+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Ecological correlates of extinction proneness in tropical butterflies



Ecological correlates of extinction proneness in tropical butterflies



Conservation Biology ember; 18(6): 1571-1578



Widespread told rapid losses of natural habitats and biodiversity have made the identification of extinction-prone species a major challenge in conservation biology. We assessed the relative importance of biologically relevant species traits (e.g., body size, ecological specialization) obtained from published records to determine the extinction probability of butterflies in a highly disturbed tropical landscape (i.e. Singapore). We also developed a taxon-specific model to estimate the extinction proneness of butterflies in Southeast Asia. Logistic regression analyses showed that adult habitat specialization, larval host plant specificity, geographical distribution, sexual dichromatism, and congenor density were significant and independent determinants of butterfly extinctions in Singapore. Among these traits, specificity of larval host plant and adult habitat specialization were the best correlates of extinction risks. We used this phenomenological extinction-regression model to estimate the relative extinction proneness of 416 butterfly species in Southeast Asia. Our results illustrate the utility of available taxon-specific data for a localized area in estimating the extinction proneness of closely-related species on a regional scale. When intensive field studies are not forthcoming especially in regions suffering from rapid biodiversity losses (e.g., southeast Asia), similar approaches could be used to estimate extinction threats for other taxonomic groups

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 011986861

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00468.x


Related references

Ecological correlates of extinction proneness in Australian tropical rain forest mammals. Conservation Biology, 51: 79-89, 1991

Correlates of extinction proneness in tropical angiosperms. Diversity and Distributions 14(1): 1-10, 2008

Multivariate correlates of extinction proneness in a naturally fragmented landscape. Diversity and distributions 13(4): 372-378, 2007

Threat status in butterflies and its ecological correlates how far can we generalize?. Biodiversity and Conservation 18(12): 3243-3267, 2009

Walking the gangplank; ecological correlates of extinction in fossil mammals. Abstracts with Programs - Geological Society of America 34(6): 541, 2002

Ecological correlates of the threat of extinction in Neotropical bird species. Animal Conservation ; 7(2): 161-168, 2004

Ecological correlates of island incidence and geographical range among British butterflies. Biodiversity & Conservation 9(3): 343-359, March, 2000

Ecological correlates of the popularity of birds and butterflies in Internet information resources. Oikos 122(2): 183-190, 2013

The 600 Myr decline of global background origination and extinction intensities Possible ecological correlates and causes. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 75(2 PART 2): 76, 1994

Phylogenetic and ecological correlates with male adult life span of rainforest butterflies. Evolutionary Ecology 22(4): 507-517, 2008

Frugivorous butterfly species in tropical forest fragments: correlates of vulnerability to extinction. Biodiversity and Conservation 14(5): 1137-1152, 2005

Life history and ecological correlates of extinction risk in European freshwater fishes. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences il; 62(4): 854-862, 2005

Ecological and biogeographical effects of forest disturbance on tropical butterflies of Sumba, Indonesia. Journal of Biogeography 24(1): 67-75, 1997

Life-history and ecological correlates of decline and extinction in the endemic Australian frog fauna. Austral Ecology ust; 30(5): 564-571, 2005