Determinants of within-patch microdistribution and movements of endangered butterfly Coenonympha oedippus (Fabricius, 1787) (Nymphalidae: Satyrinae)


  • Tatjana Čelik ZRC SAZU, Institute of Biology, Novi trg 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
  • Branko Vreš ZRC SAZU, Institute of Biology, Novi trg 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
  • Andrej Seliškar ZRC SAZU, Institute of Biology, Novi trg 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia


Mark–release–recapture, Coenonympha oedippus, microdistribution of adults, within-patch movements, vegetation structure, Ljubljansko barje


The within-patch microdistribution and movements of adults of the critically endangered butterfly, Coenonympha oedippus, were studied using mark-recapture data from an isolated patch network, which consisted of 8 patches in central Slovenia. The impact of patch characteristics on both parameters was analyzed. Males fly longer distances and spend more time flying than females. The distances and seasonal pattern of male movements were dependent on the patch size, and on the microdistribution and density of freshly emerged (receptive) females. The spatial and temporal pattern of female microdistribution was influenced by vegetation height, the homogeneity of host plant stands and the shading of the ground and/or the lowest parts of herb layer. In the case of near continuous distribution of host plants within a patch, the structure of herb vegetation appears to be the major determinant of adult microdistribution. It affects the dynamics of butterfly emergence and the selection of oviposition sites. The per cent cover of the nectar plant, Potentilla erecta, does not play an important role in butterfly microdistribution.


Download data is not yet available.


Abadijev, S.P. 2001: An Atlas of the Distribution of the Butterflies in Bulgaria (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea & Papilionoidea). Pensoft, Sofia-

Moscow, 335 pp.

Aistleitner, U., Mayr, T. & Siegel, C. 2006: Nachweise von neuen, verschollenen un stark gefährdeten Grossschmetterlingen aus Vorarlberg, Austria occ. (Lepidoptera). Zeitschrift der Arbeitsgemeinschaft österreichischer Entomologen, 58: 1–10.

Anthes, N., Fartmann, T., Hermann, G. & Kaule, G. 2003: Combining larval habitat quality and metapopulation structure – the key for successful management of pre-alpine Euphydryas aurinia colonies. Journal of Insect Conservation, 7: 175–185.

Auckland, J.N., Debinski, D.M. & Clark, W.R. 2004: Survival, movement, and resource use of the butterfly Parnassius clodius. Ecological Entomology, 29: 139–149.

Baguette, M., Vansteenwegen, C., Convi, I. & Neve, G. 1998: Sex-biased density-dependent migration in a metapopulation of the butterfly Proclossiana eunomia. Acta Oecologica, 19: 17–24.

Balleto, E., Bonelli S. & Cassulo L. 2005: Mapping the Italian Butterfly Diversity for Conservation. In: Kühn, E., Feldmann, R., Thomas, J. & Settele, J. (eds.): Studies in the ecology and conservation of butterflies in Europe. Vol. 1: General concepts and case studies. Pensoft, Sofia-Moscow, pp. 71–76.

Balleto, E. & Kudrna, O. 1985: Some Aspects of the Conservation of Butterflies in Italy, with Recommendations for a future Strategy (Lepidoptera Hesperiidae & Papilionoidea). Bolletino della Società Entomologica Italiana, 117: 39–59.

Bozano, G.C. 2002: Guide to the butterflies of the Palearctic region. Satyrinae part III. Omnes Artes, Milano, 71 pp.

Brakefield, P.M. 1982: Ecological studies on the butterfly Maniola jurtina in Britain. I. Adult behaviour, microdistrbution and dispersal. Journal of Animal Ecology, 51: 713–726.

Braun-Blanquet, J. 1964: Pflanzensoziologie. Grundzüge der Vegetations Kunde. 3. Auflage. Springer, Wien-New York, 865 pp.

Brommer, J.E. & Fred, M.S. 1999: Movement of the Apollo butterfly Parnassius apollo related to host plant and nectar plant patches. Ecological Entomology, 24: 125–131.

Brown, I.L. & Ehrlich, P.R. 1980: Population biology of the checkerspot butterfly, Euphydras chalcedona. Structure of the Jasper Ridge colony. Oecologia, 47: 239–251.

Buszko, J. 2005: Coenonympha oedippus (Fabricius, 1787). In Polska Czerwona Księga Zwierząt – Bezkręgowce, (31.5.2005)

Chew, F.S. & Robbins, R.K. 1989: Egg-laying in Butterflies. In: Vane-Wright, R.I. & Ackery, P. R. (eds.): The biology of Butterflies. Princeton

University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, pp. 65–79.

Chrétien, M.P. 1886: Une note sur les premiers ćtats du Coenonympha oedippus. In: Bourgeois, M.J. (ed.): Séance du 13 octobre 1886 (Bulletin entomologique). Annales de la Societe Entomologique de France, 6: 638 (157).

Cooch, E. & White, G. 2008: Program MARK. “A Gentle Introduction”. 7th Edition.

Čelik, T. 1997: Ecological researches of endangered species Coenonympha oedippus Fabricius, 1787 (Lepidoptera: Satyridae) on the Ljubljansko barje. Msc Thesis, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, 67 pp. (In Slovene with English summary)

Čelik, T. 2003: Population structure, migration and conservation of Coenonympha oedippus Fabricius, 1787 (Lepidoptera: Satyridae) in a fragmented landscape. PhD Thesis, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, 100 pp. (In Slovene with English summary)

Čelik, T. 2004: Population dynamics of endangered species Coenonympha oedippus Fabricius, 1787 (Lepidoptera: Satyridae) on the Ljubljansko barje. Acta Entomologica Slovenica, 12: 99–114.

Čelik, T., Verovnik, R., Gomboc, S. & Lasan, M. 2005: Natura 2000 in Slovenia: Lepidoptera. Založba ZRC SAZU, ZRC SAZU, Ljubljana, 288 pp. (In Slovene with English summary)

Dennis, L.H.R. 2004: Just how important are structural elements as habitat components? Indications from a declining lycaenid butterfly with priority conservation status. Journal of Insect Conservation, 8: 37–45.

Dierks, K. 2006: Beobachtungen zur Larvalbiologie von Coenonympha oedippus (Fabricius, 1787) im Südwesten Frankreichs (Lepidoptera: Satyridae). Entomologische Zeitschrift, 116 (4): 186–188.

Drouet, E. 1989: La situation de Coenonympha oedippus Fabricius dans le département de l’Isère (Lepidoptera Nymphalidae Satyrinae). Bulletin Mensuel de la Société Linnéenne de Lyon, 58: 345–349.

Ehrlich, P.R. 1989: The structure and dynamics of butterfly populations. In: Vane-Wright, R.I. & Ackery, P.R. (eds.): The biology of Butterflies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, pp. 25–40.

Elligsen, H., Beinlich B. & Plachter, H. 1997: Effects of large-scale cattle grazing on populations of Coenonympha glycerion and Lasiommata megera (Lepidoptera: Satyridae). Journal of Insect Conservation, 1: 13–23.

ESRI, 1999–2006: Arc GIS 9, ArcMap version 9.2. ESRI Inc.

Fischer, K., Beinlich, B. & Plachter, H. 1999: Population structure, mobility and habitat preferences of the violet copper Lycaena helle (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in Western Germany: implications for conservation. Journal of Insect Conservation, 3: 43–52.

Fleishman, E., Ray, C., Sjörgen-Gulve, P., Boggs, C.L. & Murphy, D.D. 2002: Assessing the roles of patch quality, area, and isolation in predicting metapopulation dynamics. Conservation Biology, 16: 1–11.

Fowler, J. & Cohen, L. 1992: Practical statistics for field biology. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, New York, Brisbane, Toronto, Singapore, 227 pp.

Gibbs, M., Lace, L.A., Jones, M.J. & Moore, A.J. 2004: Intraspecific competition in the speckled wood butterfly Pararge aegeria: Effect of rearing density and gender on larval life history. Journal of Insect Science, 4: 16, 6 pp.

Gorbunov, P. 2001: The butterflies of Russia: classification, genitalia, keys for identification (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea and Papilionoidea). Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Plant and Animal Ecology, Publishers Thesis, Ekaterinburg, 320 pp.

Gutiérrez, D., Thomas, C.D. & Cortes-Leon, J.L. 1999: Dispersal, distribution, patch network and metapopulation dynamics of the dingy skipper butterfly (Erynnis tages). Oecologia, 121: 506–517.

Habeler, H. 1972: Zur Kenntnis der Lebensräume von Coenonympha oedippus F. (Lep. Satyridae). Nachr. Bayer. Ent. 21, 3: 51–54.

Hafner, J. 1910: Makrolepidopteren von Görz und Umgebung. Entomologischen Zeitschrift, XXIV Jahrgang, Sonder-Abdruck: 1–40. Heath, J. 1981: Threatened Rhopalocera (Butterflies) in Europe. European Committee for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Council of Europe, 157 pp.

Ide, J. 2002: Mating behaviour and light conditions cause seasonal changes in the dispersal pattern of the satyrine butterfly Lethe diana. Ecological Entomology, 27: 33–40.

Ims, R.A. & Hjermann, D.Ø. 2001: Condition-dependent dispersal. In: Clobert, J., Danchin, E., Dhondt, A.A. & Nichols, J.D. (eds.): Dispersal.

Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 203–216.

Ims, R.A. & Yaccoz, G.N. 1997: Studying Transfer Processes in Metapopulations. Emigration, Migration and Colonization. In: Hanski, I. & Gilpin, M.E. (eds.): Metapopulation biology. Ecology, Genetics and Evolution. Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 247–265.

Kaligarič, M., 1997: Rastlinstvo Primorskega krasa in Slovenske Istre. Zgodovinsko društvo za južno Primorsko: Znanstveno-raziskovalno središče Republike Slovenije, Koper, 111 pp.

Kolar, H. 1919: Über das Vorkommen von Coenonympha oedippus F. Zeitschrift der österreichischen Entomologen-Vereines, Wien, 4. Jahrgang: 96.

Kolar, H. 1929: Verbreitung von Coenonympha oedippus F. in Europa. Verhandlugen des zoologisch- botanischen Vereins in Wien, Jahr 1928, Band 78: 105–108.

Konvicka, M., Hula, V. & Fric, Z. 2003: Habitat of pre-hibernating larvae of the endangered butterfly Euphydras aurinia (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae): What can be learned from vegetation composition and structure? European Journal of Entomology, 100: 313–322.

Krauss, J., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Müller, C.B. & Tscharntke, T. 2005: Relative importance of resource quantity, isolation and habitat quality for landscape distribution of monophagous butterfly. Ecography, 28: 465–474.

Kučinić, M., Tvrtković, N. & Kletečki, E. 1999: The False Ringelt (Coenonympha oedippus F.) is a member of the Croatian butterfly fauna after all. Natura Croatica, 8: 399–405.

Kuussaari, M., Nieminen, M., Hanski I. 1996: An experimental study of migration in the Glanville fritillary butterfly Melitaea cinxia. Journal of Animal Ecology, 65: 791–801.

Lafranchis, J. 2004: Fische Insectes protégés. Le Fadet des laîches. Insectes, 133: 21–22.

Lafranchis, T. 2000: Les Papillions de jour de France, Belgique et Luxembourg et leurs chenilles. Collection Parthenope, editions Biotope, Meze, 448 pp.

Lhonore, J. 1996: Coenonympha oedippus. Nature and environment, 79: 98–104.

Lhonore, J. 1998: Biologie, écologie et répartition de quatre espèces de Lépidoptères Rhopalocères protégés (Lycaenidae, Satyridae) dans l’Ouest de la France. Rapport d’études de l’OPIE, vol. 2, 27-09-2000.

Lhonore, J. & Lagarde, M. 1999: Biogeographie, ecologie et protection de Coenonympha oedippus (Fab., 1787) (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae: Satyrinae). Annales de la Société Entomologique de France, 35 (suppl.): 299–307.

Loertscher, M., Erhardt, A. & Zettel, J. 1995: Microdistribution of butterflies in a mosaiclike habitat: The role of nectar sources. Ecography, 18: 15–26.

Luoto, M., Kuussaari, M., Rita, H., Salminen, J. & von Bonsdorff, T. 2001: Determinants of distribution and abundance in the clouded apollo butterfly: a lanscape ecological approach. Ecography, 24: 601–617.

Manly, B.F.J. 1971: Estimates of a Marking Effect with Capture-Recapture Sampling. Journal of Applied Ecology, 8: 181–189.

Martinčič, A., Wraber, T., Jogan, N., Podobnik, A., Turk, B., Vreš, B., Ravnik, V., Frajman, B., Strgulc Krajšek, S., Trčak, B., Bačič, T., Fischer, M. A., Eler, K. & Surina, B. 2007: Mala flora Slovenije. Ključ za določanje praprotnic in semenk. Četrta, dopolnjena in spremenjena izdaja. Tehniška založba Slovenije, Ljubljana, 967 pp.

Matter, S.F. & Roland, J. 2002: An experimental examination of the effects of habitat quality on the dispersal and local abundance of the butterfly Parnassius smintheus. Ecological Entomology, 27: 308–316.

Matter, S.F., Roland, J., Keyghobadi, N. & Sabourin, K. 2003: The effects of isolation, habitat area, and resources on the abundance, density, and movements of the butterfly Parnassius smintheus. American Midland Naturalist, 150: 26–36.

Morton, A.C. 1989: The Effects of Marking and Handling on Recapture Frequencies of Butterflies. In: Vane-Wright, R.I. & Ackery, P.R. (eds.): The biology of Butterflies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, pp. 55–58.

Oberdorfer, E. 1978: Süddeutsche Pflanzengesellschaften II, 2. Aufl., Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart, New York, 355 pp. Oberdorfer, E. (ed.) 1983: Süddeutsche Pflanzengesellschaften III, Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena, Stuttgart, New York, 455 pp.

Pastoralis, G. & Reiprich, A. 1995: Zoznam Motylov vyskytujucich sa na uzemi Slovenska. Spišska Nova Ves, Komarno, 52 pp.

Pollard, E. & Yates, T. J. 1993: Monitoring Butterflies for Ecology and Conservation. Chapman & Hall, London, 274 pp.

Ravenscroft, N.O.M. 1994: The ecology of the chequered butterfly Carterocephalus palaemon in Scotland. Microhabitat. Journal of Applied Ecology, 31: 613–622.

Sajovic, G. 1910: Naravoslovni oddelek, Zoologična zbirka: brezvretenčarji. In: Mantuani, J. (ed.): Poročilo o deželnem muzeju »Rudolfinum « za l. 1909. Carniola, Nova vrsta, Muzejsko društvo za Kranjsko, Ljubljana, L. I., Zvezek 1: 39–40.

SBN (Schweizerischer Bund für Naturschutz), 1987: Tagfalter und ihre Lebensräume. Schweizerischer Bund für Naturschutz, Basel, 516 pp.

Schneider, C. 2003: The influence of spatil scale on quantifying insect dispersal: an analysis of butterfly data. Ecological Entomology, 28: 252–256.

Schneider, C., Dover, J. & Fry, G.L.A. 2003: Movement of two grassland butterflies in the same habitat network: the role of adult resources and size of the study area. Ecological Entomology, 28: 219–227.

Schwarzwälder, B., Lörtscher, M., Erhardt, A. & Zettel, J. 1997: Habitat utilization by the Heath Fritillary butterfly, Mellicta athalia ssp. celadussa (Rott.) (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) in montane grasslands of different management. Biological Conservation, 82: 157–165.

Scott, J.A. 1975: Flight patterns among eleven species of diurnal Lepidoptera. Ecology, 56: 1367–1377.

Seliškar, T., Vreš, B., Seliškar, A. 2003: FloVegSi 2.0. Računalniški program za urejanje in analizo bioloških podatkov. Biološki inštitut ZRC SAZU, Ljubljana.

Singer, M.C. 1989: Butterfly-Hostplant Relationships: Host Quality, Adult Choice and Larval Success. In: Vane-Wright, R.I. & Ackery, P.R. (eds.): The biology of Butterflies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, pp. 81–88.

SPSS Inc., 1989–2004: SPSS 13.0 for Windows. Release 13.0 (1 Sept 2004).

Staub, R. & Aistleitner, U. 2006: Das Moor- Wiesenvögelschen

– oder worauf es im grenzüberschreitenden Artenschutz ankommt. In:

Broggi, M.F. (ed.): Alpenrheintal – eine Region im Umbau. Analysen und Perspektiven der räumlichen Entwicklung. Verlag der Liechtensteinischen Akademischen Gesselschaft, pp. 245‑254.

Tabashnik, B.E. 1980: Population Structure of Pierid Butterflies. III. Pest Populations of Colias eriphyle. Oecologia, 47: 175–183.

Tregubov, V. 1957: Gozdne rastlinske združbe. In: Inštitut za gozdno in lesno gospodarstvo Slovenije (ed.): Prebiralni gozdovi na Snežniku. Vegetacijska in gozdnogospodarska monografija. Kmečka knjiga, Ljubljana, pp. 23‑63.

Trpin, D. & Vreš, B. 1995: Register flore Slovenije. Praprotnice in cvetnice. (Register of the Flora of Slovenia. Ferns and Vascular Plants). Znanstvenoraziskovalni center SAZU, Zbirka 7, Ljubljana, 153 pp.

Tshikolovets, V. V. 2003: Butterflies of Eastern Europe, Urals and Caucasus. Brno, 176 pp.

Tutin, T. G., Heywood, V., Burges, N. A., Moore, D. M., Valentine, D. H., Walters, S. M. & Webb D., A. (Eds.) 1980: Flora Europaea, Volume 5. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 452 pp.

Välimäki, P. & Itämies, J. 2003: Migration of the clouded Apollo butterfly Parnassius mnemosyne in a network of suitable habitats – effects of patch characteristics. Ecography, 26: 679–691.

van Halder, I., Barbaro, L., Corcket E. & Jactel H. 2008: Importance of semi-natural habitats for the conservation of butterfly communities in landscapes dominated by pine plantations. Biodiversity and Conservation, 17:1149–1169.

van Sway, C.A.M. & Warren, M.S. 1999: Red Data Book of European Butterflies (Rhopalocera). Nature and Environment, 99: 1–260.

Vozar, A., Örvössy, N., Kocsis, M., Korösi, A. & Peregovits, L. 2005: First results of a study on Coenonympha oedippus in Hungary. In: Kühn, E., Feldmann, R., Thomas, J. & Settele, J. (eds.): Studies in the ecology and conservation of butterflies in Europe. Vol.1: General concepts and case studies. Pensoft, Sofia-Moscow, pp. 120.

Weidemann, H. J. 1995: Tagfalter: beobachten, bestimmen. 2., völlig neu bearb. Aufl. Naturbuch Verlag, Augsburg, 659 pp.

White, G. 2008: Program MA RK. Version 5.1 (http//

Wiklund, C. 2003: Sexual selection and the evolution of butterfly mating systems. In: Boggs, C.L., Watt, W.B. & Ehrlich, P.R. (eds.): Butterflies. Ecology and Evolution Taking Flight. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 67–90.

Winiarska, G. 2001: Butterflies (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea, Papilionoidea) in Narew National Park. Fragmenta faunistica, 44: 73–78.



How to Cite

Čelik, T., Vreš, B., & Seliškar, A. (2015). Determinants of within-patch microdistribution and movements of endangered butterfly Coenonympha oedippus (Fabricius, 1787) (Nymphalidae: Satyrinae). Hacquetia, 8(2). Retrieved from




Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>