Create microclimate and microhabitat refuges

Overall effectiveness category No evidence found (no assessment)
Number of studies: 0
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

not assessed
Certainty

not assessed
Harms

not assessed

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Climate change threatens butterfly and moth species by shifting areas of suitable climatic conditions away from species’ historic ranges. For species with poor dispersal ability, tracking suitable climate across long distances is likely to be difficult, or even impossible. However, landscapes with more diverse microclimates are able to preserve species, by providing cooler climatic refuges (Suggitt et al. 2015, 2018). Therefore, increasing microclimate diversity by, for example, creating topographic features or increasing the structural diversity of habitats, may enable temperature sensitive species to persist (Davies et al. 2006, Suggitt et al. 2018). Improving habitat suitability more generally may also reduce the overall stress on populations, and increase their ability to cope with climatic changes (Walsh 2017). These features may also enable species which are shifting their ranges polewards to colonize new areas more quickly.

For studies on improving habitat to facilitate elevational or latitudinal range shifts, see “Protect and connect habitat along elevational gradients” and “Enhance natural habitat to improve landscape connectivity to allow for range shifts”.

^{Davies Z.G., Wilson R.J., Coles S. & Thomas C.D. (2006) Changing habitat associations of a thermally constrained species, the silver-spotted skipper butterfly, in response to climate warming. Journal of Animal Ecology, 75, 247–256.}

^{Suggitt A.J., Wilson R.J., August T.A., Fox R., Isaac N.J.B., Macgregor N.A., Morecroft M.D. & Maclean I.M.D. (2015) Microclimate affects landscape level persistence in the British Lepidoptera. Journal of Insect Conservation, 19, 237–253.}

^{Suggitt A.J., Wilson R.J., Isaac N.J.B., Beale C.M., Auffret A.G., August T., Bennie J.J., Crick H.Q.P., Duffield S., Fox R., Hopkins J.J., Macgregor N.A., Morecroft M.D., Walker K.J. & Maclean I.M.D. (2018) Extinction risk from climate change is reduced by microclimatic buffering. Nature Climate Change, 8, 713–717.}

^{Walsh R.O. (2017) Microclimate and biotic interactions affect Karner blue butterfly occupancy and persistence in managed oak savanna habitats. Journal of Insect Conservation, 21, 219–230.}

Key messages

We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of creating microclimate and microhabitat refuges.

‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Please cite as:

Bladon A.J., Bladon, E. K., Smith R.K. & Sutherland W.J. (2023) Butterfly and Moth Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions for butterflies and moths. Conservation Evidence Series Synopsis. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.