Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T14:48:58.824Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Butterfly behavioural responses to natural Bornean tropical rain-forest canopy gaps

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 December 2011

James S. Pryke ,
Sven M. Vrdoljak ,
Paul B. C. Grant  and
Michael J. Samways
James S. Pryke*
Affiliation:
Department of Conservation Ecology and Entomology, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland, 7602, South Africa
Sven M. Vrdoljak
Affiliation:
Department of Conservation Ecology and Entomology, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland, 7602, South Africa
Paul B. C. Grant
Affiliation:
Department of Conservation Ecology and Entomology, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland, 7602, South Africa
Michael J. Samways
Affiliation:
Department of Conservation Ecology and Entomology, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland, 7602, South Africa
*
1Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Natural tree canopy gaps allow sunlight to penetrate to the forest floor, a major environmental component and resource for many tropical rain-forest species. We compare here how butterflies use sunny areas created by the natural gaps in canopies in comparison with adjacent closed-canopy areas. We chose butterflies as our focal organisms as they are taxonomically tractable and mobile, yet habitat sensitive. Previous studies have shown that butterfly diversity in tropical forests responds to varying degrees of canopy openness. Here we assess butterfly behavioural responses to gaps and equivalent sized closed-canopy patches. Butterfly occupancy time and behaviour were simultaneously observed 61 times in gaps and 61 times in equivalent sized closed-canopy patches across four sites in a tropical rain forest in northern Borneo. Out of the 20 most frequently recorded species, 12 were more frequently recorded or spent more time in gaps, four occurred more frequently in closed-canopy areas, and four showed no significant differences. Overall agonistic, basking, patrolling and resting were more common in gaps compared with the closed canopy. Many butterfly species have complex behavioural requirements for both gaps and closed canopies, with some species using these different areas for different behaviours. Each butterfly species had particular habitat requirements, and needed both canopy gaps and closed canopy areas for ecological and behavioural reasons, emphasizing the need for natural light heterogeneity within these systems.

Keywords

BorneoBruneiclosed-canopygap ecologyLepidopteralightshadesun
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , January 2012 , pp. 45 - 54
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

LITERATURE CITED

BAGUETTE, M. & VAN DYCK, H. 2007. Landscape connectivity and animal behavior: functional grain as a key determinant for dispersal. Landscape Ecology 22:1117–1129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BERGMAN, M. & WIKLUND, C. 2009. Visual mate detection and mate flight pursuit in relation to sunspot size in a woodland territorial butterfly. Animal Behaviour 78:17–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BERGMAN, M., GOTTHARD, K., BERGER, D., OLOFSSON, M., KEMP, D. J., & WIKLUND, C. 2007. Mating success of resident versus non-resident males in a territorial butterfly. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 274:1659–1665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BOLKER, B. M., BROOKS, M. E., CLARK, C. J., GEANGE, S. W., POULSEN, J. R., STEVENS, M. H. H. & WHITE, J. S. S. 2009. Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 24:127–135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
BONTE, D. & VAN DYCK, H. 2009. Mate-locating behaviour, habitat-use, and flight morphology relative to rainforest disturbance in an Afrotropical butterfly. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 96:830–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BROKAW, N. & BUSING, R. T. 2000. Niche versus chance and tree diversity in forest gaps. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 15:183–188.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
CLEARY, D. F. R. 2004. Assessing the use of butterflies as indicators of logging in Borneo at three taxonomic levels. Journal of Economic Entomology 97:429–435.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
CRANBROOK, EARL OF 1993. Research and management of the Batu-Apoi-Forest-Reserve, Temburong, Brunei – the Universiti-Brunei-Darussalam Royal-Geographical-Society Rain-Forest Project 1991/92. Global Ecology and Biogeography 3:267–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DAVIS, A. J., HUIJBREGTS, H. & KRIKKEN, J. 2000. The role of local and regional processes in shaping dung beetle communities in tropical forest plantations in Borneo. Global Ecology and Biogeography 9:281–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DENNIS, R. L. H. & SPARKS, T. H. 2006. When is a habitat not a habitat? Dramatic resource use changes under differing weather conditions for the butterfly Plebejus argus. Biological Conservation 129:291–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DENNIS, R. L. H., SHREEVE, T. G. & VAN DYCK, H. 2003. Towards a functional resource-based concept for habitat: a butterfly biology viewpoint. Oikos 102:417–426.Google Scholar
DENSLOW, J. S. 1987. Tropical rain-forest gaps and tree species-diversity. Annual Review of Ecological Systems 18:431–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DUMBRELL, A. J. & HILL, J. K. 2005. Impacts of selective logging on canopy and ground assemblages of tropical forest butterflies: implications for sampling. Biological Conservation 125:123–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DYKES, A. P. 2000. Climatic patterns in a tropical rainforest in Brunei. The Geographical Journal 166;63–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FEENER, D. H. & SCHUPP, E. W. 1998. Effect of treefall gaps on the patchiness and species richness of Neotropical ant assemblages. Oecologia 116:191–201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
HAMER, K. C., HILL, J. K., BENEDICK, S., MUSTAFFA, N., SHERRATT, N. T., MARYATI, M. & CHEY, V. K. 2003. Ecology of butterflies in natural and selectively logged forests of northern Borneo: the importance of habitat heterogeneity. Journal of Applied Ecology 40:150–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HAMER, K. C., HILL, J. K., BENEDICK, S., MUSTAFFA, N., CHEY, V. K. & MARYATI, M. 2006. Diversity and ecology of carrion- and fruit-feeding butterflies in Bornean rain-forest. Journal of Tropical Ecology 22:25–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HEDL, R., SVATEK, M., DANCAK, M., RODZAY, A. W., SALLEH, A. B. M. & KAMARIAH, A. S. 2009. A new technique for inventory of permanent plots in tropical forests: a case study from lowland dipterocarp forest in Kuala Belalong, Brunei Darussalam. Blumea 54:124–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HILL, J. K., HAMER, K. C., TANGAH, J. & DAWOOD, M. 2001. Ecology of tropical butterflies in rainforest gaps. Oecologia 128:294–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
LEDERHOUSE, R. C. 1982. Territorial defence and lek behavior of the black swallowtail butterfly, Papilio polyxenes. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 10:109–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MARTIN, P. & BATESON, P. 1993. Measuring behaviour: an introductory guide. (Second edition.) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 222 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MCCULLOCH, C. E., SEARLE, S. R. & NEUHAUS, J. M. 2008. Generalized, linear, and mixed models. (Second edition.) Wiley, Hoboken. 384 pp.Google Scholar
MITTERMEIER, R. A., GIL, P. R., HOFFMANN, M., PILGRIM, J., BROOKS, T., MITTERMEIER, C. G., LAMOREUX, J. & DA FONSECA, G. A. B. 2004. Hotspots revisited. Cemex, Mexico City. 390 pp.Google Scholar
O'HARA, R. B. 2009. How to make models add up – a primer on GLMMs. Annales Zoologici Fennici 46:124–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ORR, A. G. & HAUSER, C. L. 1996. Temporal and spatial patterns of butterfly diversity in a lowland tropical rainforest. Pp. 125–138 in Edwards, D. S., Booth, W. E. & Choy, S. C. (eds.). Tropical rainforest research – current issues. Kluwer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
OTSUKA, K. 2001. A field guide to the butterflies of Borneo and South East Asia. Hornbill, Kota Kinabalu. 224 pp.Google Scholar
PALMER, M. W. 1993. Putting things in even better order – the advantages of canonical correspondence-analysis. Ecology 74:2215–2230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
POLLARD, E. & YATES, T. J. 1995. Monitoring butterflies for ecology and conservation. Chapman and Hall, London. 274 pp.Google Scholar
ROSENZWEIG, M. L. 1995. Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 436 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SCHULZE, C. H., LINSENMAIR, K. E. & FIEDLER, K. 2001. Understory versus canopy: patterns of vertical stratification and diversity among Lepidoptera in a Bornean rain-forest. Plant Ecology 153:133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SCOTT, J. A. 1974. Mate-locating behavior of butterflies. American Midland Naturalist 91:103–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SPARROW, H. R., SISK, T. D., EHRLICH, P. R. & MURPHY, D. D. 1994. Techniques and guidelines for monitoring neotropical butterflies. Conservation Biology 8:800–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SPITZER, K., JAROS, J., HAVELKA, J. & LEPS, J. 1997. Effect of small-scale disturbance on butterfly communities of an Indochinese montane rainforest. Biological Conservation 80:9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TER BRAAK, C. J. F. & ŠMILAUER, P. 2002. CANOCO reference manual and user's guide to Canoco for Windows: software for canonical community ordination (version 4.5). Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, New York. 500 pp.Google Scholar
WALPOLE, M. J. & SHELDON, I. R. 1999. Sampling butterflies in tropical rainforests: an evaluation of a transect walk method. Biological Conservation 87:85–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WHITMORE, T. C. 1991. An introduction to tropical rain-forests. Clarendon, Oxford. 226 pp.Google Scholar
ZUUR, A. F., ELENA, N. I. & ELPHICK, C. S. 2010. A protocol for data exploration to avoid common statistical problems. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 1:1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar