Vertical stratification on a small scale: the distribution of fruit-feeding butterflies in a semi-deciduous Atlantic forest in Brazil

Araujo, Poliana Felix; Freitas, André Victor Lucci; Gonçalves, Gleice Ane de Souza; Ribeiro, Danilo Bandini

doi:10.1080/01650521.2020.1728033

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For fruit‐feeding butterflies, is recognized that some families or tribes are associated with a particular vertical statum (DeVries et al., 2012 ; Hill et al., 2001 ), even the probability of species detection may differ between strata (Ribeiro et al., 2016 ). In addition to the lack of studies evaluating phylogenetic and functional diversity for this group, for the Neotropical region, there is no clear pattern as to which is the most diverse stratum from a taxonomic perspective (understory—Araujo et al., 2020 ; Barlow et al., 2007 ; Lourenço et al., 2019 ; Whitworth et al., 2016 ; canopy—Devries, 1988 ; DeVries et al., 2012 ; Ribeiro & Freitas, 2012 ; Santos et al., 2017 ). In our study, we show that there was a large underestimation in species richness, providing evidence that there is a bias for observed taxonomic diversity in canopies sites.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Assemblages of fruit‐feeding butterflies show high vertical stratification (Devries, 1988 ; DeVries et al., 2012 ; Ribeiro & Freitas, 2012 ; Santos et al., 2017 ), with the canopy generally being taxonomically more diverse than understory. These strata exhibit a large difference in their microclimatic conditions and habitat structure and hence in their taxonomic composition (Araujo et al., 2020 ; DeVries et al., 2012 ; Santos et al., 2017 ). Whereas Charaxinae, Biblidinae, and Nymphalinae are recognized as canopy‐dwellers, Satyrinae is generally associated with understory sites (Schulze et al., 2001 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The hidden side of diversity: Effects of imperfect detection on multiple dimensions of biodiversity

Richter

Nakamura

Iserhard

et al. 2021

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies on ecological communities often address patterns of species distribution and abundance, but few consider uncertainty in counts of both species and individuals when computing diversity measures. We evaluated the extent to which imperfect detection may influence patterns of taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity in ecological communities. We estimated the true abundance of fruit‐feeding butterflies sampled in canopy and understory strata in a subtropical forest. We compared the diversity values calculated by observed and estimated abundance data through the hidden diversity framework. This framework evaluates the deviation of observed diversity when compared with diversities derived from estimated true abundances and whether such deviation represents a bias or a noise in the observed diversity pattern. The hidden diversity values differed between strata for all diversity measures, except for functional richness. The taxonomic measure was the only one where we observed an inversion of the most diverse stratum when imperfect detection was included. Regarding phylogenetic and functional measures, the strata showed distinct responses to imperfect detection, despite the tendency to overestimate observed diversity. While the understory showed noise for the phylogenetic measure, since the observed pattern was maintained, the canopy had biased diversity for the functional metric. This bias occurred since no significant differences were found between strata for observed diversity, but rather for estimated diversity, with the canopy being more clustered. We demonstrate that ignore imperfect detection may lead to unrealistic estimates of diversity and hence to erroneous interpretations of patterns and processes that structure biological communities. For fruit‐feeding butterflies, according to their phylogenetic position or functional traits, the undetected individuals triggered different responses in the relationship of the diversity measures to the environmental factor. This highlights the importance to evaluate and include the uncertainty in species detectability before calculating biodiversity measures to describe communities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The hidden side of diversity: Effects of imperfect detection on multiple dimensions of biodiversity

Richter

Nakamura

Iserhard

et al. 2021

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, the underlying questions guiding these studies vary considerably, including the collecting techniques, the level of taxonomic identification, and the core group of insects considered. Some studies approach an array of arthropod groups 29 – 36 , while most focus on particular groups of lepidopterans 37 – 47 , beetles 48 – 53 , hymenopterans 54 – 58 , orthopterans 59 , collembolans 60 , 61 , psocopterans 62 or hemipterans 63 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vertical stratification of insect abundance and species richness in an Amazonian tropical forest

Amorim

Brown

Bôscolo

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tropical forests are among the most biodiverse biomes on the planet. Nevertheless, quantifying the abundance and species richness within megadiverse groups is a significant challenge. We designed a study to address this challenge by documenting the variability of the insect fauna across a vertical canopy gradient in a Central Amazonian tropical forest. Insects were sampled over two weeks using 6-m Gressitt-style Malaise traps set at five heights (0 m–32 m–8 m intervals) on a metal tower in a tropical forest north of Manaus, Brazil. The traps contained 37,778 specimens of 18 orders of insects. Using simulation approaches and nonparametric analyses, we interpreted the abundance and richness of insects along this gradient. Diptera, Hymenoptera, and Coleoptera had their greatest abundance at the ground level, whereas Lepidoptera and Hemiptera were more abundant in the upper levels of the canopy. We identified species of 38 of the 56 families of Diptera, finding that 527 out of 856 species (61.6%) were not sampled at the ground level. Mycetophilidae, Tipulidae, and Phoridae were significantly more diverse and/or abundant at the ground level, while Tachinidae, Dolichopodidae, and Lauxaniidae were more diverse or abundant at upper levels. Our study suggests the need for a careful discussion of strategies of tropical forest conservation based on a much more complete understanding of the three-dimensional distribution of its insect diversity.

show abstract

“…For fruit-feeding butterflies, is recognized that some families or tribes are more related with canopy or understory (DeVries et al, 2012; Hill, Hamer, Tangah, & Dawood, 2001), including the detection probability of species can differ among strata (Ribeiro et al, 2016). Despite the lack of studies that access the phylogenetic and functional diversity for this group, and hence the relationship with forests strata, for the Neotropical region there is no clear pattern as to which is the most diverse stratum from a taxonomic perspective (understory – Araujo et al, 2020; Barlow, Overal, Araujo, Gardner, & Peres, 2007; Lourenço et al, 2019; Whitworth et al, 2016; canopy – Devries, 1988; DeVries et al, 2012; Ribeiro & Freitas, 2012; Santos et al, 2017). In our study, we show that there was a large underestimation in species richness, providing evidence that there is a bias for observed taxonomic diversity in canopies sites.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Assemblages of fruit-feeding butterflies show high vertical stratification (Devries, 1988; DeVries, Alexander, Chacon, & Fordyce, 2012; Ribeiro & Freitas, 2012; Santos, Iserhard, Carreira, & Freitas, 2017), with the canopy generally being taxonomically more diverse than understory. These strata exhibit a large difference in their microclimatic conditions, habitat structure and, hence in their taxonomic composition (Araujo, Freitas, Souza, & Ribeiro, 2020; DeVries et al, 2012; Santos et al, 2017). Whereas Charaxinae, Biblidinae, and Nymphalinae are recognized as canopy-dwellers, Satyrinae is generally associated with understory sites (Schulze, Linsenmair & Fiedler, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Hidden Side of Diversity: Effects of Imperfect Detection on Multiple Dimensions of Biodiversity

Richter

Nakamura

Iserhard

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies on ecological communities often address patterns of species distribution and abundance, but few consider uncertainty in counts of both species and individuals when computing diversity measures. We evaluated the extent to which imperfect detection may influence patterns of taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity in ecological communities. We estimated the true abundance of fruit-feeding butterflies sampled in canopy and understory strata in a subtropical forest. We compared the diversity values calculated by observed and estimated abundance data through the hidden diversity framework. This framework evaluates the deviation of observed diversity when compared with diversities derived from estimated true abundances, and if such deviation represents a bias or a noise in the observed diversity pattern. The hidden diversity values differed between strata for all diversity measures, except for functional richness. The taxonomic measure was the only one where we observed an inversion of the most diverse stratum when imperfect detection was included. Regarding phylogenetic and functional measures, the strata showed distinct responses to imperfect detection, despite the tendency to overestimate observed diversity. While the understory showed noise for the phylogenetic measure, since the observed pattern was maintained, the canopy had biased diversity for the functional metric. This bias occurred since no significant differences were found between strata for observed diversity, but rather for estimated diversity, with the canopy being more clustered. We demonstrate that ignore imperfect detection may lead to unrealistic estimates of diversity and hence, to erroneous interpretations of patterns and processes that structure biological communities. For fruit-feeding butterflies, according to their phylogenetic position or functional traits, the undetected individuals triggered different responses in the relationship of the diversity measures to the environmental factor. This highlights the importance to evaluate and include the uncertainty in species detectability before calculating biodiversity measures to describe communities.

show abstract

Vertical stratification on a small scale: the distribution of fruit-feeding butterflies in a semi-deciduous Atlantic forest in Brazil

Cited by 15 publications

References 44 publications

The hidden side of diversity: Effects of imperfect detection on multiple dimensions of biodiversity

The hidden side of diversity: Effects of imperfect detection on multiple dimensions of biodiversity

Vertical stratification of insect abundance and species richness in an Amazonian tropical forest

The Hidden Side of Diversity: Effects of Imperfect Detection on Multiple Dimensions of Biodiversity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About