4.2 Article

Mobility and microhabitat utilization in a flightless wetland grasshopper, Chorthippus montanus (Charpentier, 1825)

Journal

JOURNAL OF INSECT CONSERVATION
Volume 16, Issue 3, Pages 379-390

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10841-011-9423-6

Keywords

Dispersal; Habitat preferences; Mark-recapture; Microhabitat use; Orthoptera; Wetland conservation

Funding

  1. Forschungsinitiative Rheinland-Pfalz

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Wetlands are among the most threatened habitat types on our planet. Their decline will probably even intensify under climate change. Many biota are strongly dependent on wetlands, including a large number of invertebrate species. The populations of such hygrophilous species become increasingly disconnected due to the ongoing fragmentation of their habitats. This is particularly true for species with reduced dispersal capacities, such as flightless insects. We studied mobility, population size and microhabitat utilization in a population of an endangered grasshopper species, the Water-meadow Grasshopper, . Our mark-recapture study revealed that the cumulative movement distance of the adults was on average 23.5 m with a maximum of 104 m. The microhabitat analysis showed that both sexes of preferred warmer patches with greater radiation than measured at control sites. Niche overlap among sexes was stronger than expected by chance, while niche overlap between insects and controls showed the opposite pattern. Our results suggest that is strongly restricted to its habitat and is probably not able to cross larger distances through unsuitable vegetation. Hence, we assume that the populations of this flightless insect species are strongly isolated. However, the effect of the rare macropterous morph of on gene flow remains unknown. Wetland restoration is crucial to reconnect the existing wetland patches in Central Europe and thereby reduce the negative effects of habitat fragmentation on wetland species.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available