Spatial Structure of Forest Lepidopteran Communities in Oak Hickory Forests of Indiana

Summerville, Keith S.; Dupont, Miranda M.; Johnson, Andrew V.; Krehbiel, Robb

doi:10.1093/ee/37.5.1224

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many species of small mammals, including P. leucopus and P. maniculatus, are omnivorous and consume insects (Ostfeld et al 1996;Semel and Andersen 1988;Whitaker 1963). The literature documents variability in insect assemblages based on forest composition; however, much of this research supports positive links between oak forests and invertebrates, which would have additional positive effects on higher trophic levels (Butler and Strazanac 2000;Martel and Mauffette 1997;Summerville et al 2008). Further research on how insect communities may differ along a gradient of oak-hickory cover and how invertebrate prey contribute to small-mammal diets should help clarify this relationship.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mesophication has been widely assumed to be detrimental to a diversity of terrestrial vertebrates that depend on oaks for food (Aldrich et al 2005;Fralish and McArdle 2009;Rodewald and Abrams 2002;Summerville et al 2008); however, the magnitude of the potential effect has not been widely studied. Examination of our data, which contain a lack of significant relationships among hard-mast biomass or percent hard-mast BA, Peromyscus density, and mesocarnivore occurrence, suggests a less extreme view of the consequences of mesophication, at least in these forest stands in southern Illinois.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of forest composition on trophic relationships among mast production and mammals in central hardwood forest

Gillen

Hellgren

2013

J Mammal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of forest composition on trophic relationships among mast production and mammals in central hardwood forest

Gillen

Hellgren

2013

J Mammal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moth community composition in these forests shows little variability across regions, remaining consistent in species diversity and changing mainly in the identity of the dominant taxa (Butler et al, ; Summerville et al, ; Stange et al, ). The most critical factor determining the structure of lepidopteran communities in regions of similar biogeographical history is plant community composition, which is largely associated with stand age and structure of the surrounding landscape (Hammond & Miller, ; Usher & Keiller, ; Summerville et al, ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lepidoptera-specific insecticide used to suppress gypsy moth outbreaks may benefit non-target forest Lepidoptera

Manderino¹,

Crist

Haynes³

2014

Agr Forest Entomol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1 Despite considerable interest in the impacts of forest-defoliating insects and pesticide-based suppression of defoliator outbreaks on non-target arthropods, studies have often been hampered by the unpredictability of outbreaks. 2 We evaluated the long-term impacts of forest defoliation by gypsy moths, and the suppression of their outbreaks with Bacillus thuringiensis var. kurstaki (Btk), on native moths. Three years after a gypsy moth outbreak, moth diversity and abundance were compared among sites that were defoliated but not sprayed with Btk (defoliated sites), defoliated and sprayed (Btk sites) or neither (undisturbed sites). We conducted separate evaluations of the effects of disturbance history on the overall moth community, taxonomic subgroups (families) and moths differing in their dietary overlap with gypsy moths. 3 Analyses of the full moth community revealed no effects of disturbance history on local ( ) moth diversity or diversity of moths among sites ( -diversity). The -or -diversities of moths classified by their dietary overlap with gypsy moths (overlapping, partially overlapping, not overlapping) were also not affected by disturbance history. However, taxonomic affiliation was important. Geometridae -diversity in late summer was significantly lower in defoliated sites than in Btk or undisturbed sites. No effects of disturbance history on moth abundances were found. 4 We conclude gypsy moth defoliation had negative effects on a major moth family (Geometridae), although Btk application may have protected Geometridae from the adverse effects of gypsy moth defoliation. The results of the present study help to clarify the relative, and sometimes countervailing, effects of defoliators and microbial pesticides on forest communities.

show abstract

“… Citations: A ( Grimble et al 1992 ) B ( Butler and Kondo 1991 ) C ( Steury et al 2007 ) C1 ( Butler et al 2002 ) C2 ( Albu and Metzler 2004 ) D ( Profant 1989 ) E ( Moulding and Madenjian 1979 ) F ( Landau and Prowell 1999b ) G ( Landau and Prowell 1999a ) H ( Summerville et al 2008 ) I ( Lewis et al 2005 ) J ( Rings et al 1987 ) K ( Williams et al 1977 ) L ( Rings and Metzler 1988 ) M ( Scholtens and Wagner 2007 ) N ( Dodd et al 2008 ) O ( Szabo et al 2007 ) P ( Schmidt and Roland 2006 ) Q ( Thomas 2001 ) R ( Dirks 1937 ) 1 The published species counts often included families that were not part of this research. Therefore the number of species were recounted and species from families not part of this study were removed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Macrolepidoptera biodiversity in Wooster, Ohio from 2001 through 2009

Downer¹,

Ebert²

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Skinner mercury vapor light trap was operated from 2001 through 2009 in a residential backyard to document biodiversity within the moth families Thyatiridae, Drepanidae, Geometridae, Mimallonidae, Apatelodidae, Lasiocampidae, Saturniidae, Sphingidae, Erebidae (including Lymantriinae and Arctiinae), Euteliidae, Nolidae, and Noctuidae. When making comparisons to older literature, we recalculated our results to conform to the older classification of the Noctuoidea. Moths were released after identification. There were 501 species documented in 77581 captures from 1290 sampling dates. There was a perceived risk that released moths would fly back into the trap the following evening. This should result in an abnormal number of rare moths that are caught multiple times. The number of species caught twice versus the number caught once was no different than a similar ratio for surveys that used more traditional sampling methods. Therefore this concern does not seem to be valid for these data. These data are provided in a supplementary file available for download.There were three previous surveys conducted in nearby natural areas. They documented fewer species than were documented here. To understand this better, we examined several specialized groups of moths that tend to use host plants not typically found in an urban residential yard. More species in Schinia Hübner, Catocala Schrank, Acronicta Ochsenheimer, and Herminiinae Leech were found in this survey than the other local surveys. Only in the Papaipema Smith did we recover fewer species, though it was still above 70% of what was expected. This diversity could be a result of sampling effort, but it shows that this urban location has a very diverse moth fauna. We suggest that this diversity is partly due to the planting of native plant species in the area about the light trap. Therefore we would concur with others that urban landscapes can be planned to increase biodiversity relevant to more natural ecosystems.In this study we looked at the ratio of the number of species of Geometridae divided by the number of species of Noctuidae as one approach to evaluating the level of disturbance in the moth assemblage. Although the yearly average was nearly constant, the seasonal ratio ranged from 0.09 to 0.91 depending on the sampling date. We also calculated alpha diversity and found that seasonal change in alpha diversity greatly exceeded yearly differences. This strong seasonal component means that a comparison between two studies requires a correction for seasonality and similar sampling intervals. In this study, a shift of two weeks would be sufficient to result in a significant difference in alpha diversity. This is the equivalent of increasing temperature by 1.53 °C. Seasonal shifts limit the usefulness of this methodology for environmental assessment because the within season change exceeds the between season change. This problem is compounded when sampling designs interact with this seasonality.In describing our data, we made use of a growing degree day (GDD) model. Th...

show abstract

Spatial Structure of Forest Lepidopteran Communities in Oak Hickory Forests of Indiana

Cited by 9 publications

References 30 publications

Effects of forest composition on trophic relationships among mast production and mammals in central hardwood forest

Effects of forest composition on trophic relationships among mast production and mammals in central hardwood forest

Lepidoptera-specific insecticide used to suppress gypsy moth outbreaks may benefit non-target forest Lepidoptera

Macrolepidoptera biodiversity in Wooster, Ohio from 2001 through 2009

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About