Search

Asynchrony in population abundance can buffer the effects of environmental change leading to greater community and ecosystem stability. Both environmental (abiotic) drivers and species functional (biotic) traits can influence population dynamics leading to asynchrony. However, empirical evidence linking dissimilarity in species traits to abundance asynchrony is limited, especially for understudied taxa such as insects. To fill this knowledge gap, we explored the relationship between pairwise species trait dissimilarity and asynchrony in interannual abundance change between pairs of species for 422 moth, butterfly, and bumblebee species in Great Britain. We also explored patterns differentiating traits that we assumed to capture 'sensitivity to environmental variables' (such as body mass), and traits that may reflect 'diversity in exposure' to environmental conditions and lead to niche partitioning (for example, habitat uses, and intra‐annual emergence periods). As expected, species trait dissimilarity calculated overall and for many individual traits representing response and exposure was positively correlated with asynchrony in all three insect groups. We found that 'exposure' traits, especially those relating to the phenology of species, had the strongest relationship with abundance asynchrony from all tested traits. Positive relationships were not simply due to shared evolutionary history leading to similar life‐history strategies: detected effects remained significant for most traits after accounting for phylogenetic relationships within models. Our results provide empirical support that dissimilarity in traits linked to species exposure and sensitivity to the environment could be important for temporal dissimilarity in insect abundance. Hence, we suggest that general trait diversity, but especially diversity in 'exposure' traits, could play a significant role in the resilience of insect communities to short‐term environmental perturbations through driving asynchrony between species abundances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Insects provide key ecosystem services for our sustainable future, which rely upon effective conservation policies to protect insect biodiversity. To date, however, we still do not know how effective current conservation policies are for protecting insect biodiversity, opening up the possibility that policies are unfit-for-purpose. Given the considerable debate and public awareness on the potential global decline of insect species, it is important to understand whether or not current policies can protect insect biodiversity. Here, we used IUCN listing of species status and developed a quantitative framework to analyse the potential effectiveness and coverage of current conservation policies pertaining to insect biodiversity in the UK and Ireland. We contrasted this against coverage for a well-known group – mammals – as a benchmark, to find that while the vast majority of the UK mammalian species in the European IUCN red list are directly protected by current policies, insects remain largely unprotected. Moreover, for those insect species that are explicitly protected by current policies, there is a taxonomic bias whereby the majority (>50%) of insect species are Lepidopterans (moths and butterflies), while a minority are Coleopterans (beetles), and none are Hymenopterans (bees, ants, wasps). Similar trends were observed in the UK priority biodiversity lists. Based on our data, we conclude that current biodiversity policies in the UK and Ireland have significant gaps in their protection of insect biodiversity and, there is a taxonomic bias that may skew some conservation efforts toward butterflies and moths. We anticipate that our findings are likely to occur worldwide, highlighting the need for more directive policies to manage and protect insect biodiversity for the sustainability of ecosystem services. • UK policies show biases toward Lepidoptera over other large insect orders. • Policy protection of mammals shows greater uniformity between orders than insects. • Policies in Ireland lack protection for any insect species. • UK priority lists do not prioritise all insects assessed as at risk of extinction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Britain, most butterfly species reach the limit of their range due to climate. Such species are the ones most likely to show rapid adaptations to climate change. There are indications that several butterfly species are adapting and that these insects make good indicators of the likely effects of climate change on other animals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the last 150 years butterflies have declined rapidly in both distribution and abundance in Britain. The majority of species declines can be linked with widespread habitat destruction that has occurred over the same period. The resulting concern for their conservation has provided many examples of attempts at restoration, most of which have been unsuccessful. The most common reasons for failure appear to be unsuitability of the habitat or lack of knowledge of the species' requirements, but in many cases the recording of the attempt is inadequate for any assessment to be made. Case studies of recent restoration efforts for four butterfly species are used to illustrate that successful restoration depends on detailed study of the species[SUP1] ecology and--particularly--habitat requirements, the ability and the resources to manage the habitat to provide those requirements, and a formal scientific approach that maximizes the information gained from the restoration process. As more land in Britain is taken out of intensive agricultural use, opportunities will increase for restoration programs. Prominent and popular species indicative of particular habitats can act as a focus for restoration of the habitat as a whole. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The heath fritillary butterfly, Mellicta athalia, is an endangered species in Britain and has been the subject of a detailed study in 1980–85. M. athalia is found in three types of habitat in which it uses a range of different host-plants: (i) newly cleared woodland where its sole host is Melampyrum pratense; (ii) rough, unimproved grassland where its main, primary hosts are Plantago lanceolata and Veronica chamaedrys; (iii) sheltered heathland where its main, primary host is Melampyrum pratense. Eggs are laid in large batches on plants close to the ground, chiefly in open, sunny situations. In woodland habitats some eggs are laid in fairly shady situations, but always close to sunny clearings. A large range of host-plants was observed in the field, but the range used by adult females was rather narrower than that of the larvae. One secondary host, Digitalis purpurea, which was commonly used by post-diapause larvae in heathland habitats, was apparently never used by egg-laying females. In captivity, pre-diapause larvae failed to survive on this plant but post-diapause larvae grew as quickly on it as on other hosts. Considerable variation was observed in the phenology of M. athalia between both years and regions. In the predominantly grassland habitats in Cornwall, the adult population peaked 2–3 weeks earlier than in the woodland habitats in Kent. In both regions a close relationship was found between the date of the peak flight period and the temperature during April and May when the post-diapause larvae were developing. The regional difference in phenology was therefore thought to be caused by climatic differences, but a habitat effect could not be ruled out. The host selection and phenology of M. athalia in the different habitats and regions are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]