4.0 Article

Forest eternal? Endemic butterflies of the Bamenda highlands, Cameroon, avoid close-canopy forest

Journal

AFRICAN JOURNAL OF ECOLOGY
Volume 48, Issue 2, Pages 428-437

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2028.2009.01129.x

Keywords

Afromontane landscape; conservation; Lepidoptera; mountain forest history; sparse canopy; West Africa

Categories

Funding

  1. Czech Academy of Sciences [IAA601410709]
  2. Czech Science Foundation [206/08/H044]
  3. Czech Ministry of Education [6007665801]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Gulf of Guinea Highlands, a centre of endemism and high conservation importance, represent the only large mountain system in West and Central Africa. We studied habitat use of three common endemic butterflies Colias electo manengoubensis, Bicyclus anisops and Mylothris jacksoni knutsoni, using time-standardized surveys in four distinct habitats: close-canopy forest, scrub and forest edges, bracken and grasslands. All three species avoided close-canopy forests and bracken; the Colias preferring grassland, whereas Bicyclus and Mylothris scrub and forest edges. Ordination analyses of surrounding habitats indicated that all three taxa required heterogeneous landscape mosaics. We argue that the life history traits of taxa with limited geographic distribution may reflect past habitat conditions within their ranges, and that these habitat preferences can indicate the continuous existence of mosaic of forest and nonforest habitats in the West African mountains. Such a landscape was probably maintained by climatic fluctuation and large herbivores, further modified by human impact. This conclusion is consistent with the palaeoenvironmental record and with the requirements of Afromontane endemics from other groups. Recent conservation activities focus on patches of continuous forests, but the mosaic landscapes are no less threatened by intensive agriculture, and should be included to protected areas.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available