Distribution patterns in butterflies and birds of the Czech Republic: separating effects of habitat and geographical position

Abstract

Aim To evaluate the relative role of environmental factors and geographical position (latitude and longitude) in determining species distribution and composition of local assemblages of butterflies and birds.Location Czech Republic, central Europe.Methods Canonical correspondence analysis that ordinates species and samples (grid cells in distribution atlases) such that interspecific and intersample differences attributable to environmental factors are maximized. The technique allowed us to test the significance of individual factors, including the geographical ones, by controlling the other factors and accounting for spatial autocorrelation.Results Altitude and climate (temperature and precipitation) accounted for most variance in the interspecific differences in distribution of both butterflies and birds. The distribution of birds was also strongly affected by the area of water bodies, and less strongly, but still significantly, by the area of meadows and mountain open habitats. Habitat types important for the differences in butterfly distribution were deciduous forests, meadows, swamps and mountain open habitats. Some less common habitat types were important only because of the presence of rare species. Latitude and longitude invariably accounted for a large proportion of total variance, and their effect was highly significant even after controlling for the effect of all other environmental factors.Main conclusions Although environmental factors, especially those related to elevation and climate, represent the main determinants of species distribution and composition of local assemblages, the geographical position is very important on this scale of resolution. Understanding distribution patterns, thus, must include not only an understanding of species ecological requirements, but also an understanding of geographical context, which affects structure and dynamics of speciesÕ geographical ranges.

Habitat selection of the Ortolan bunting Emberiza hortulana in Poland: predictions from large‐scale habitat elements

“…On a smaller scale, such data cannot replace-at least as far as conservation is concerned-the painstaking field study of habitat requirements for individual species (Storch et al 2003).…”

Butterfly diversity and biogeography on the Croatian karst mountain Biokovo: Vertical distribution and preference for altitude and aspect?

“…Biokovo butterfly diversity and composition changes almost twice as much with altitude as with aspect. Numerous authors have pointed out that altitude is one factor that determines climate patterns and changes in floristic composition, both of which strongly affect species distribution (Wettstein & Schmid, 1999;Pyrcz & Wojtusiak, 2002;Storch et al, 2003;Eyre et al, 2005).…”

“…In mountain ecosystems, the distribution of species is determined by the suitability of habitat and climate (Storch et al, 2003). The main factors that influence species distribution and diversity include geographic isolation, altitude, climate and features of landscape and habitat such as structure, heterogeneity and quality (e.g.…”

“…The main factors that influence species distribution and diversity include geographic isolation, altitude, climate and features of landscape and habitat such as structure, heterogeneity and quality (e.g. Kudrna, 1986;Fleishman et al, 1998Fleishman et al, , 2003Wettstein & Schmid, 1999;Pyrcz & Wojtusiak, 2002;Storch et al, 2003).…”

The effect of temperature and habitat quality on abundance of the Glanville fritillary on the Isle of Wight: implications for conservation management in a warming climate

“…Like most insects, butterflies are extremely sensitive to changes in temperature and are therefore affected strongly by climatic limitations at a range of spatial scales (Dennis & Shreeve 1991;Bryant et al 2002;Storch et al 2003). At the broadest scale, latitude determines the climatic tolerances of species (Gutierrez & Menendez 1995;Dennis et al 2008), mainly because the time available in which to complete the life cycle is a primary constraint (Thomas 1993;Oliver et al 2009).…”