Spatial Synchrony and Asynchrony in Butterfly Population Dynamics

Sutcliffe, Odette L.; Thomas, Chris D.; Moss, D.

doi:10.2307/5702

Cited by 238 publications

(273 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

255

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, if asynchrony increases with distance, it may not be optimal to concentrate the habitat patches, but to maintain a distance between patches which exceeds the range within which the population fluctuations are correlated (Kindvall 1996). A decreased distance between local populations increases synchrony for some insects, at least on a large-scale level (Thomas 1991;Hanski and Woiwod 1993;Sutcliffe et al 1996), but not for others (Kindvall 1996). The results from this study suggest that there is no strong synchrony of O. eremita populations even within a stand of trees.…”

Section: Species Preservationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Harrison and Quinn 1989;Thomas and Hanski 1997). Studies on populations of aphids, moths and butterflies suggest that fluctuations often occur more or less in synchrony over areas of 200,000 km 2 or more (Hanski and Woiwod 1993;Pollard and Yates 1993;Sutcliffe et al 1996). If strong synchrony between populations were a common pattern, it may threaten to undermine the theoretical importance of metapopulation dynamics in predicting the long-term survival of populations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Constancy and asynchrony of Osmoderma eremita populations in tree hollows

Ranius

2001

Oecologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A species rich beetle fauna is associated with old, hollow trees. Many of these species are regarded as endangered, but there is little understanding of the population structure and extinction risks of these species. In this study I show that one of the most endangered beetles, Osmoderma eremita, has a population structure which conforms to that of a metapopulation, with each tree possibly sustaining a local population. This was revealed by performing a mark-release-recapture experiment in 26 trees over a 5-year period. The spatial variability between trees was much greater than temporal variability between years. The population size was on average 11 adults tree-1 year-1, but differed widely between trees (0-85 adults tree -1 year -1 ). The population size in each tree varied moderately between years [mean coefficient of variation (C.V.)=0.51], but more widely than from sampling errors alone (P=0.008, Monte Carlo simulation). The population size variability in all trees combined, however, was not larger than expected from sampling errors alone in a constant population (C.V.=0.15, P=0.335, Monte Carlo simulation). Thus, the fluctuations of local populations cancel each other out when they are added together. This pattern can arise only when the fluctuations occur asynchronously between trees. The asynchrony of the fluctuations justifies the assumption usually made in metapopulation modelling, that local populations within a metapopulation fluctuate independently of one another. The asynchrony might greatly increase persistence time at the metapopulation level (per stand), compared to the local population level (per tree). The total population size of O. eremita in the study area was estimated to be 3,900 individuals. Other localities sustaining O. eremita are smaller in area, and most of these must be enlarged to allow long-term metapopulation persistence and to satisfy genetic considerations of the O. eremita populations.

show abstract

Section: Species Preservationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constancy and asynchrony of Osmoderma eremita populations in tree hollows

Ranius

2001

Oecologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In our study, at least 448 in one species (Pied Avocet) the distance between lakes 449 and hydroperiod seemed to act together to cause the 450 spatial synchronization of populations. Ranta et al 451 (1999) (Sutcliffe et al 1996), the degree of 467 functional connectivity between patches (Powney et al 468 2011), the spatial scale (Paradis et al 1999) and presence 469 of environmental disturbances (Ranta et al 1999). 470 Functional connectivity refers to the environmental 471 permeability of a given landscape, which facilitates or 472 hinders the movement of individuals between patches 473 and/or fragments (Goodwin andFahrig 2002, Powney 474 et al 2011).…”

Section: U N C O R R E C T E D P R O O Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial synchrony of wader populations in inland lakes of the Iberian Peninsula

Gonçalves

Gil‐Delgado

Gosálvez

et al. 2016

Ecological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Given that a population is spatially structured, at what level of detail do we need to sample it in order to understand the underlying processes? These questions, and others like them, are difficult to answer empirically, because they require population data of large spatial and temporal extent, tied to information about dispersal (but see Hanski and Woiwood, 1993;Holyoak and Lawler, 1996;Sutcliffe et al, 1996). Thus we we must turn to theory for guidance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%