Click here for the original journal page (in Acrobat pdf format).

The text below is grayed out because it is not intended to be read. It is a necessarily imperfect OCR of the original and is only used by a search engine.

Volume 51, Number 2

179

Powell, J. A. & J. A. De Benedictis. 1995. Foliage feeding Lepidoptera of Abies and Pseudotsuga associated with Choristoneura in California, pp. 168-215. In Powell, J. A. (ed.), Biosystematic studies of conifer-feeding Choristoneura (Lepidoptera: Tor-tricidae) in the western United States. Univ. Calif. Publ. Entomol. 115; 275 pp.

Steiner. 1990. Butterflies of the San Francisco Bay Area. Unpubl. M.S. Thesis, Calif. State Univ., Hayward. 93 pp.

Jerky A. POWELL, Essig Museum of Entomology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720, USA.

Received for publication 1 November 1995; revised and accepted 13 May 1996.

Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 51(2), 1997, 179-184

DIURNAL LEPIDOPTERA OF NATIVE AND RECONSTRUCTED PRAIRIES IN EASTERN MINNESOTA

Additional key words: surveys, species richness, vagility.

Prairie butterflies are subjects of increasing conservation concern. Their habitat has been greatly diminished, and their ability to survive on managed sites and to colonize new sites or recolonize old ones is in doubt (Opler 1991). In this paper I report on and compare the diurnal Lepidoptera communities of both native and reconstructed prairies in Minnesota.

I collected insects from the flowers of 58 forb species in four native prairie sites and four prairie reconstructions (former agricultural areas recently replanted to prairie) during the summers of 1990, 1991 and 1992. The sites are described in Table 1. Insects were collected between 0900 h and 1600 h on sunny or partly cloudy days when the temperature was between 20° and 35° C. Collections were made from late May to late September. I made one 15 min aerial net collection of insects on the flowers of each forb species with at least 100 flowers or inflorescences open, for a total of 507 collections from all forb species in all sites over the three summers. Thus, the number of collections made from a site was closely related to the number of forb species present in populations large enough to produce 100 or more flowers. Although only a small fraction of the Lepidoptera present on a site can be sampled by daylight collections, many of the species of conservation concern are diurnal.

The 507 collections yielded 3702 insects representing 305 species; 295 of these were identified at least to genus (Reed 1995). There were 118 Lepidoptera individuals representing 28 species: 24 butterflies and four diurnal moths (Table 2). Insect vouchers are deposited in the University of Minnesota Insect Museum, and plant vouchers are in the University of Minnesota Herbarium.

Collections in native sites produced greater species richness than in reconstructed sites: 73 individuals and 21 species in 218 15-min collections from native sites, compared to 45 individuals and 16 species in 289 collections from reconstructions. Five of the 28 species collected were described as prairie obligates by Orwig (1992): Callophrys gryneus (Hub-ner), Hesperia I. leonardus Harris, H. I. pawnee Dodge, Polites origines (Fabr.) and Satyrium edwardsii (Grote & Robinson) and an additional four species were described as remnant-restricted by Panzer et al. (1995): Euphyes conspicua (Edw.) Harkenclenus titus (Fabr.), Speyeria aphrodite (Fabr.) and Thorybes pylades (Scudder). Of these nine species, eight were collected from native sites only, none from reconstructions only, and one was collected from both native and reconstructed sites. Of the 19 species not considered site-restricted, four were collected from native sites only, seven from reconstructions only, and eight from both native and reconstructed sites (Table 3).

Management practices do not appear to account for the differences in species presence among sites. There are no obvious differences in management between native sites and reconstructions as a group: the large sites are burned in sections, while the small sites

Table 1. Descriptions of Minnesota prairie sites at which Lepidoptera collections were made. Area co area where collections were made. Plant abbreviations: 1, Achillea millefolium; 2, Agastache foeniculu canescens; 5, Anemone canadensis; 6, Aquilegia canadensis; 7, Aster ericoides; 8, Aster ontarionis; 9, Ast 11, Aster simplex; 12, Berteroa incana; 13, Campanula rotundifolia; 14, Chrysopsis villosa; 15, Cirsium ar opsis palmata; 18, Crepis tectorum; 19, Dalea purpurea; 20, Dalea villosa; 21, Desmodium canadense; 22 ale; 24, Grindelia squarrosa; 25, Helianthus rigidus; 26, Helianthus tuberosus; 27, Heliopsis helianthoide tata; 30, Liatris pycnostachya; 31, Lithospermum canescens; 32, Lupinus perennis; 33, Melilotus alba; nyctaginea; 36, Monarda fistulosa; 37, Nepeta cataria; 38, Penstemon grandiflorus; 39, Phlox pilosa; 40, 42, Pycnanthemum virginianum; 43, Ratibida pinnata; 44, Rosa blanda; 45, Rubus occidentalis; 46, Rud 48, Solidago nemoralis; 49, Solidago rigida; 50, Solidago speciosa; 51, Stachys palustris; 52, Sysirinchium Verbena hastata; 55, Ver£>gn<2 stricta; 56, Vernonia fasciculata; 57, Vicitf americana; 58, Zizitf aurea.

182

Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society

Table 2. Scientific and common names of Lepidoptera collected in this study. Nomenclature follows Scott (1984), Opler & Krizek (1984) and Covell (1984).

Hesperiidae

Atrytone lagan (Edw.), Delaware Skipper

Euphyes conspicua (Edw.), Black Dash

Euphyes vestris (Boisd.), Dun Skipper

Hesperia leonardus leonardus Harris, Leonard's Skipper

Hesperia leonardus pawnee Dodge, Pawnee Skipper

Polites coras (Cr.), Peck's Skipper

Polites origines (Fabr.), Crossline Skipper

Polites themistocles (Latr.), Tawny-Edged Skipper

Wallengrenia egeremet (Scudder), Broken Dash

Epargyreus clarus (Cr.), Silver Spotted Skipper

Thoryhes pylades (Scudder), Northern Cloudy Wing

Pieridae

Colias eurytheme Boisd., Orange Sulphur Calias philodice Godart, Clouded Sulphur

Lycaenidae

Celastrina ladon (L.), Spring Azure Satyrium edwardsii (Gr. & Rob.), Edwards' Hairstreak Callophrys gryneus (Hubner), Olive Hairstreak Harkenclenus titus (Fabr.), Coral Hairstreak

Nymphalidae

Phyciodes tharos (Drury), Pearl Crescent

Nymphalis milberti (Godart), Milbert's Tortoiseshell

Vanessa cardui (L.), Painted Lady

Speyeria aphrodite (Fabr.), Aphrodite Fritillary

Speyeria cyhele (Fabr.), Great Spangled Fritillary

Cercyonis pegala (Fabr.), Wood Nymph

Asterocampa celtis (Boisd. & Lee), Hackberry Butterfly

Sphingidae

Hemaris diffinis (Boisd.), Snowberry Clearwing Hemaris thy she (Fabr.), Hummingbird Clearwing

Noctuidae

Alypia octomaculata Fabr., Eight-Spotted Forester Ctenuchidae

Cisseps fulvicollis (Hubner), Yellow-Collared Scape Moth

(AREM, CEM, ASP and LLRP) are burned all at once. The ASP and CARP reconstructions were mowed for two years following planting, but now are managed by burning. Brush cutting is done as needed but does not replace burning on any site.

It is possible that the reconstructed sites do not provide suitable habitat for these obligate species. The reconstructions tend to be more mesic than the most species-rich native sites (CC and AREM), and five of the eight prairie obligates are reported to be restricted to xeric sites by Panzer et al. (1995): Polites origines and Hesperia I. leonardus to xeric prairie; Harkenclenus titus to xeric/mesic prairie; Satyrium edwardsii to savanna; and Thoryhes pylades to sand savanna. Hesperia leonardus pawnee and Callophrys gryneus also are found in xeric areas (Orwig 1992). Only two of the obligate species collected are reported by Panzer et al. from mesic sites: Euphyes conspicua from sedge meadow and

Volume 51, Number 2

183

Table 3. Number of individual Lepidoptera species on each prairie site, and their nectar plants. Numeric plant abbreviations follow those given in Table 1. Superscript 1 = restricted to prairie habitats (Orwig 1992). Superscript 2 = high or moderate remnant reliance (Panzer et al. 1995).

Speyeria aphrodite from mesic prairie (S. aphrodite was collected from the mesic reconstruction CARP—the only obligate individual found on a reconstruction). Beyond these associations with general prairie types, specific interactions with foodplants (both larval and adult), or larval-tending ants may be required for establishment of certain species, as has been demonstrated for other rare Lepidoptera species (Arnold 1983, Cushman & Murphy 1993). Callophrys gryneus may be absent from the reconstructions due to the absence of its larval foodplant, eastern red cedar {Juniperus virginiana) (Opler & Krizek 1984).

Alternatively, the obligate species may not have reached these reconstructions yet. Butterfly populations in some fragmented habitats have diminished mobility (Dempster 1991), and Cushman and Murphy (1993) suggest that dispersal ability is especially limited among lycaenids. Mobility may be influenced by species-specific behavior, such as reluctance to leave larval foodplants (Arnold 1983). Colonization of new habitat patches by these Lepidoptera may be an infrequent event that occurs during "rare years of explosive dispersal" as described by Ehrlich and Murphy (1987) for Euphydryas editha. More study of the basic biology and mobility of each species is required before we can predict whether prairie obligate butterflies will be able to colonize prairie reconstructions.

184

Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society

This study was funded in part by a grant from the Non-game Wildlife Division of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Field assistance was funded by a Research Explorations for Teachers grant to the University of Minnesota Curriculum and Instruction Department. I thank Dave Andow, Theresa Leahy, Bill Miller, Susan Weller and the site managers for all their help. I especially appreciate the thorough reading and professional attitudes of the reviewers.

Literature Cited

ARNOLD, R. A. 1983. Ecological studies of six endangered butterflies (Lepidoptera, Ly-caenidae): island biogeography, patch dynamics, and the design of habitat preserves. Univ. Calif. Publ. Entomol. 99:1-161.

Covell, C. V, Jr. 1984. A field guide to the moths of eastern North America. Houghton Mifflin, Boston. 496 pp.

Cushman, J. H. & D. D. MURPHY. 1993. Susceptibility of lycaenid butterflies to endan-germent. Wings (Xerces Society) 17:16—21.

DEMPSTER, J. P. 1991. Fragmentation, isolation and mobility of insect populations, pp. 143-154. In Collins, N. M. & J. A. Thomas (Eds.), The conservation of insects and their habitats. Academic Press, London.

EHRLICH, P. R. & D. D. MURPHY. 1987. Conservation lessons from long term studies of checkerspot butterflies. Cons. Biol. 1:122-131.

Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. Univ. Kansas Press, Lawrence, Kansas. 1402 pp.

OPLER, P. A. 1991. North American problems and perspectives in insect conservation, pp. 9-32. In Collins, N. M. & J. A. Thomas (Eds.), The conservation of insects and their habitats. Academic Press, London.

OPLER, P. A. & G. O. KRIZEK. 1984. Butterflies east of the Great Plains. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. 294 pp.

Orwig, T. T 1992. Loess hills prairies and butterfly survivia: opportunities and challenges, pp. 132-135. In Smith, D. D. & C. A. Jacobs (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twelfth North American Prairie Conference. Univ. Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa.

Panzer, R., D. Stillwaugh, R. Gnaedinger & G. Derkovitz. 1995. Prevalence of remnant-reliance among the prairie and savanna-inhabiting insects of the Chicago region. Natural Areas Journal 15:101-116.

REED, C. C. 1995. Insects surveyed on flowers in native and reconstructed prairies (Minnesota). Restoration and Management Notes 13:210—213.

SCOTT, J. A. 1986. The butterflies of North America: a natural history and field guide. Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford, California. 585 pp.

Catherine C. Reed, Entomology Department, 219 Hodson Hall, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55108, USA.

Received for publication 20 December 1994; revised and accepted 12 March 1996.

Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 51(2), 1997, 184-187

YOU CAUGHT WHAT IN YOUR BACKYARD?

Additional key words: Electrostrymon angelia, Ministrymon azia, Dry as iulia, Florida, dispersal.

What butterflies are in your back yard? This question has been asked before in the pages of the Journal (Howe 1959) and many subsequent notes. Howe identified 64 butterfly species on a nine-acre plot in Kansas, at the time a truly impressive feat. We also