 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Ide, J. 2002: Mating behaviour and light conditions cause seasonal changes in the dispersal pattern of the satyrine butterfly Lethe diana.Ecological Entomology, 27: 33-40.Search in Google Scholar

Ims, R.A. & Hjermann, D.Ø. 2001: Condition-dependent dispersal. In: Clobert, J., Danchin, E., Dhondt, A.A. & Nichols, J.D. (eds.): Dispersal. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 203-216.Search in Google Scholar

Ims, R.A. & Yaccoz, G.N. 1997: Studying Transfer Processes in Metapopulations. Emigration, Migration and Colonization. In: Hanski, I. & Gilpin, M.E. (eds.): Metapopulation biology. Ecology, Genetics and Evolution. Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 247-265.Search in Google Scholar

Kaligarič, M., 1997: Rastlinstvo Primorskega krasa in Slovenske Istre. Zgodovinsko društvo za južno Primorsko: Znanstveno-raziskovalno središče Republike Slovenije, Koper, 111 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Kolar, H. 1919: Über das Vorkommen von Coenonympha oedippus F. Zeitschrift der öster reichischen Entomologen-Vereines, Wien, 4. Jahrgang: 96.Search in Google Scholar

Kolar, H. 1929: Verbreitung von Coenonympha oedippus F. in Europa. Verhandlugen des zoologisch-botanischen Vereins in Wien, Jahr 1928, Band 78: 105-108.Search in Google Scholar

Konvicka, M., Hula, V. & Fric, Z. 2003: Habitat of pre-hibernating larvae of the endangered butterfly Euphydras aurinia (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae): What can be learned from vegetation composition and structure? European Journal of Entomology, 100: 313-322.Search in Google Scholar

Krauss, J., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Müller, C.B. & Tscharntke, T. 2005: Relative importance of resource quantity, isolation and habitat quality for landscape distribution of monophagous butterfly. Ecography, 28: 465-474.Search in Google Scholar

Kučinić, M., Tvrtković, N. & Kletečki, E. 1999: The False Ringelt (Coenonympha oedippus F.) is a member of the Croatian butterfly fauna after all. Natura Croatica, 8: 399-405.Search in Google Scholar

Kuussaari, M., Nieminen, M., Hanski I. 1996: An experimental study of migration in the Glanville fritillary butterfly Melitaea cinxia.Journal of Animal Ecology, 65: 791-801.Search in Google Scholar

Lafranchis, J. 2004: Fische Insectes protégés. Le Fadet des laîches. Insectes, 133: 21-22.Search in Google Scholar

Lafranchis, T. 2000: Les Papillions de jour de France, Belgique et Luxembourg et leurs chenilles. Collection Parthenope, editions Biotope, Meze, 448 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Lhonore, J. 1996: Coenonympha oedippus. Nature and environment, 79: 98-104.Search in Google Scholar

Lhonore, J. 1998: Biologie, écologie et répartition de quatre espèces de Lépidoptères Rhopalocères protégés (Lycaenidae, Satyridae) dans l'Ouest de la France. Rapport d'études de l'OPIE, vol. 2 http://www.inra.fr/opie-insectes/re-rhopa.htmSearch in Google Scholar

Lhonore, J. & Lagarde, M. 1999: Biogeographie, ecologie et protection de Coenonympha oedippus (Fab., 1787) (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae: Satyrinae). Annales de la Société Entomologique de France, 35 (suppl.): 299-307.Search in Google Scholar

Loertscher, M., Erhardt, A. & Zettel, J. 1995: Microdistribution of butterflies in a mosaiclike habitat: The role of nectar sources. Ecography, 18: 15-26.Search in Google Scholar

Luoto, M., Kuussaari, M., Rita, H., Salminen, J. & von Bonsdorff, T. 2001: Determinants of distribution and abundance in the clouded apollo butterfly: a lanscape ecological approach. Ecography, 24: 601-617.Search in Google Scholar

Manly, B.F.J. 1971: Estimates of a Marking Effect with Capture-Recapture Sampling. Journal of Applied Ecology, 8: 181-189.Search in Google Scholar

Martinčič, A., Wraber, T., Jogan, N., Podobnik, A., Turk, B., Vreš, B., Ravnik, V., Frajman, B., Strgulc Krajšek, S., Trčak, B., Bačič, T., Fischer, M. A., Eler, K. & Surina, B. 2007: Mala flora Slovenije. Ključ za določanje praprotnic in semenk. Četrta, dopolnjena in spremenjena izdaja. Tehniška založba Slovenije, Ljubljana, 967 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Matter, S.F. & Roland, J. 2002: An experimental examination of the effects of habitat quality on the dispersal and local abundance of the butterfly Parnassius smintheus.Ecological Entomology, 27: 308-316.Search in Google Scholar

Matter, S.F., Roland, J., Keyghobadi, N. & Sabourin, K. 2003: The effects of isolation, habitat area, and resources on the abundance, density, and movements of the butterfly Parnassius smintheus.American Midland Naturalist, 150: 26-36.Search in Google Scholar

Morton, A.C. 1989: The Effects of Marking and Handling on Recapture Frequencies of Butterflies. In: Vane-Wright, R.I. & Ackery, P.R. (eds.): The biology of Butterflies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, pp. 55-58.Search in Google Scholar

Oberdorfer, E. 1978: Süddeutsche Pflanzengesellschaften II, 2. Aufl., Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart, New York, 355 pp. Oberdorfer, E. (ed.) 1983: Süddeutsche Pflanzengesellschaften III, Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena, Stuttgart, New York, 455 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Pastoralis, G. & Reiprich, A. 1995: Zoznam Motylov vyskytujucich sa na uzemi Slovenska. Spišska Nova Ves, Komarno, 52 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Pollard, E. & Yates, T. J. 1993: Monitoring Butterflies for Ecology and Conservation. Chapman & Hall, London, 274 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Ravenscroft, N.O.M. 1994: The ecology of the chequered butterfly Carterocephalus palaemon in Scotland. Microhabitat. Journal of Applied Ecology, 31: 613-622.Search in Google Scholar

Sajovic, G. 1910: Naravoslovni oddelek, Zoologična zbirka: brezvretenčarji. In: Mantuani, J. (ed.): Poročilo o deželnem muzeju »Rudolfinum« za l. 1909. Carniola, Nova vrsta, Muzejsko društvo za Kranjsko, Ljubljana, L. I., Zvezek 1: 39-40.Search in Google Scholar

SBN (Schweizerischer Bund für Naturschutz), 1987: Tagfalter und ihre Lebensräume. Schweizerischer Bund für Naturschutz, Basel, 516 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Schneider, C. 2003: The influence of spatil scale on quantifying insect dispersal: an analysis of butterfly data. Ecological Entomology, 28: 252-256.Search in Google Scholar

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. Ecological Entomology, 28: 219-227.Search in Google Scholar

Schwarzwälder, B., Lörtscher, M., Erhardt, A. & Zettel, J. 1997: Habitat utilization by the Heath Fritillary butterfly, Mellicta athalia ssp. celadussa (Rott.) (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) in montane grasslands of different management. Biological Conservation, 82: 157-165.10.1016/S0006-3207(97)00023-2Search in Google Scholar

Scott, J.A. 1975: Flight patterns among eleven species of diurnal Lepidoptera. Ecology, 56: 1367-1377.Search in Google Scholar

Seliškar, T., Vreš, B., Seliškar, A. 2003: FloVegSi 2.0. Računalniški program za urejanje in analizo bioloških podatkov. Biološki inštitut ZRC SAZU, Ljubljana.Search in Google Scholar

Singer, M.C. 1989: Butterfly-Hostplant Relationships: Host Quality, Adult Choice and Larval Success. In: Vane-Wright, R.I. & Ackery, P.R. (eds.): The biology of Butterflies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, pp. 81-88.Search in Google Scholar

SPSS Inc., 1989-2004: SPSS 13.0 for Windows. Release 13.0 (1 Sept 2004).Search in Google Scholar

Staub, R. & Aistleitner, U. 2006: Das Moor-Wiesenvögelschen - oder worauf es im grenzüberschreitenden Artenschutz ankommt. In: Broggi, M.F. (ed.): Alpenrheintal - eine Region im Umbau. Analysen und Perspektiven der räumlichen Entwicklung. Verlag der Liechtensteinischen Akademischen Gesselschaft, pp. 245-254.Search in Google Scholar

Tabashnik, B.E. 1980: Population Structure of Pierid Butterflies. III. Pest Populations of Colias eriphyle.Oecologia, 47: 175-183.Search in Google Scholar

Tregubov, V. 1957: Gozdne rastlinske združbe. In: Inštitut za gozdno in lesno gospodarstvo Slovenije (ed.): Prebiralni gozdovi na Snežniku. Vegetacijska in gozdnogospodarska monografija. Kmečka knjiga, Ljubljana, pp. 23-63.Search in Google Scholar

Trpin, D. & Vreš, B. 1995: Register flore Slovenije. Praprotnice in cvetnice. (Register of the Flora of Slovenia. Ferns and Vascular Plants). Znanstvenoraziskovalni center SAZU, Zbirka 7, Ljubljana, 153 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Tshikolovets, V. V. 2003: Butterflies of Eastern Europe, Urals and Caucasus. Brno, 176 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Tutin, T. G., Heywood, V., Burges, N. A., Moore, D. M., Valentine, D. H., Walters, S. M. & Webb, D. A. (Eds.) 1980: Flora Europaea, Volume 5. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 452 pp.Search in Google Scholar

Välimäki, P. & Itämies, J. 2003: Migration of the clouded Apollo butterfly Parnassius mnemosyne in a network of suitable habitats - effects of patch characteristics. Ecography, 26: 679-691.Search in Google Scholar

van Halder, I., Barbaro, L., Corcket E. & Jactel H. 2008: Importance of semi-natural habitats for the conservation of butterfly communities in landscapes dominated by pine plantations. Biodiversity and Conservation, 17:1149-1169.Search in Google Scholar

van Sway, C.A.M. & Warren, M.S. 1999: Red Data Book of European Butterflies (Rhopalocera). Nature and Environment, 99: 1-260.Search in Google Scholar

Vozar, A., Örvössy, N., Kocsis, M., Korösi, A. & Peregovits, L. 2005: First results of a study on Coenonympha oedippus in Hungary. In: Kühn, E., Feldmann, R., Thomas, J. & Settele, J. (eds.): Studies in the ecology and conservation of butterflies in Europe. Vol.1: General concepts and case studies. Pensoft, Sofia-Moscow, pp. 120.Search in Google Scholar

Weidemann, H. J. 1995: Tagfalter: beobachten, bestimmen. 2., völlig neu bearb. Aufl. Naturbuch Verlag, Augsburg, 659 pp.Search in Google Scholar

White, G. 2008: Program MARK. Version 5.1 ( http//www.cnr.colostate.edu/~gwhiteSearch in Google Scholar

Wiklund, C. 2003: Sexual selection and the evolution of butterfly mating systems. In: Boggs, C.L., Watt, W.B. & Ehrlich, P.R. (eds.): Butterflies. Ecology and Evolution Taking Flight. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 67-90.Search in Google Scholar

Winiarska, G. 2001: Butterflies (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea, Papilionoidea) in Narew National Park. Fragmenta faunistica, 44: 73-78.Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo