TY - JOUR T1 - Dung beetle movements at two spatial scales JF - Oikos Y1 - 2000 A1 - Roslin, T. SP - 323 EP - 335 KW - APHODIUS SCARABAEIDAE KW - butterfly KW - colonization KW - euphydryas-editha-bayensis KW - long-distance dispersal KW - melitaea-cinxia KW - metapopulation structure KW - migration KW - patch size KW - proclossiana-eunomia lepidoptera KW - resource utilization AB - To understand the dynamics of spatially structured populations, we need to know the level of movements at different spatial scales. This paper reports on Aphodius dung beetle movements at two scales: movements between dung pats within pastures, and movements between pastures. First, I test an assumption common to many recent models of spatially structured populations - that the probability of an individual moving between habitat patches decreases exponentially with distance. For dung beetles, I find sufficient evidence to reject this assumption. The distribution of dispersal distances was clearly leptokurtic, with more individuals moving short and long distances than expected on the basis of an exponential function. In contrast, the data were well described by a power function. I conclude that dung beetle movements include an element of non-randomness not captured by the simplistic exponential model. The power function offers a promising alternative, but the actual mechanisms behind the pattern need to be clarified. Second, I compare several species of Aphodius to each other. Although these species occur in the same network of habitat patches, their movement patterns are different enough to result in a mixture of different spatial population structures. Movements between pastures were more frequent the larger the species, the more specific its occurrence in relation to pat age, and the more specialized it is on cow dung and open pasture habitats. Within pastures, all species form "patchy" populations, with much movement among individual pats. VL - 91 UR - ://000166017800013 N1 - Times Cited: 23Cited Reference Count: 75Cited References: 1996, RURAL BUSINESS REGIS BAGUETTE M, 1994, ECOL ENTOMOL, V19, P1 BALTHASAR V, 1963, MONOGRAPHIE SCARABAE BELL WJ, 1991, SEARCHING BEHAV BISTROM O, 1991, ENTOMOL FENNICA, V2, P53 BROMMER JE, 1999, ECOL ENTOMOL, V24, P125 CHATFIELD C, 1980, INTRO MULTIVARIATE A CLARK JS, 1998, BIOSCIENCE, V48, P13 DOBZHANSKY T, 1943, GENETICS, V28, P304 FERRANDINO FJ, 1993, PHYTOPATHOLOGY, V83, P795 FITT BDL, 1987, J PHYTOPATHOL, V118, P227 FRAMPTON VL, 1942, PHYTOPATHOLOGY, V32, P799 GARNER FH, 1944, CATTLE BRITAIN GITTINGS T, 1994, THESIS NATL U IRELAN GITTINGS T, 1997, ECOGRAPHY, V20, P55 GREGORY PH, 1968, ANNU REV PHYTOPATHOL, V6, P189 GYLLENBERG M, 1997, METAPOPULATION BIOL, P93 HANSKI I, 1977, OECOLOGIA, V28, P203 HANSKI I, 1980, ANIM BEHAV, V28, P953 HANSKI I, 1980, ANN ZOOL FENN, V17, P11 HANSKI I, 1980, ANN ZOOL FENN, V17, P17 HANSKI I, 1980, OIKOS, V34, P293 HANSKI I, 1986, ACTA OECOL-OEC GEN, V7, P171 HANSKI I, 1987, NUTR ECOLOGY INSECTS, P837 HANSKI I, 1990, LIVING PATCHY ENV, P127 HANSKI I, 1991, DUNG BEETLE ECOLOGY HANSKI I, 1991, DUNG BEETLE ECOLOGY, P75 HANSKI I, 1994, BIOL CONSERV, V68, P167 HANSKI I, 1994, ECOLOGY, V75, P747 HANSKI I, 1994, J ANIM ECOL, V63, P151 HANSKI I, 1997, METAPOPULATION BIOL, P5 HANSKI I, 1999, METAPOPULATION ECOLO HARRISON S, 1988, AM NAT, V132, P360 HARRISON S, 1989, ECOLOGY, V70, P1236 HARRISON S, 1991, BIOL J LINN SOC, V42, P73 HARRISON S, 1994, LARGE SCALE ECOLOGY, P111 HARRISON S, 1997, METAPOPULATION BIOL, P27 HILL JK, 1996, J ANIM ECOL, V65, P725 HOLTER P, 1982, OIKOS, V39, P213 HOSMER DW, 1989, APPL LOGISTIC REGRES HOWE HF, 1986, PLANT ECOL, P185 IBRAHIM KM, 1996, HEREDITY 3, V77, P282 JOHNSON ML, 1990, ANNU REV ECOL SYST, V21, P449 KIYOSAWA S, 1972, ANN PHYTOPATHOL SOC, V38, P41 KOSKELA H, 1977, ANN ZOOL FENN, V14, P204 KOSKLELA, 1979, OIKOS, V33, P419 KOT M, 1996, ECOLOGY, V77, P2027 KUUSSAARI M, 1996, J ANIM ECOL, V65, P791 LANDIN BO, 1961, OPUSC ENTOMOL LUND S, V19, P1 LEWIS MA, 1997, SPATIAL ECOLOGY ROLE, P46 LUMARET PJ, 1990, ATLAS COLEOPTERES SC MATTER SF, 1996, OECOLOGIA, V105, P447 MOLLISON D, 1977, J ROY STAT SOC B MET, V39, P283 NEVE G, 1996, J APPL ECOL, V33, P14 NICHOLS RA, 1994, HEREDITY, V72, P312 NIEMINEN M, 1996, OECOLOGIA, V108, P643 NIEMINEN M, 1998, J ANIM ECOL, V67, P149 NIEMINEN M, 1999, ECOGRAPHY, V22, P697 NILSSON T, 1997, ACTA U UPS ABSTR UPP, P311 NILSSON T, 1997, ECOL ENTOMOL, V22, P82 OTRONEN M, 1983, J ANIM ECOL, V52, P663 RAINIO M, 1966, ANN ZOOL FENN, V3, P88 ROFF D, 1977, J ANIM ECOL, V46, P443 ROSLIN T, 1999, THESIS U HELSINSKI SILFVERBERG H, 1992, ENUMERATIO COLEOPTEO SOUTHWOOD TRE, 1962, BIOL REV, V37, P171 STACEY PB, 1997, METAPOPULATION BIOL, P267 SUTCLIFFE OL, 1997, OECOLOGIA, V109, P229 TAYLOR RAJ, 1978, ECOL ENTOMOL, V3, P63 THOMAS CD, 1997, METAPOPULATION BIOL, P359 TURCHIN P, 1998, QUANTITATIVE ANAL MO UNRUH TR, 1993, CAN ENTOMOL, V125, P55 WAHLBERG N, 1996, SCIENCE, V273, P1536 WHITE E, 1960, ENTOMOL MON MAG, V96, P25 WHITLOCK MC, 1992, AM NAT, V139, P952EnglishArticleOIKOS385RQ ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Large-scale spatial ecology of dung beetles JF - Ecography Y1 - 2001 A1 - Roslin, T. SP - 511 EP - 524 KW - abundance KW - assemblages KW - coexistence KW - communities KW - FINLAND KW - gradients KW - LATITUDINAL KW - METAPOPULATION DYNAMICS KW - PLANT-SPECIES RICHNESS KW - REGIONAL DIVERSITY KW - Scarabaeidae AB - Recent modelling work shows that the composition of local communities can be influenced by the configuration of the surrounding landscape, but many of these models assume that all community members display the same type of extinction- colonization dynamics. I use Aphodius dung beetles to test the hypothesis that interspecific differences in habitat selection and dispersal capacity may translate into differences in spatial population dynamics, even among closely related species coexisting on the same resource. If this is true, then groups of species with different. characteristics would show different responses to landscape configuration. I first divided the area of Finland into a grid, and used collection records to describe regional variation in the Aphodius fauna of open cattle pastures. I then sampled dung beetles on 131 cattle farms, to examine whether the subset of species found on each farm was related to the density of pastures in the surrounding grid square. Finally, I used historical records to analyze changes in dung beetle communities during the last century, when there was great loss of pasture. Overall, I found no relationship between landscape characteristics and the total proportion of the regional species pool that was found on each farm. However, the distribution of species among guilds with different habitat specificity did related to the configuration of the landscape, and the pattern was most pronounced in a specialists species with limited dispersal. Associations between community structure and landscape configuration were superimposed on two much larger and stronger patterns: a large-scale latitudinal gradient in regional species richness, and a decelerating gain of species to local communities with an increasing regional species pool. I conclude that ecological variation among community members is a crucial factor in the analysis of local community composition, and that local species richness should always be conditioned on regional richness. VL - 24 N1 - EnglishArticleOCTECOGRAPHY ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Spatial population structure in a patchily distributed beetle JF - Molecular Ecology Y1 - 2001 A1 - Roslin, T. SP - 823 EP - 837 KW - allozymes KW - aphodius KW - gene flow KW - genetic differentiation KW - mitochondrial DNA KW - spatial population structure AB - The dynamics and evolution of populations will critically depend on their spatial structure.Hence, a recent emphasis on one particular type of structure—the metapopulation conceptof Levins—can only be justified by empirical assessment of spatial population structuresin a wide range of organisms. This paper focuses onAphodius fossor, a dung beetle specializedon cattle pastures. An agricultural database was used to locate nearly 50 000 localpopulationsofA. fossorin Finland. Several independent methods were then used to quantify key processesin this vast population system.Allozyme markers and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA)sequences were applied to examine genetic differentiation of local populations and to deriveindirect estimates of gene flow. These estimates were compared to values expected on thebasis of direct observations of dispersing individuals and assessments of local effectivepopulation size. Molecular markers revealed striking genetic homogeneity inA. fossor.Differentiation was only evident in mtDNA haplotype frequencies between the isolatedÅland islands and the Finnish mainland. Thus, indirect estimates of gene flow agreed withdirect observations that local effective population size inA. fossoris large (hundreds ofindividuals), and that in each generation, a substantial fraction (approximately one-fifth) ofthe individuals move between populations. Large local population size, extreme haplotypediversity and a high regional incidence ofA. fossorall testify against recurrent populationturnover. Taken together, these results provide strong evidence that the whole mainlandpopulation ofA. fossoris better described as one large ‘patchy population’, with substantialmovement between relatively persistent local populations, than as a classical metapopulation. VL - 10 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Distribution and abundance of dung beetles in fragmented landscapes JF - Oecologia Y1 - 2001 A1 - Roslin, T. A1 - Koivunen, A. SP - 69 EP - 77 KW - aphodius KW - APHODIUS SCARABAEIDAE KW - assemblage KW - COLEOPTERA KW - community KW - diversity KW - dynamics KW - europe mammals KW - habitat loss KW - metapopulation KW - patchy KW - population KW - resource utilization KW - serpentine KW - spatial population structure KW - stability AB - Related species utilising similar resources are often assumed to show similar spatial population structures and dynamics. This paper reports substantial ecological variation within a set of Aphodius dung beetles occurring in the same patchily distributed resource, livestock dung in pastures. We show how variation in habitat and resource selectivity, in the rate of movements between pastures, and in the distribution of local population sizes all contribute to interspecific differences in spatial population structures. Local dung beetle assemblages are compared between two landscapes with different densities of pastures. In one of the landscapes, we contrast the abundances and regional distributions of Aphodius before and after 15 years of rapid habitat loss. Different species show very dissimilar responses to changes in the structure of the landscape. Our results suggest that generalist Aphodius species, and specialist species with high dispersal powers, occur as large "patchy" populations in the landscape. In contrast? a strict pasture specialist species with limited dispersal powers (A. pusillus) forms classical metapopulations. At the community level, interspecific differences in spatial population structures make the local community composition a function of the structure of the surrounding landscape. VL - 127 UR - ://000167629200008 N1 - digital & hard copy copy ER -