Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników

Znaleziono wyników: 14

Liczba wyników na stronie
Pierwsza strona wyników Pięć stron wyników wstecz Poprzednia strona wyników Strona / 1 Następna strona wyników Pięć stron wyników wprzód Ostatnia strona wyników

Wyniki wyszukiwania

help Sortuj według:

help Ogranicz wyniki do:
Pierwsza strona wyników Pięć stron wyników wstecz Poprzednia strona wyników Strona / 1 Następna strona wyników Pięć stron wyników wprzód Ostatnia strona wyników
The study was carried out in 1999–2000 in midfield shelterbelts located in mosaic agricultural landscape near village Turew (West Poland) with the aid of transect method (total length amounted to 4520 m). Five shelterbelts (transect length – 3070 m) have been planted in 1993 and one shelterbelt (transect length – 1450 m) in 1998. All the shelterbelts have been planted on arable land. Twenty seven species of butterflies (imagines) were recorded during the study period. Pieris napi and P.rapae dominated in all shelterbelts. Their dominance in 6–7 years old shelterbelts amounted to 30 and 24%, respectively, while in younger one (1–2 years old) – 34 and 32%. Total mean density of butterflies in older shelterbelts was equal to 91.9 ind. km⁻¹ of transect (width 5 m) – and was about 40% higher than in the younger one. Lower dominance of Aphantopus hyperantus (8%) observed in 6–7 years shelterbelts (when compared to several tens years ones) was most likely caused by small share of grasses and perennial dicotyledons, which are important for this species. The butterflies recorded in shelterbelts may be assigned to four ecological groups: ubiquistic species (7 spp.), species typical for open area (10 spp.), species linked to afforestations (3 spp.) and woodland (7 spp.). In all studied shelterbelts most abundant were ubiquistic species and open areas species (Pieris rapae and P. napi) with no respect to age of shelterbelt. Also some rare species with higher environmental demands were recorded, i.e., Polyommatus amandus and Carterocephalus palaeon, which have not been previously observed in the study area.
Former studies usually show a positive effect of landscape heterogeneity on different groups of animals occurring in crop fields but some controversies have been discovered. The aim of this study was to answer the question whether the introduction of mid-field tree belts can help to increase numbers of predatory carabids in crop fields. Distance and the direction of movements of individually marked carabids caught in traps in the shelterbelts and in the adjacent crop fields were measured during one week of July (in 2003 and 2004). Pitfall traps (N=360) were placed 2 meters apart in 30 parallel rows which formed a rectangle of 58 × 22 m divided into 5 strips (5 rows in each one). Strip A was located in the shelterbelt, the others (B-E) were placed in the field. Beetles (exclusively – Harpalus rufipes (Degeer, 1774) which predominated in both habitats) after being marked with fast drying paint (non-dissolving in water, not harmful, and using dot code) were released at the same spots where they were caught. Accordingly 1099 and 1683 individuals in both years were marked and the number of recaptured individuals was equal to 259 (24%) and 307 (18%). Proportion of recapture rate for individuals marked in particular strips ranged between 18 and 28%. Mobility of the beetles was similar in both years (15.9 m and 16.5 m; t = 0.59, df = 579, P> 0.5). Individuals marked within the shelterbelt (strip A) were in both years caught much further away (25 and 27 m) than the individuals marked in opposite strip E, located in crop field (15 and 17.5 m). Differences between the distance covered daily by insects marked in the field and in the shelterbelt were statistically significant whereas differences between distances covered within the field by insects marked in particular strips – were not significant. Only 8–9% of insects marked in the shelterbelt (strip A) was recaptured in the same strip while recapture rate for individuals marked in other strips was higher –16 to 32%. The proportion of insects marked in the field (strip B, C, D, E) and recaptured in the shelterbelt was very low (2–11%). The comparison of recapture rates between strips A and B also shows that insects move mostly from the shelterbelt to the field. As much as 30–34% of the insects marked in the shelterbelt were caught in the bordering field. Among the insects marked in the next strip B, adjacent to the shelterbelt, only 10–11% individuals were caught in the shelterbelt. Presented results indicate that dominating direction of the dispersal in the mosaic landscape is from the shelterbelt to the field.
Pierwsza strona wyników Pięć stron wyników wstecz Poprzednia strona wyników Strona / 1 Następna strona wyników Pięć stron wyników wprzód Ostatnia strona wyników
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.