Study

Effects of managing semi-natural grassland buffers on butterflies

  • Published source details Dollar J.G., Riffell S.K. & Burger L.W. (2013) Effects of managing semi-natural grassland buffers on butterflies. Journal of Insect Conservation, 17, 577-590.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Maintain or create bare ground

Action Link
Butterfly and Moth Conservation

Use prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance in grasslands or other open habitats

Action Link
Butterfly and Moth Conservation

Plant grass buffer strips/margins around arable or pasture fields

Action Link
Butterfly and Moth Conservation
  1. Maintain or create bare ground

    A replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in 2007–2009 on a mixed farm in Mississippi, USA (Dollar et al. 2013) found that disking grass field margins to create bare ground increased the abundance, but not species richness, of disturbance-tolerant butterflies without affecting the abundance or species richness of grassland butterflies. The abundance of 18 disturbance-tolerant butterfly species was higher both one (10–14 individuals) and two (18 individuals) years after disking than on undisturbed (4–14 individuals) margins. However, the species richness of disturbance-tolerant butterflies was similar between disked (7–9 species) and undisturbed (6–8 species) margins. Both the abundance and species richness of 14 grassland butterfly species remained similar in disked (abundance: 0.6–1.4 individuals; richness: 2 species) and undisturbed margins (abundance: 0.5–1.3; richness: 1–3 species). See paper for details of individual species. In spring 2004, grass margins were sown with a seed mix of common prairie species. Ten fields (containing 28 margins) were randomly assigned to one of two treatments: disking and no disturbance. Within each disking field, one margin was disked in autumn 2007, and a different margin was disked in autumn 2008. From June–August 2007–2009, butterflies were surveyed six times/year along three 50-m transects in the centre of each margin.

    (Summarised by: Andrew Bladon)

  2. Use prescribed fire to maintain or restore disturbance in grasslands or other open habitats

    A replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in 2007–2009 on a mixed farm in Mississippi, USA (Dollar et al. 2013) found that burning grass field margins did not increase the abundance or species richness of either disturbance-tolerant or grassland butterflies. The abundance and species richness of 18 disturbance-tolerant butterfly species was similar on burned (abundance: 4–11 individuals; richness: 6–7 species) and undisturbed (abundance: 4–14 individuals; richness: 6–8 species) grass field margins. The abundance and species richness of 14 grassland butterfly species also remained similar in burned (abundance: 0.3–1.3 individuals; richness: 1–3 species) and undisturbed (abundance: 0.5–1.3; richness: 1–3 species) margins. See paper for details of individual species. In spring 2004, grass margins were sown with a seed mix of common prairie species. Ten fields (containing 26 margins) were randomly assigned to one of two treatments: burning and no disturbance. Within each burning field, one margin was burned in spring 2008 and a different margin was burned in spring 2009. From June–August 2007–2009, butterflies were surveyed six times/year along three 50-m transects in the centre of each margin.

    (Summarised by: Andrew Bladon)

  3. Plant grass buffer strips/margins around arable or pasture fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in 2007–2009 on a mixed farm in Mississippi, USA (Dollar et al. 2013) found that disking grass field margins increased the abundance, but not species richness, of disturbance-tolerant butterflies without affecting the abundance or species richness of grassland butterflies, while burning did not affect the abundance or species richness of any butterflies. The abundance of 18 disturbance-tolerant butterfly species was higher both one (10–14 individuals) and two (18 individuals) years after disking than on either burned (4–11 individuals) or undisturbed (4–14 individuals) margins. However, the species richness of disturbance-tolerant butterflies was similar between disked (7–9 species), burned (6–7 species) and undisturbed (6–8 species) margins. Both the abundance and species richness of 14 grassland butterfly species remained similar in disked (abundance: 0.6–1.4 individuals; richness: 2 species), burned (abundance: 0.3–1.3 individuals; richness: 1–3 species) and undisturbed (abundance: 0.5–1.3; richness: 1–3 species) margins. See paper for details of individual species. In spring 2004, grass margins totalling 79 ha were sown with a seed mix of common prairie species. Fifteen fields (containing 43 margins) were randomly assigned to one of three treatments: disking, burning and no disturbance. Within each disking field, one margin was disked in autumn 2007, and a different margin was disked in autumn 2008. Within each burning field, one margin was burned in spring 2008 and a different margin was burned in spring 2009. From June–August 2007–2009, butterflies were surveyed six times/year along three 50-m transects in the centre of each margin.

    (Summarised by: Andrew Bladon)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust