Journal of Ecology and Environment

The Ecological Society of Korea (한국생태학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Differences in Moth Diversity in Two Types of Forest Patches in an Agricultural Landscape in Southern Korea - Effects of Habitat Heterogeneity -

  • Choi, Sei-Woong (Department of Environmental Education, Mokpo National University) ;
  • Park, Marana (Department of Environmental Education, Mokpo National University) ;
  • Kim, Hui (Department of Oriental Medicine Resources, Mokpo National University)
  • Published : 2009.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This research focused on the effects of fragmentation on moth diversity in an agricultural land-scape by comparing moth species richness and abundance between hillocks and young secondary forests. We examined five sites from the southwestern part of South Korea: three sites from hillock forest and two from secondary forest. We collected moths bi-weekly from April to October for a 2-year period (2006-2007) with a UV light trap that usually attracts moths within 30 meters. Tree species richness and abundance in $20m{\times}20m$ plots at each moth sampling site showed a substantial difference in tree diversity between the two types of forest habitats. The total abundance and richness of moth species were higher in secondary forests (541 species with 4,998 individuals) than in hillock forests (423 species with 3,913 individuals), irrespective of the distance among the sites. An ordination analysis with NMDS showed that habitat is the most important factor of grouping sites. The food preferences of the dominant moth species i,n each habitat were closely related to the habitat type.

Keywords

References

  1. Beck J, Linsemnair KE. 2006. Feasibility of light-trapping in community research on moths; attraction radius oflight, completeness of samples, nightly flight times and seasonality of Southeast-Asian hawkmoths (Lepidoptera; Sphingidae). J Res tepid 39: 18-37
  2. Benton TG, Vickery JA, Wilson JD. 2003. Farmland biodiversity; is habitat heterogeneity the key? Trends Ecol Evol 18: 182-188 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(03)00011-9
  3. Colwell RK. 2006. EstimateS: Statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 8.0. User's Guide and application published at: http://purl.oclc.org/estimates
  4. Cunningham SA, Floyd RE, Weir TA. 2005. Do Eucalyptus plantations host an insect community similar to remnant Eucalyptus forest? Aust Ecol 30: 103-117 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2005.01429.x
  5. Duelli P. 1997. Biodiversity evaluation in agricultural landscapes: An approach at two different scales. Agric Ecosyst Environ 62: 81-91 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(96)01143-7
  6. Ewers RM, Didham RK. 2006. Confounding factors in the detection of species responses to habitat fragmentation. Biol Rev 81: 117-142 https://doi.org/10.1017/S1464793105006949
  7. Gaston KJ. 1988. Patterns in the local and regional dynamics of moth populations. Oikos 53: 49-57 https://doi.org/10.2307/3565662
  8. Gotelli NJ, Colwell RK. 2001. Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecol Lett 4:. 379-391 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1461-0248.2001.00230.x
  9. Hamb$\ddot{a}$ck PA, Summerville KS, Steffan-Dewenter I, Krauss J, Englund G, Crist TO. 2007. Habitat specialization, body size, and family identity explain lepidopteran density-area relationships in a crosscontinental comparison. PNAS 104: 8368-8373 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0611462104
  10. Hole DG, Perkins AJ, Wilson JD, Alexander IH, Grice PV, Evans AD. 2005. Does organic farming benefit biodiversity? Biol Conserv 122: 113-130 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2004.07.018
  11. Inoue T. 2003. Chronosequential change in a butterfly community after clear-cutting of deciduous forests in a cool temperate region of central Japan. Entomol Sci 6: 151-163 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1343-8786.2003.00022.x
  12. Ishii M. 1996. Species diversity of butterfly communities in different environment of forests in southern Osaka. In Decline and Conservation of Butterflies in Japan. Vol. IV. (Tanaka B, Arita Y. eds.). The Lepidopterological Society of Japan, Osaka, pp. 63-75. (in Japanese with English summary)
  13. Kitching RL, Orr AG, Thalib L, Mitchell H, Hopkins MS, Graham AW. 2000. Moth assemblages as indicators of environmental quality in remnants of upland Australian rain forest. J Appl Ecol 37: 284297
  14. Kwaiser KS, Hendrix SD. 2008. Diversity and abundance of bees (Hymenoptera: Apiforrnes) in native and ruderal grasslands of agriculturally dominated landscape. Agric Ecosyst Environ 124: 200204
  15. McCune B, Grace JB. 2002. Analysis of Ecological Communities. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, OR. 300pp
  16. McCune B, Mefford MJ. 2006. PC-ORD. Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data, Version 5.12. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, OR
  17. Magurran AE. 2003. Measuring Biological Diversity. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA. 256 pp
  18. Natuhara Y, Imai C, Takahashi M. 1999. Pattern of land mosaics affecting butterfly assemblage at Mt. Ikoma, Osaka, Japan. Ecol Res 14: 105-118 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1703.1999.00287.x
  19. Ohwaki A, Nakajima K, Tanabe S-1. 2007. Butterfly assemblages in a traditional agricultural landscape: importance of secondary forests for conserving diversity, life history specialists and endemics. Biodiversity Conserv 16: 1521-1539 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-006-9042-9
  20. Ricketts TH, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR, Fay JP. 2001. Countryside biogeography of moths in a fragmented landscape: biodiversity in native and agricultural habitats. Conserv Bioi 15: 378-388 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.015002378.x
  21. Scobie MJ. 1999. Geometrid Moths of the World. A Catalogue, Volumes 1, 2. The Natural History Museum, London
  22. Senior K. 2005. Rescue efforts for the Satoyama. Front Ecol Environ 3: 68 https://doi.org/10.2307/3868498
  23. Sohn JC. 2006. Pocket Atlas of Caterpillars. Slow & Steady, Seoul. (in Korean)
  24. SPSS Inc. 2006. SPSS-PC for Windows, ver. 14.0. SPSS Inc., Chicago. Summerville KS, Ritter LM, Crist TO. 2004. Forest moth taxa as indicators of lepidopteran richness and habitat disturbance: a preliminary assessment. Biol Conserv 116: 9-18 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(03)00168-X
  25. Summerville KS, Ritter LM, Crist TO. 2004. Forest moth taxa as indicators of lepidopteran richness and habitat disturbance: a preliminary assessment. Biol Conserv 116: 9-18 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(03)00168-X
  26. Sugi S. 1987. Larvae of Larger Moths in Japan. Kodansha, Tokyo
  27. Takeuchi K, Brown RD, Washitani I, Tsunekawa A, Yokohari M. 2003. Satoyama. The Traditional Rural Landscape of Japan. Springer, Tokyo
  28. Tanaka B. 1988. A method of environmental evaluation by means of faunal composition of butterflies. Spec Bull Lepid Soc Japan 6:527-566. (in Japanese with English summary)
  29. Teramoto N. 1993. Catalogue of host plants of Lepidopterous insects in Japan (Fagaceae). Bull Shiga Pref Agric Exp Stu Extra 1: 1185. (in Japanese)
  30. Tscharntke T, Steffan-Dewenter I, Kruess A, Thies C. 2002. Characteristics of insect populations on habitat fragments: A mini review. Ecol Res 17: 229-239 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1703.2002.00482.x
  31. Tscharntke T, Klein AM, Kruess A, Steffan-Dewenter I, Thies C. 2005. Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity - ecosystem service management. Ecol Lett 8: 857-874 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00782.x
  32. Usher MB, Keiller SWJ. 1998. The macrolepidoptera of farm woodlands:determinants of diversity and community structure. Biodiversity Conserv 7: 725-748 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008836302193
  33. Washitani I. 2001. Traditional sustainable ecosystem 'Satoyama' and biodiversity crisis in Japan: conservation ecological perspective, Global Environ Res 5: 119-133
  34. Weibull A-C, Bengtsson J, Nohlgren E. 2000. Diversity of butterflies in the agricultural landscape: the role of farming system and landscape heterogeneity. Ecography 23: 743-750 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0587.2000.230611.x
  35. Weibull A-C, $\ddot{O}$stman $\ddot{O}$, Granqvist $\AA$ 2003. Species richness in agroecosystems: the effect of landscape, habitat and farm management. Biodiversity Conserv 12: 1335-1355 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023617117780
  36. Whittaker RH. 1972. Evolution and measurement of species diversity. Taxon 21: 213-251 https://doi.org/10.2307/1218190

Cited by

  1. Different seasonal feeding activity of diverse herbivores in two temperate forests vol.44, pp.6, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-5967.12079