Distance sampling and the challenge of monitoring butterfly populations

1. Abundance indices generated by the UK Butterfly Monitoring Scheme (UKBMS) have been influential in informing our understanding of environmental change and highlighting UK conservation priorities. Here, we critically evaluate the standard ‘Pollard Walk’ methodology employed by the UKBMS. 2. We consider the systematic sampling biases among different butterfly species and biotopes using distance sampling. We collected over 5000 observations on 17 species using distance sampling at 13 study sites in England and Wales. We fitted detection functions to explore variation in detectability among species and sites. 3. Our results suggest that around one-third of individual butterflies in the Pollard Walk box were missed. However, detectability varies markedly among species and sites. We provide the first species-specific estimates of detectability for converting Pollard Walk data into population densities. A few species show no drop off in detectability and most require only a modest correction factor, but for the least detectable species, we estimate that 3/4 of individuals are not recorded. 4. Much of the variation among sites is explained by substantially higher detectability among sites in England than in Wales, which had different recorders. Biological traits have only limited explanatory power in distinguishing detectable vs undetectable species. 5. The variation in detectability is small compared with the variation in true abundance, such that population density estimates from the Pollard Walk are highly correlated with those derived from distance sampling. 6. These results are used to evaluate the robustness of the Pollard Walk for comparisons of abundance across species, across sites and over time. UKBMS data provide a good reflection of relative abundance for most species and of large-scale trends in abundance. We also consider the practicalities of applying distance sampling to butterfly monitoring in general. Distance sampling is a valuable tool for quantifying bias and imprecision and has a role in surveying species of conservation concern, but is not viable as a wholesale replacement for simpler methods for large-scale monitoring of multispecies butterfly communities by volunteer recorders.

[1]  E. Pollard,et al.  Monitoring Butterflies for Ecology and Conservation: The British Butterfly Monitoring Scheme , 1994 .

[2]  R. Dennis,et al.  When is a habitat not a habitat? Dramatic resource use changes under differing weather conditions for the butterfly Plebejus argus , 2006 .

[3]  Roger L. H. Dennis,et al.  The effects of visual apparency on bias in butterfly recording and monitoring , 2006 .

[4]  J. Greenwood,et al.  Use of distance sampling to improve estimates of national population sizes for common and widespread breeding birds in the UK , 2008 .

[5]  T. Hovestadt,et al.  Evidence based conservation of butterflies , 2011, Journal of Insect Conservation.

[6]  T. Brereton,et al.  The state of butterflies in Britain and Ireland , 2006 .

[7]  P. Henry,et al.  Butterfly monitoring methods: the ideal and the real world , 2008 .

[8]  T. Brereton,et al.  Butterfly abundance in a warming climate: patterns in space and time are not congruent , 2011, Journal of Insect Conservation.

[9]  T. Brereton,et al.  United Kingdom Butterfly Monitoring Scheme annual report 2007 , 2010 .

[10]  Gavin B. Stewart,et al.  Meta-analysis in applied ecology , 2010, Biology Letters.

[11]  Josef Settele,et al.  Butterfly monitoring in Europe: methods, applications and perspectives , 2008, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[12]  Brian J. McGill,et al.  A Renaissance in the Study of Abundance , 2006, Science.

[13]  Len Thomas,et al.  Distance software: design and analysis of distance sampling surveys for estimating population size , 2009, The Journal of applied ecology.

[14]  P. Milberg,et al.  Monitoring of butterflies in semi-natural grasslands: diurnal variation and weather effects , 2009, Journal of Insect Conservation.

[15]  D. Roy,et al.  Butterfly numbers and weather: predicting historical trends in abundance and the future effects of climate change , 2001 .

[16]  C. Thomas,et al.  The status of the health fritillary butterfly Mellicta athalia Rott. in Britain , 1984 .

[17]  J. Greenwood,et al.  Comparative Losses of British Butterflies, Birds, and Plants and the Global Extinction Crisis , 2004, Science.

[18]  C. Thomas,et al.  Changing habitat associations of a thermally constrained species, the silver-spotted skipper butterfly, in response to climate warming. , 2006, The Journal of animal ecology.

[19]  A. Dobson.  Monitoring global rates of biodiversity change: challenges that arise in meeting the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 2010 goals , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[20]  D. Moss,et al.  Spatial synchrony and asynchrony in butterfly population dynamics , 1996 .

[21]  David B. Roy,et al.  Phenology of British butterflies and climate change , 2000 .

[22]  E. Pollard.  A method of assessing the abundance of butterflies in Monks Wood National Nature Reserve in 1973 , 1975 .

[23]  D. Noble,et al.  Developing and launching a wider countryside butterfly survey across the United Kingdom , 2011, Journal of Insect Conservation.

[24]  J. A. Thomas.  Monitoring change in the abundance and distribution of insects using butterflies and other indicator groups , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[25]  J. Thomas,et al.  A quick method for estimating butterfly numbers during surveys , 1983 .

[26]  T. Brereton,et al.  Changes in habitat specificity of species at their climatic range boundaries. , 2009, Ecology letters.

[27]  S. Buckland.  Introduction to distance sampling : estimating abundance of biological populations , 2001 .

[28]  M. Warren,et al.  Annual and long-term changes in a popilation of the wood white butterfly Leptidea sinapis , 1986 .

[29]  J. Randers,et al.  The Living Planet Index: using species population time series to track trends in biodiversity , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[30]  M. Boyce,et al.  Line transect sampling of Karner blue butterflies ( Lycaeides melissa samuelis) , 1998, Environmental and Ecological Statistics.

[31]  D. Boughton,et al.  The Dispersal System of a Butterfly: A Test of Source‐Sink Theory Suggests the Intermediate‐Scale Hypothesis , 2000, The American Naturalist.

[32]  Matthew J. R. Cowley,et al.  Density–distribution relationships in British butterflies. I. The effect of mobility and spatial scale , 2001 .

[33]  R. Dennis.  Butterfly habitats, broad‐scale biotope affiliations, and structural exploitation of vegetation at finer scales: the matrix revisited , 2004 .

[34]  M. Kéry,et al.  Species richness estimation and determinants of species detectability in butterfly monitoring programmes , 2007 .

[35]  Peter Rothery,et al.  Reduced‐effort schemes for monitoring butterfly populations , 2007 .

[36]  M. Morris,et al.  Monitoring butterflies for ecology and conservation , 1993 .

[37]  T. Shreeve,et al.  How accurate are single site transect data for monitoring butterfly trends? Spatial and temporal issues identified in monitoring Lasiommata megera , 2008, Journal of Insect Conservation.

[38]  A. F. Powell,et al.  Status of the regal fritillary (Speyeria idalia) and effects of fire management on its abundance in northeastern Kansas, USA , 2007, Journal of Insect Conservation.

[39]  T. Brereton,et al.  The changing status of the Chalkhill Blue butterfly Polyommatus coridon in the UK: the impacts of conservation policies and environmental factors , 2008, Journal of Insect Conservation.

[40]  David W. Macdonald,et al.  The identification of 100 ecological questions of high policy relevance in the UK , 2006 .

[41]  W. Sutherland,et al.  The need for evidence-based conservation. , 2004, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[42]  E. Pollard.  A method for assessing changes in the abundance of butterflies , 1977 .

[43]  J. K. Hill,et al.  Rapid responses of British butterflies to opposing forces of climate and habitat change , 2001, Nature.

[44]  Peter Rothery,et al.  Application of generalized additive models to butterfly transect count data , 2001 .

[45]  J. Thomas.  Rare species conservation: case studies of European butterflies , 1991 .

[46]  Kevin Gross,et al.  Determining Optimal Population Monitoring for Rare Butterflies , 2008, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[47]  V. Kapos,et al.  Biodiversity trends in Europe: development and testing of a species trend indicator for evaluating progress towards the 2010 target , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.