The butterfly fauna of the Krakatau Islands after a century of colonization

New, T. R.; Bush, Mark B.; Thornton, I. W. B.; Sudarman, H. K.

doi:10.1098/rstb.1988.0137

Cited by 20 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On islands which have been defaunated by natural catastrophes, such as Krakatau (e.g. New et al, 1988) or Motmot Island (Ball & Glucksman, 1975), the order of colonization is greatly influenced by the succession of vegetation on the island. In experimental studies where only the animals have been removed, leaving the vegetation intact, such as in the studies by Rey (Rey & Strong, 1983;Rey, 1984) and Simberloff (e.g.…”

Section: Afatural Colonization Of Defaunated Islandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Colonization in metapopulations: a review of theory and observations

Ebenhard

1991

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In metapopulation dynamics turnover of populations in isolated patches may be frequent. Regional survival of a species in such a system with frequent extinctions hinges on its colonization ability. Colonization is more than just dispersal; when a propagule reaches a new patch i t Faces higher extinction probabilities than does an established population. Extinction models as wrll as empirical data suggest that a large propagule with a potential for rapid increase in a varying environment, 01 with a low mortality rate in an environment perceived as constant, has a higher probability of successful colonization. Large variation in population size when it is still small increases the risk of failure. Factors introducing such variation are dcmographic stochasticity and environmental variation. It is hard to single out demographic traits that ensure good colonizing ability, since colonization can be achieved in many direrent ways, but generalists and species with selffertilization seem to be superior.

show abstract

Section: Afatural Colonization Of Defaunated Islandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Colonization in metapopulations: a review of theory and observations

Ebenhard

1991

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Twenty‐five such species collected on Panaitan and Java's west coast in 1982 were unknown on Krakatau, and 16 others previously known from Krakatau (half of them satyrids and hesperiids, feeders on grasses and palms) were not found in the 1982 surveys (Yukawa, 1984). Yet, between 1986 and 1993, 20 of the 25 Javan species and 14 of the 16 previously collected Krakatau species were found on Krakatau (Bush, 1986; New et al ., 1988; New & Thornton, 1992b; Yukawa et al ., 2000).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How important were stepping stones in the colonization of Krakatau?

Thornton¹,

Runciman²,

Cook³

et al. 2002

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In theory, one factor determining the rate and nature of the assembly of island biotas is the presence or absence of stepping stone islands, yet no field studies have demonstrated stepping stone function in practice. Krakatau, in Sunda Strait, is about equidistant from Java and Sumatra. Sebesi lies about half way between Krakatau and Sumatra, but no island intervenes between Krakatau and the nearest coast of Java. We assess the evidence that Sebesi has acted as an important stepping stone for Krakatau's recolonization since the devastating 1883 volcanic eruption. About a quarter of Krakatau's resident land birds, two‐fifths of its reptiles, bats and land molluscs, and about two‐thirds of its termites, pteridophytes, butterflies and spermatophytes are unknown on Sebesi, evidently having colonized without stepping stone involvement. Identifiable Sumatran taxa do not outnumber identifiable Javan ones on Krakatau, nor do historical distribution records indicate movement from Sebesi to Krakatau in animal groups. Krakatau's biota is not a subset of Sebesi's in predominantly anemochorous or thallassochorous plant groups, butterflies, reptiles or bats, and is only marginally so in termites. It is a subset in predominantly zoochorous spermatophyte groups, except Ficus species, and in birds and land molluscs. Comparison with a weaker stepping stone candidate, Panaitan, provides no evidence for a stepping stone role for Sebesi in butterflies or termites. We discuss the dispersal and establishment constraints on colonization by the groups involved, and conclude that, overall, Sebesi had little impact as a stepping stone. Instead, it is more probable that divergence of the environments of the two islands has led to an increasingly independent recolonization of Krakatau. © 2002 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2002, 77, 275–317.

show abstract

“…Thus it is evident that turnover events actually occurred that involved species with different ecological niches. This type of turnover has been associated with vegetational change in the case of butterfly fauna (Yukawa 1984;New et al 1988). However, turnover events involving related species with similar habitat preferences are less obvious.…”

Section: Cumulative Species Number and Turnovermentioning

confidence: 99%

Recolonization of the Krakataus by Hymenoptera and Isoptera (Insecta)

1992

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aculeate and isopteran fauna was surveyed in 1982 on the Krakatau islands, all the biota of which had been exterminated by the great eruption in 1883.The pattern of colonization of these insects (wasps, bees and termites) and the present state of their faunas are discussed based upon our 1982 survey and those made earlier. Species numbers varied only slightly between the four islands in spite of their differing sizes. This may be because the islands are situated close to each other and most of the aculeates prefer open sites rather than forests.The species/time curve for the Aculeata as a whole was still rising in 1982. However, in some groups flattening of the curve had occurred, and a comparison of species number in social wasps and bees, for example, between Java, Krakatau and Sumatra suggested the occurrence of"supersaturation". Cumulative species number was distinctly larger than actual number in the three most recent surveys showing that several species must have become extinct in each intersurvey period. Species turnover associated with habitat changes may have occurred for the whole island group and on particular islands.Analysis of the colour pattern of the Krakatau populations of certain species with different geographical races on Java and Sumatra showed that the Javan elements have a slight preponderance over the Sumatran ones on the Krakataus. Some examples of faunal disharmony were found; the most remarkable was the almost complete lack of species of swarm-founding social wasps and bees, and of ground-nesting termites probably reflecting their poor dispersal ability across the sea barrier.

show abstract

The butterfly fauna of the Krakatau Islands after a century of colonization

Cited by 20 publications

References 4 publications

Colonization in metapopulations: a review of theory and observations

Colonization in metapopulations: a review of theory and observations

How important were stepping stones in the colonization of Krakatau?

Recolonization of the Krakataus by Hymenoptera and Isoptera (Insecta)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About