Spring Comes Slowly to the East Coast

Harry LeGrand, veteran lep guru and all-round naturalist from NC, posted to carolinaleps and NABA-chat recently just how far behind the East Coast is for the 2013 flight season:

Here in North Carolina, in a warm winter/spring like in 2012, serious butterflying can be underway by late February or early March. In a normal spring, things start popping here (5 or more species in a few hours) by mid-March. This year has seen a very cold period from mid-February to now, and it will continue into early April. Basically, spring hasn’t truly come to NC yet, and it is March 22!  The Northeast and Midwest keep getting pummeled by snow.

So, I was curious to see how butterfly records in NC this year , so far, compared to the quite early 2012.

2013 — Jan. 1 – Mar. 20 = 84 records in NC (reported by all folks on carolinaleps listserve)
2012 — Jan. 1 – Mar. 20 = 351 records.

So, this roughly means that there were 4.17 times as many butterflies flying last year than this year, as of this date! Alternatively, there have been 24% the number of butterfly records in 2013 than there were at this time last year.  No surprise to me!

If you have seen no butterflies yet, or just a couple, like me, you aren’t alone. I guess things are averaging maybe 10-14 days late this year — certainly at least a week late.

 

Barbara Kingsolver and Butterflies | Audubon Magazine

What would happen if monarch butterflies suddenly appeared at the wrong overwintering site? That’s the scenario Barbara Kingsolver paints in her captivating new novel, Flight Behavior, in which she explores why climate change is such a divisive issue.

Barbara Kingsolver and Butterflies | Audubon Magazine.

 

 

 

NPS Climate Change Intern Studies Indiana Dunes Karner Blue

Through its George Melendez Wright Climate Change Interns and Fellows program, the National Park Service supports student research on climate change issues.  Tatanya Liakhova is studying Karner Blues (from the NPS web site):

Preserving the Karner Blue Butterfly in Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore

Over the summer, Tatyana Liakhova worked with NPS and USGS scientists in hopes of preserving populations of the federally endangered butterfly species called Karner Blue. As a GMW Intern, she was not only able to watch Karner Blue grow from a tiny egg to a full grown adult, but also worked on helping to prevent the extinction of these beautiful butterflies.

Tatyana Liakhova is working to prevent the extinction of the Karner Blue Butterfly. NPS photo.

Ms. Liakhova collected field data on temperature variations, slope aspect, canopy cover, and shading in order to model and predict the specific effects of climate change on the lifecycle of the Karner.

Based on the Karner’s response to the documented temperature variations, it will be possible to recreate the most suitable conditions in order to stop further population loss. Another important part of her internship was to educate the public about climate change research and the importance of diversity preservation at Indiana Dunes by creating field signs and information for the park’s educational websites.

“Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore is a fascinating place teeming with diverse plant and animal life,” says Ms. Liakhova. “Overall, knowledge gained through this internship has broadened my understanding about climate change and the ways to fight it. It has solidified my decision to become an environmental chemist in hopes of preventing further climate change.”

 

Extreme Weather Threatens UK Butterfly Extinction

A news report from the International Business Times:

By HANNAH OSBORNE

November 1, 2012 1:55 PM GMT

Extreme weather could eventually lead to the extinction of butterfly populations in the UK because they take so long to recover after a drought.

The sensitivity and recovery of UK butterflies following extreme drought is affected by the area and fragmentation of habitat types, research by NERC Centre for Ecology & Hydrology has found.

With more droughts during summer months predicted, scientists believe butterflies face eventual extinction.

Co-author Dr David Roy, from the centre, said: “The delayed recovery of butterfly populations is worrying given that severe summer droughts are expected to become common in some areas of the UK, for example, south east England.

“If populations don’t recover by the time the next drought hits, they may face gradual erosion until local extinction.”

The scientists looked at data on the Ringlet butterfly collected between 1990 and 1999; the period that spanned a severe drought in 1995.

They found that there were marked declines in insect species after the 1995 drought. The Ringlet butterfly populations crashed severely in regions that were drier.

Researchers also found habitat structures in the wider areas influenced population, with populations in larger and connected patches of woodland recovering faster.

Lead author Dr Tom Oliver said, “Most ecological climate change studies focus on species’ responses to gradual temperature rise, but it may be that extreme weather will actually have the greatest impact on our wildlife.

“We have provided the first evidence that species responses to extreme events may be affected by the habitat structure in the wider countryside.”

Dr Tom Brereton, from Butterfly Conservation and study co-author, added: “Our results suggest that landscape-scale conservation projects are vital in helping species to recover from extreme events expected under climate change.

“However, conversely, if we do nothing, the high levels of habitat fragmentation will mean species are more susceptible.”

There are only around 60 species of butterfly that are regularly seen in the UK. As butterflies pollenate plants, their extinction could have a huge impact on the ecosystem.

To leave feedback about this article, e-mail the author: h.osborne@ibtimes.co.uk

To contact the editor, e-mail: editor@ibtimes.co.uk

 

UK Lancashire butterflies still struggling while other UK butterflies thrive

UK Lancashire butterflies still struggling while other UK butterflies thrive

From the Lancashire (UK) Telegraph

 

UK Butterfly Monitoring Scheme

Ran across this interesting web site for UKBMS:

 

Butterflies are uniquely placed amongst British terrestrial insect and other invertebrate groups to act as indicators of the state of the environment, allowing us to assess the impacts of climate change and the progress of government policy initiatives such as the UK Biodiversity Action Plan, agri-environment schemes and site condition monitoring of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs).

Not only are butterflies biologically suitable as indicator species, having rapid lifecycles and, in many cases, high sensitivity to environmental conditions, but the recording and monitoring volunteer networks and datasets built up by Butterfly Conservation (BC) and the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH) enable accurate assessment of their trends.

The United Kingdom Butterfly Monitoring Scheme (UKBMS) is a recently formed merger of the long-running Butterfly Monitoring Scheme (BMS) with Butterfly Conservation’s co-ordination of ‘independent’ transects. You can find out more about the background of these two separate schemes on our Development page.

The UKBMS consists of a network of sites throughout the UK, covering 71 species.

The UKBMS mission is to assess the status and trends of UK butterfly populations for conservation, research and quality of life.

The objectives of the scheme are:

• To maintain and develop a network of transect sites in order to assess and interpret changes in the abundance and status of UK butterflies
• To encourage participation in recording butterfly transects by supporting volunteer recording networks
• To ensure a high level of quality assurance for butterfly transect data by development and promotion of standards, and by applying rigorous data validation and verification procedures
• To secure and manage transect monitoring data and provide access to academia, governments, industry and the public subject to approval.
• To advance knowledge in butterfly ecology through interpretation of transect monitoring data.
• To provide the scientific underpinning for solutions to butterfly conservation issues arising from and habitat and climate change
• To provide the knowledge base, including indicators of change, for government policies addressing environmental issues
• To promote public awareness and understanding of butterflies through communication of the results of the scheme.

Data are collected annually to monitor changes in the abundance of butterflies, using well-established data collection and analysis methodologies.

Results have been published in numberous publications, and you can see the key findings elsewhere on this website.

The UKBMS operates as a partnership between the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH), Butterfly Conservation (BC) and and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) with funding by a multi-agency consortium led by Defra, and including the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW), English Nature (EN), Environment and Heritage Service (EHS), Forestry Commission (FC), the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC), Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department (SEERAD), and Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH).

You can see details of planned developments to the scheme on our Objectives page.

 

EU Releases New Guidelines for Butterfly Conservation

From the EU Research & Innovation Newsdesk:

Researchers in Europe have created a set of new guidelines for the protection of Europe’s most threatened butterfly species. Coordinated by the Butterfly Conservation Europe, the report puts the spotlight on 29 threatened species listed in Council Directive 92/43/EEC, more commonly known as the Habitats Directive. The report is part of the SCALES (‘Securing the conservation of biodiversity across administrative levels and spatial, temporal, and ecological scales’) project, which is backed with EUR 7 million under the Environment Theme of the EU’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7).

All EU Member States must help conserve these species. The report, entitled ‘Dos and don’ts for butterflies of the Habitats Directive of the European Union’ is presented in the journal Nature Conservation; it provides detailed accounts of each species, their habitat requirements and food plants. The dos and don’ts of managing the habits of these species are also included in the report, which offers all the information one needs to understand how to ensure the protection of the butterflies and to meet the global biodiversity targets.

Researchers say almost 10% of Europe’s butterflies are threatened with extinction. According to the European grassland indicator, more than 70% of the abundance of 17 characteristic butterflies has shrunk since the late 1990s. Habitat loss and improper management are responsible for the loss.

Led by the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ) in Germany, the researchers say many habitats are now abandoned from agriculture, becoming overgrown with scrub, while others are too intensively managed. The report offers the information we need to ensure improved management of remaining habitats.

Researchers use butterflies to help determine how habitat change impacts both the environment and populations. Improved management for butterflies will give these and other creatures better survival rates, as well as better wildlife and ultimately human survival rates.

‘Managing habitats in the correct way is the single most important issue affecting the survival of European butterflies,’ says lead author Chris van Swaay of the Dutch Butterfly Conservation. ‘This is the first time that practical information has been brought together to address the issue. We hope the advice will be taken up urgently across Europe to help save these beautiful species from extinction.’

For his part, Klaus Henle of the UFZ says: ‘Biodiversity loss is one of the most important topics facing the future of our planet. Our new open access journal Nature Conservation is intended to make scientific information freely available to help conserve nature and create a healthy world for everyone. The journal aims particularly at facilitating better interaction between scientists and practitioners, and its major goal is to support synergistic interactions among scientists, policymakers, and managers.’

Researchers from Australia, Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan and the United Kingdom make up the SCALES consortium.

 

Overwintering Energy Strategies of Butterflies

Here in the mid-Atlantic area, winter temperatures can fluctuate wildly, from bone-chilling sub-zero weeks that never end to strings of balmy 60-degree days that fool forsythias into bloom.  How do overwintering butterflies cope with these swings, especially when they overwinter as adults or caterpillars that become active during the warm spells and risk losing fat resources to carry them through the rest of the winter?  A PhD thesis by Caroline Williams at the University of Western Ontario gives some clues …

Williams, Caroline M., “Overwintering energetics of Lepidoptera: the effects of winter warming and thermal variability.” (2011). Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. Paper 323.

 

Climate Change Makes Some Interacting Species Drift Apart

European scientists reported recently that climate change is likely to separate some butterfly species from their host plants as their ecological niche is disrupted.  The scenario that Oliver Schweiger (at the German Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research) and his colleagues anticipate is that butterflies and hostplants with slightly different ecological needs that currently coincide will be separated by global climate disruption.

From the researchers’ synopsis:

“We investigate the importance of interacting species for current and potential future species distributions, the influence of their ecological characteristics on projected range shifts when considering or ignoring interacting species, and the consistency of observed relationships across different global change scenarios. Location: Europe. Methods: We developed ecological niche models (generalized linear models) for 36 European butterfly species and their larval host plants based on climate and land-use data. We projected future distributional changes using three integrated global change scenarios for 2080. Observed and projected mismatches in potential butterfly niche space and the niche space of their hosts were first used to assess changing range limitations due to interacting species and then to investigate the importance of different ecological characteristics. Results: Most butterfly species were primarily limited by climate. Species dwelling in warm areas of Europe and tolerant to large variations in moisture conditions were projected to suffer less from global change. However, a gradient from climate to host plant control was apparent, reflecting the range size of the hosts. Future projections indicated increased mismatching of already host-plant-limited butterflies and their hosts. Butterflies that utilize plants with restricted ranges were projected to suffer most from global change. The directions of these relationships were consistent across the scenarios but the level of spatial mismatching of butterflies and their host plants increased with the severity of the scenario. Main conclusions: Future changes in the co-occurrence of interacting species will depend on political and socio-economic development, suggesting that the composition of novel communities due to global change will depend on the way we create our future. A better knowledge of ecological species characteristics can be utilized to project the future fate and potential risk of extinction of interacting species leading to a better understanding of the consequences of changing biotic interactions. This will further enhance our abilities to assess and mitigate potential negative effects on ecosystem functions and services.” Oliver Schweiger, Risto K. Heikkinen, Alexander Harpke, Thomas Hickler, Stefan Klotz, Otakar Kudrna, Ingolf Kühn, Juha Pöyry, Josef Settele, Global Ecology and Biogeography, Special Issue: QUO VADIS, ECOSYSTEM? SCENARIOS AS A TOOL FOR LARGE-SCALE ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH, Volume 21, Issue 1, pages 88–99, January 2012, DOI: 10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00607.x. [Full text]

 

Monarch Watch Update for September

Chip Taylor, Monarch Watch Director, posted the following to a number of lep listservs to update folks on the current migration season:

 

>>Monarch Population Status – September 2011
by Chip Taylor – Director, Monarch Watch

The following is a brief update on the status of the eastern monarch population.

The leading edge of the migration has now reached northern Texas. As many of you know, we attempt to follow the monarch population closely. Based on our experience, and ongoing data analysis of monarch numbers, we offer opinions/projections on what to expect in the near future based on our understanding of how the monarch populations have been affected by patterns of temperature and rainfall in the preceding months.

Late in the spring I started predicting a small migration this fall. In the Premigration Newsletter sent out with the Monarch Watch Tagging Kits, I predicted that overwintering population in Mexico would be similar in size to that of the low populations recorded in 2004 (2.19 hectares) and 2009 (1.92 hectares). It was clear that the monarch numbers in New England and recorded at Cape May would be low this fall, and that the numbers originating in the central region would be slightly better than those of the eastern Dakotas through Wisconsin but still low relative to long term numbers. The New England/Cape May projection appears to be correct as the numbers are down in this region. I was wrong about the central region (Ontario, MI, OH, IN, IL) – fewer monarchs appear to have been produced in this area than I expected. Wisconsin numbers also appear to be down.

The surprise is the eastern Dakotas and western MN. This area seems to be the source of a large number of the monarchs moving through the lower midwest at this time. Nevertheless, the overall numbers are down. But, it gets worse. The migration is just beginning to navigate a 1000 miles of hell – a nearly flowerless/nectarless and waterless expanse of central KS, OK, TX, and NE MX (see Drought Monitor at http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/).

It is too late for rains to change the situation in TX and northern MX. Monarchs will make it to the overwintering sites but their numbers will be significantly reduced by these conditions. My expectation is that that the overwintering numbers will be the lowest ever (previous low 1.92 hectares) and that the arriving butterflies will be in relatively poor shape with low fat reserves. If the average condition (mass) of the overwintering monarchs is lower than average, mortality during the winter could also be high. Other scenarios could include low returning numbers next spring with a reduced reproductive capacity due to low fat reserves. Keep your fingers crossed that there are no winter storms in MX that could make matters worse.

It will be interesting to see how monarchs cope with the lack of nectar and water as they move through TX. Monarchs, like most insects, have hygroreceptors (sense organs that are sensitive to humidity gradients); therefore, when conditions are extremely dry, we might expect monarchs to seek out the darkest and most humid habitats. If this plays out, most monarchs will accumulate in drainages, along rivers, move in an out of forests, and concentrate around other water sources.

As I pointed out in the Premigration Newsletter (and the August Population Status blog article), there is a new reality, or expectation, regarding the size of the overwintering population in MX. It now appears that winter populations will be in the range of 2-6 hectares (down from the long term average of 7.24) with 6 hectares being reached only during the most favorable conditions. In the near term, the average overwintering population will be close to 3 hectares. As we pointed out recently (Brower et al. 2011), the decline is related to the loss of habitat, particularly the rapid adoption of herbicide tolerant (HT) crops. The majority of these crops are planted within the summer (June-August) breeding area for the monarch population. In spite of weed control methods prior to 1996, when HT crops were first introduced, milkweed persisted in these croplands at a low level where they provided an excellent resource for monarchs. With the planting of HT engineered corn and soy followed by the use of glyphosate to control weeds, milkweed has been almost completely eliminated from these crops. At present, the total area of HT crops is larger than that of any state except TX and AK, or about 4 times the state of IL). The decline in the monarch population first became noticeable in 2004 when the percentage of HT corn and soy acreage exceeded 50% of all acreage for these crops.

Low monarch numbers in MX this winter and in the future means that the integrity of the overwintering sites is now more important than ever and that planting milkweeds in gardens and incorporating these plants in restoration projects either as seeds or plugs should receive the highest priority.<<