Korean journal of applied entomology (한국응용곤충학회지)

Korean Society of Applied Entomology (한국응용곤충학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Metapopulation Dynamics of the Oriental Long-tailed Swallow Sericinus montela (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) in Korea

한국산 꼬리명주나비의 메타개체군 동태

  • Kim, Do-Sung (School of Applied Biosciences, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Kwon, Yong-Jung (School of Applied Biosciences, Kyungpook National University)
  • 김도성 (경북대학교 응용생명과학부 농생물학과) ;
  • 권용정 (경북대학교 응용생명과학부 농생물학과)
  • Received : 2010.09.09
  • Accepted : 2010.11.02
  • Published : 2010.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The loss of natural habitats and their fragmentation caused by human activities pose a great threat to biodiversity worldwide, reducing animal population to small, fragmented patches of natural habitat. In this paper, a metapopulation dynamics of Sericinus montela koreanus, a species of butterfly, was studied for two years by mark-release-recapture (MRR) techiques in the Musimcheon, Cheongju Korea. 2,749 individuals (males: 2,295, females: 454) were marked and released, with 343 individuals (12.5%) recaptured during the MRR experiment. Capture sex ratio and recapture sex ratios was both consistently male-biased. The Jolly-Seber model was used to estimate daily metapopulation size, survival rates, addition rate, and accidental deaths. We urge conservation biologists to consider the local population dynamics of species for the management of metapopulations in fragmented landscapes. In the case of the S. montela koreanus, continuing site protection is essential.

세계적으로 인간 활동 따른 서식지의 소실과 단절은 생물다양성을 떨어뜨리는 주요원인이며 서식지의 소형화와 세분화는 개체군의 크기를 감소시키고 있다. 본 연구는 꼬리명주나비를 표지-방사-재포획법(MRR 방법)을 이용하여 메타개체군 동태를 파악하였다. 그 결과 2,749 개체(암컷-2295, 수컷-454)가 포획되었으며 이중 343개체(12.8%)가 재포획되었다. 포획된 암수 비율에서는 수컷이 주를 이루는 것으로 나타났다. Jolly-Seber의 방법으로 일일메타개체군의 크기, 생존율, 추가율, 사망률을 추정하였다. 저자들은 보전생물학자들에게 단절된 경관에서 국지적 메타개체군의 관리와 보전을 강조하고자 하며, 특히 한국산 꼬리명주나비의 경우 지속적인 서식지 보전이 필요하다.

Keywords

References

  1. Baguette, M.G., M.S. Petit, and N. Schtickzelle. 2003. Effect of habitat fragmentation on dispersal in the butterfly Priclissiana eunomia. Compptes Rendus Biologies. 326: 200-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1631-0691(03)00058-1
  2. Caughley, G. 1994. Directions in conservation biology. J. Anim. Ecol. 63: 215-244. https://doi.org/10.2307/5542
  3. Chris, A.M., van Swaay and M.S. Warren. 2006. Prime butterfly areas of Europe: an initial selection of priority sites for conservation. Journal of Insect Conservation. 10: 5-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-005-7548-1
  4. Cormack, R.M. 1968. Estimates of survival from the sighting of marked animals. Biometrika. 51: 429-438.
  5. Ehrlich P.R. and P.H. Raven. 1964. Butterflies and plants: A study in coevolution. Evolution. 18: 586-608. https://doi.org/10.2307/2406212
  6. Erhardt, A. and J.A. Thomas. 1991 Lepidoptera as indicators of changes in the semi-natural grasslands of lowland and upland Europe. In: Collins, N.M. and J. A. Thomas (eds). The Conservation of Insects and their Habitats. Academic Press. London. pp. 213-237.
  7. Fahrig, L. 2003. Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annual Reviews of Ecology and Systematics. 34: 487-515. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132419
  8. Fahrig, L. and G. Merriam. 1994. Conservation of fragmented population. Cons. Biol. 8: 50-59. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1994.08010050.x
  9. Fischer, K., B. Beinlich and H. Plachter. 1999. Population structure, mobility and habitat preferences of the violet copper Lycaena helle (Lepidiptera: Lycaeindae) in Western Germany: implication for conservation.
  10. Fowles, A.P. and R.G. Simth. 2006. Mapping the gabitat quality of patch networks for the march fritillary Euphydryas aurinia (Rottemburg, 1775) (Lepidiptera, Nymphalidae) in Wales. Journal of Insect Conservation. 10: 161-177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-006-6291-6
  11. Fred, M.S. and J.E. Brommer 2003. Influence of habitat quality and patch size on occupancy and persistence in two population of the Apollo butterfly (Parnassius apollo). Journal of insect Conservation. 7: 85-98. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025522603446
  12. Freitas, A.V.L. and R.R. Ramos. 2001. Population biology of Parides anchises nephalion(Papilionidae) in a coastal site in Southeast Brazal. Braz. J. Biol. 61: 623-630. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-69842001000400011
  13. Grundea, R., N.B. Pavlovic and C.L. Sulzman. 1998. Habit use by the endangered Karner blue butterfly in oak woodlands: the influence of colnony cover. Biological Conservation. 85: 47-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(97)00165-1
  14. Gutierrez, D., C.D. Thomas and J. Leon-Cortes. 1999. Dispersal, distribution, patch network and metapopulation dynamics of the dingy skipper butterfly(Erynnis tages). Oecologia. 121: 506-517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004420050957
  15. Hanski, I. 1999. Metapopulation ecology. Oxford University Press. New York.
  16. Hanski, I. and M. E. Gilpin. 1997. Case studies. Pages 353-357. in Hanski, I. and M.E. Gilpin. editors. Metapopulation biology: ecology, Genetics, and evolution. Academic Press. San Diego, California.
  17. Hanski, I. and E. Meyke. 2005. Large-scale dynamics of the Glanville fritillary butterfly: landscape structure, population processes, and weather. Ann. Zoll. Fennici. 42: 379-395.
  18. Hanski, I., A. Moilanen and M. Gyllenberg 1996 Minimum viable metapopulation size. American Naturalist. 147: 527-541. https://doi.org/10.1086/285864
  19. Hunter, M.L. 2001. Fundamentals of conservation Biology. Blackwell Science, Inc. Cambridag, MA.
  20. Jolly, G.M. 1965. Explicit estimates from capture-recapture data with both death and immigration-stochastic model. Biometrika. 52: 225-247. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/52.1-2.225
  21. Kim, Y.S. 2002. Illustrated book of Korean butterflies in color. Kyohaksa.
  22. McLaughlin, J.F., J.J. Hellmann, C.L. Boggs and P.R. Ehrlich. 2002. The route to extinction: population dynamics of a threatened butterfly. Oecologia. 132: 538-548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-002-0997-2
  23. Meffe, G.K. and C.R. Carrol. 1997. Principles of conservation biology. Sinauer Assiciartes, Ins., Sundrerland Massachusetts.
  24. New, T.R. 1997. Butterfly conservation. Oxford University Press.
  25. Parmesan, C. 2003. Butterflies as bioindicators for climate change effects. pp. 541-559. In eds. Boggs, S. L., Watt W. B. and Ehrlich P. R. Butterflies: Ecology and evolution taking flight. The University of Chicago.
  26. Parmesan, C., N. Ryrholm, C. Stefanescu, J.K. Hill, C.D. Thomas, H. Descimon, B. Huntley, L. Kaila, J. Kullberg, T. Tammaur, W.J. Tennent, J.A. Thomas and M. warren. 1999. Poleward shifts in geographical ranges of butterfly species associated with regional warming. Nature. 399: 579-583. https://doi.org/10.1038/21181
  27. Sawchik, J., M. Dufrene and P. Lebrun. 2003. Estimation of habitat quality based on plant community, and eddects of isolation in a network of butterfly habitat patches. Acta Oecologica 24: 25-33 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1146-609X(02)00005-X
  28. Simone K.H. and E. Strand. 2006. Adaptive patch searching strategies in fragmented landscapes. Evolutionary Ecology. 20: 113-130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10682-005-5378-y
  29. Taylor, P.D., F.K. Henein and G. Merriam. 1993. Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos. 68: 571-573. https://doi.org/10.2307/3544927
  30. Van Swaay, C.A.M. and M.S. Warren. 1999. Rad data book of European butterflies. Council of Europe publishing. Nature and Environment. No. 99. Strasbourg.
  31. Wilcox, B.A. and D.D. Murphy. 1985. Conservation strategy: the effects of fragmentation on extinction. Am. Nat. 125: 897-887.

Cited by

  1. Temperature-Dependent Development of the Swallowtail Butterfly, Sericinus montela Gray vol.29, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.7852/ijie.2014.29.2.153
  2. The Butterfly Community in Is. Guleopdo, Korea and the Dominance of the Endangered Species Argynnis nerippe vol.50, pp.2, 2011, https://doi.org/10.5656/KSAE.2011.04.0.16
  3. The Analysis and Conservation of Patch Network of Endangered Butterfly Parnassius bremeri(Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) in Fragmented Landscapes vol.51, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.5656/KSAE.2012.01.1.064
  4. Effects of Host plant, Nectar plant and Vegetation types on Butterfly Communities vol.51, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.5656/KSAE.2012.08.0.023