Habitat Requirements and Preservation of the Beetle Assemblages Associated with Hollow Oaks
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Habitat requirements and preservation of the beetle assemblages associated withh Habitat requirements and preservation of the beetle assemblages associated with hollow oaks Nicklas Jansson Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology Division of Ecology Linköping University SE-581 83 Linköping Sweden Jansson, N. 2009. Habitat requirements and preservation of the beetle assemblages associated with hollow oaks. Doctoral thesis. Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Division of E cology, L inköping University, L inköping, Sweden. N icklas Jansson Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Division of E cology, L inköping University, SE-58183 Linköping, Sweden. e-mail: nicja@ ifm.liu.se, nicklas.jansson@ lansstyrelsen.se © 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd (Paper I) © 2002 K luwer Academic Publishers. (Paper II) © Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008. (Paper III) © 2009 Nicklas Jansson unless otherwise noted No part of this thesis, including papers that are in press, may be reproduced without permission of the copyright holders. Front cover: top: young leaves of a young oak grazed by elk; bottom: the largest oak in the County of Östergötland “L agnebrunnaeken” in Boxholm, fruit body of the fungi Laetiporus sulphureus on an oak trunk, oak wood with brown rot and the darkling beetle Tenebrio opacus. Back cover: a male of the hermit beetle (Osmoderma eremita) sitting on an oak trunk outside a cavity. ISBN: 978-91-7393-679-8 ISSN: 0345-7524 Printed by L iU-Tryck Linköping, Sweden 2009 2 Contents Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Populärvetenskaplig sammanfattning (ska översätta ovan istället) ......................................................................... 6 List of papers ........................................................................................................................................................... 7 My contribution to the papers ................................................................................................................................. 7 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 9 1.1 Oaks in Sweden ........................................................................................................................................... 10 1.2. The saproxylic beetles on oak .................................................................................................................... 11 1.3. Important factors for saproxylic beetles on old oaks .................................................................................. 11 1.3.1. Substrate types and dead wood succession ......................................................................................... 11 1.3.2 Spatial and temporal variation in substrate availability ........................................................................ 13 1.3.3. Climate ................................................................................................................................................ 14 1.3.4. Historical events .................................................................................................................................. 14 1.4. Aim of the thesis ........................................................................................................................................ 15 2. Study sites and methods .................................................................................................................................... 15 2.1. Study regions and sites ............................................................................................................................... 15 2.2. Sampling methods ...................................................................................................................................... 16 2.3. Description of each study ........................................................................................................................... 18 2.3.1. The influence of forest regrowth, original canopy cover and tree size on saproxylic beetles associated with old oaks (Paper I) .................................................................................................................................. 18 2.3.2. A comparison of three methods to survey saproxylic beetles in hollow oaks (Paper II). .................... 18 2.3.3. An indicator system for identification of sites of high conservation value for saproxylic oak (Quercus spp.) beetles in southern Sweden (Paper III) ................................................................................................. 18 2.3.4. Boxes mimicking tree hollows can help conservation of saproxylic beetles (Paper IV) ..................... 19 2.3.5. Spatial preferences for substrate density in saproxylic oak beetles (Paper V) .................................... 20 2.4. Analyses ..................................................................................................................................................... 21 2.4.1. Identification of beetles ....................................................................................................................... 21 3. Results and discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 21 3.1. Species number and composition (I, II, III, IV) ......................................................................................... 21 3.2. Habitat requirements of the beetle fauna (Paper I) ..................................................................................... 22 3.3. Artificial environments for the hollow inhabiting beetle fauna (Paper IV) ................................................ 23 3.4. Importance of spatial structure of the habitat (Paper IV, V) ...................................................................... 24 3.5. Practical considerations in site selection for protection and management (Papers I, II, III, IV, V) ........... 26 3.5.1. Comparison of methods for studying the saproxylic beetle fauna (Paper II) ...................................... 26 3.5.2. Indicators for identification of species-rich sites or sites with many red-listed species and how they work when used in other regions (Paper III) ................................................................................................ 28 4. Conclusions and recommendations ................................................................................................................... 31 4.1. Finding high priority sites .......................................................................................................................... 31 4.2. Management at a landscape level ............................................................................................................... 33 4.3. Management at a stand level ...................................................................................................................... 34 4.4. Needed knowledge for future management of oak habitats ....................................................................... 35 5. Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................................... 35 6. References ......................................................................................................................................................... 37 3 4 Abstract One of the most endangered assemblages of species in Europe is saproxylic beetles associated with old trees. To be able to conserve these species there is a need of developing methods to survey the fauna and to evaluate the conservation value of different oak habitats, develop in- struments for landscape planning and detailed knowledge of species habitat requirements. The results are based on a data set from window and pit-fall trapping of saproxylic beetles at 94 different sites spread over four regions in southern Sweden. Additionally, 48 wooden boxes with artificial wood mould, consisting mainly of oak saw dust and oak leaves and some vary- ing additional substrates, were studied for three years at three of the sites and their vicinities. A comparison of three methods to assess species richness and composition of the saproxylic beetle fauna in standing hollow oaks showed that all trapping methods were effec- tive in detecting species, but as they partially target different assemblages of species it is prof- itable to combine the methods. Window traps gave most species but wood mould sampling is the cheapest method to sample the fauna. It was possible to predict the conservation value in- dividual oak patches with sets of indicator species of saproxylic beetles with regard to number of species or presence of conservation priority species. Indicator sets of species effectively caught with pitfall traps gave the overall best predictions. When comparing different treat- ment of species indata, the explanatory power of predictions was strongest for pres- ence/absence data. Predictions of species number and an index worked well within the same regions but gave varied result for three other regions, which shows that transferability of indi- cators between regions may be doubtful. Species richness was greatest in stands with large,