scholarly journals Monarch butterfly population decline in North America: identifying the threatening processes

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (9) ◽  
pp. 170760 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wayne E. Thogmartin ◽  
Ruscena Wiederholt ◽  
Karen Oberhauser ◽  
Ryan G. Drum ◽  
Jay E. Diffendorfer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Population Size ◽  
Breeding Season ◽  
Habitat Loss ◽  
Climatic Factors ◽  
Population Decline ◽  
Danaus Plexippus ◽  
Monarch Butterfly ◽  
Stochastic Variation ◽  
Related Factors

The monarch butterfly ( Danaus plexippus ) population in North America has sharply declined over the last two decades. Despite rising concern over the monarch butterfly's status, no comprehensive study of the factors driving this decline has been conducted. Using partial least-squares regressions and time-series analysis, we investigated climatic and habitat-related factors influencing monarch population size from 1993 to 2014. Potential threats included climatic factors, habitat loss (milkweed and overwinter forest), disease and agricultural insecticide use (neonicotinoids). While climatic factors, principally breeding season temperature, were important determinants of annual variation in abundance, our results indicated strong negative relationships between population size and habitat loss variables, principally glyphosate use, but also weaker negative effects from the loss of overwinter forest and breeding season use of neonicotinoids. Further declines in population size because of glyphosate application are not expected. Thus, if remaining threats to habitat are mitigated we expect climate-induced stochastic variation of the eastern migratory population of monarch butterfly around a relatively stationary population size.

scholarly journals Density estimates of monarch butterflies overwintering in central Mexico

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wayne Thogmartin ◽  
Jay E Diffendorfer ◽  
Laura Lopez-Hoffman ◽  
Karen Oberhauser ◽  
John Pleasants ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Population Size ◽  
Population Decline ◽  
Danaus Plexippus ◽  
Mixture Distribution ◽  
Monarch Butterfly ◽  
Accurate Estimate ◽  
Monarch Butterflies ◽  
Density Estimates ◽  
Considerable Uncertainty ◽  
Log Normal

Given the rapid population decline and recent petition for listing of the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus L.) under the Endangered Species Act, an accurate estimate of the Eastern, migratory population size is needed. Because of difficulty in counting individual monarchs, the number of hectares occupied by monarchs in the overwintering area is commonly used as a proxy for population size, which is then multiplied by the density of individuals per hectare to estimate population size. There is, however, considerable variation in published estimates of overwintering density, ranging from 6.9–60.9 million ha-1. We develop a probability distribution for overwinter density of monarch butterflies from six published density estimates. The mean density among the mixture of the six published estimates was ~27.9 million butterflies ha-1 (95% CI: 2.4–80.7 million ha-1); the mixture distribution is approximately log-normal, and as such is better represented by the median (21.1 million butterflies ha-1). Based upon assumptions regarding the number of milkweed needed to support monarchs, the amount of milkweed (Asclepias spp.) lost (0.86 billion stems) in the northern U.S. plus the amount of milkweed remaining (1.34 billion stems), we estimate >1.8 billion stems is needed to return monarchs to an average population size of 6 ha. Considerable uncertainty exists in this required amount of milkweed because of the considerable uncertainty occurring in overwinter density estimates. Nevertheless, the estimate is on the same order as other published estimates. The studies included in our synthesis differ substantially by year, location, method, and measures of precision. A better understanding of the factors influencing overwintering density across space and time would be valuable for increasing the precision of conservation recommendations.

scholarly journals Density estimates of monarch butterflies overwintering in central Mexico

PeerJ ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. e3221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wayne E. Thogmartin ◽  
Jay E. Diffendorfer ◽  
Laura López-Hoffman ◽  
Karen Oberhauser ◽  
John Pleasants ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Population Size ◽  
Population Decline ◽  
Danaus Plexippus ◽  
Mixture Distribution ◽  
Monarch Butterfly ◽  
Accurate Estimate ◽  
Monarch Butterflies ◽  
Density Estimates ◽  
Considerable Uncertainty ◽  
Log Normal

Given the rapid population decline and recent petition for listing of the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus L.) under the Endangered Species Act, an accurate estimate of the Eastern, migratory population size is needed. Because of difficulty in counting individual monarchs, the number of hectares occupied by monarchs in the overwintering area is commonly used as a proxy for population size, which is then multiplied by the density of individuals per hectare to estimate population size. There is, however, considerable variation in published estimates of overwintering density, ranging from 6.9–60.9 million ha−1. We develop a probability distribution for overwinter density of monarch butterflies from six published density estimates. The mean density among the mixture of the six published estimates was ∼27.9 million butterflies ha−1 (95% CI [2.4–80.7] million ha−1); the mixture distribution is approximately log-normal, and as such is better represented by the median (21.1 million butterflies ha−1). Based upon assumptions regarding the number of milkweed needed to support monarchs, the amount of milkweed (Asclepias spp.) lost (0.86 billion stems) in the northern US plus the amount of milkweed remaining (1.34 billion stems), we estimate >1.8 billion stems is needed to return monarchs to an average population size of 6 ha. Considerable uncertainty exists in this required amount of milkweed because of the considerable uncertainty occurring in overwinter density estimates. Nevertheless, the estimate is on the same order as other published estimates. The studies included in our synthesis differ substantially by year, location, method, and measures of precision. A better understanding of the factors influencing overwintering density across space and time would be valuable for increasing the precision of conservation recommendations.

scholarly journals Density estimates of monarch butterflies overwintering in central Mexico

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wayne Thogmartin ◽  
Jay E Diffendorfer ◽  
Laura Lopez-Hoffman ◽  
Karen Oberhauser ◽  
John Pleasants ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Population Size ◽  
Population Decline ◽  
Danaus Plexippus ◽  
Mixture Distribution ◽  
Monarch Butterfly ◽  
Accurate Estimate ◽  
Monarch Butterflies ◽  
Density Estimates ◽  
Considerable Uncertainty ◽  
Log Normal

Given the rapid population decline and recent petition for listing of the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus L.) under the Endangered Species Act, an accurate estimate of the Eastern, migratory population size is needed. Because of difficulty in counting individual monarchs, the number of hectares occupied by monarchs in the overwintering area is commonly used as a proxy for population size, which is then multiplied by the density of individuals per hectare to estimate population size. There is, however, considerable variation in published estimates of overwintering density, ranging from 6.9–60.9 million ha-1. We develop a probability distribution for overwinter density of monarch butterflies from six published density estimates. The mean density among the mixture of the six published estimates was ~27.9 million butterflies ha-1 (95% CI: 2.4–80.7 million ha-1); the mixture distribution is approximately log-normal, and as such is better represented by the median (21.1 million butterflies ha-1). Based upon assumptions regarding the number of milkweed needed to support monarchs, the amount of milkweed (Asclepias spp.) lost (0.86 billion stems) in the northern U.S. plus the amount of milkweed remaining (1.34 billion stems), we estimate >1.8 billion stems is needed to return monarchs to an average population size of 6 ha. Considerable uncertainty exists in this required amount of milkweed because of the considerable uncertainty occurring in overwinter density estimates. Nevertheless, the estimate is on the same order as other published estimates. The studies included in our synthesis differ substantially by year, location, method, and measures of precision. A better understanding of the factors influencing overwintering density across space and time would be valuable for increasing the precision of conservation recommendations.

scholarly journals Testing the hypothesis that routine sea ice coverage of 3-5 mkm2 results in a greater than 30% decline in population size of polar bears (Ursus maritimus)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan J Crockford
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Population Size ◽  
Habitat Loss ◽  
Polar Bear ◽  
Population Decline ◽  
Ursus Maritimus ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
Population Declines ◽  
Sea Ice Decline

The polar bear (Ursus maritimus) was the first species to be classified as threatened with extinction based on predictions of future conditions rather than current status. These predictions were made using expert-opinion forecasts of population declines linked to modeled habitat loss – first by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)’s Red List in 2006, and then by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2008 under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), based on data collected to 2005 and 2006, respectively. Both assessments predicted significant population declines of polar bears would result by mid-century as a consequence of summer sea ice extent rapidly reaching 3-5 mkm2 on a regular basis: the IUCN predicted a >30% decline in total population, while the USFWS predicted the global population would decline by 67% (including total extirpation of ten subpopulations within two vulnerable ecoregions). Biologists involved in these conservation assessments had to make several critical assumptions about how polar bears might be affected by future habitat loss, since sea ice conditions predicted to occur by 2050 had not occurred prior to 2006. However, summer sea ice declines have been much faster than expected: low ice levels not expected until mid-century (about 3-5 mkm2) have occurred regularly since 2007. Realization of predicted sea ice levels allows the ‘rapid sea ice decline = population decline’ assumption for polar bears to be treated as a testable hypothesis. Data collected between 2007 and 2015 reveal that polar bear numbers have not declined as predicted and no subpopulation has been extirpated. Several subpopulations expected to be at high risk of decline remained stable and five showed increases in population size. Another at-risk subpopulation was not counted but showed marked improvement in reproductive parameters and body condition with less summer ice. As a consequence, the hypothesis that repeated summer sea ice levels of below 5 mkm2 will cause significant population declines in polar bears is rejected, a result that indicates the ESA and IUCN judgments to list polar bears as threatened based on future risks of habitat loss were scientifically unfounded and that similar predictions for Arctic seals and walrus may be likewise flawed. The lack of a demonstrable ‘rapid sea ice decline = population decline’ relationship for polar bears also potentially invalidates updated survival model outputs that predict catastrophic population declines should the Arctic become ice-free in summer.

scholarly journals Testing the hypothesis that routine sea ice coverage of 3-5 mkm2 results in a greater than 30% decline in population size of polar bears (Ursus maritimus)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan J Crockford
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Population Size ◽  
Habitat Loss ◽  
Polar Bear ◽  
Population Decline ◽  
Ursus Maritimus ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
Population Declines ◽  
Sea Ice Decline

The polar bear (Ursus maritimus) was the first species to be classified as threatened with extinction based on predictions of future conditions rather than current status. These predictions were made using expert-opinion forecasts of population declines linked to modeled habitat loss – first by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)’s Red List in 2006, and then by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2008 under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), based on data collected to 2005 and 2006, respectively. Both assessments predicted significant population declines of polar bears would result by mid-century as a consequence of summer sea ice extent rapidly reaching 3-5 mkm2 on a regular basis: the IUCN predicted a >30% decline in total population, while the USFWS predicted the global population would decline by 67% (including total extirpation of ten subpopulations within two vulnerable ecoregions). Biologists involved in these conservation assessments had to make several critical assumptions about how polar bears might be affected by future habitat loss, since sea ice conditions predicted to occur by 2050 had not occurred prior to 2006. However, summer sea ice declines have been much faster than expected: low ice levels not expected until mid-century (about 3-5 mkm2) have occurred regularly since 2007. Realization of predicted sea ice levels allows the ‘rapid sea ice decline = population decline’ assumption for polar bears to be treated as a testable hypothesis. Data collected between 2007 and 2015 reveal that polar bear numbers have not declined as predicted and no subpopulation has been extirpated. Several subpopulations expected to be at high risk of decline remained stable and five showed increases in population size. Another at-risk subpopulation was not counted but showed marked improvement in reproductive parameters and body condition with less summer ice. As a consequence, the hypothesis that repeated summer sea ice levels of below 5 mkm2 will cause significant population declines in polar bears is rejected, a result that indicates the ESA and IUCN judgments to list polar bears as threatened based on future risks of habitat loss were scientifically unfounded and that similar predictions for Arctic seals and walrus may be likewise flawed. The lack of a demonstrable ‘rapid sea ice decline = population decline’ relationship for polar bears also potentially invalidates updated survival model outputs that predict catastrophic population declines should the Arctic become ice-free in summer.

scholarly journals Chromosome Number of the Monarch Butterfly, Danaus plexippus (Linnaeus 1758) and the Danainae

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher A. Hamm
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Chromosome Number ◽  
Danaus Plexippus ◽  
Evolutionary Genetics ◽  
Monarch Butterfly ◽  
Chromosome Count ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
Testable Hypothesis ◽  
Haploid Chromosome Number ◽  
Important System

AbstractThe monarch butterfly, Danaus plexippus (Linnaeus 1758) is a charismatic butterfly known for its multi-generational migration in Eastern North America, and is emerging as an important system in the study of evolutionary genetics. Assigning genes or genetic elements to chromosomes is an important step when considering how genomes evolved. The monarch butterfly has a reported haploid chromosome number of 30. The specimens that this count is based on are from Madras, India where D. plexippus does not occur. As a consequence the reported haplotype for the D. plexippus is incorrect. A literature review revealed that the specimens this count was based on were most likely Danaus genutia (Cramer 1779), which Linnaeus and others conflated with D. plexippus. In a 1954 Opinion (#282) the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature decided that the name D. genutia refers to specimens originating from the Orient and D. plexippus to those from North America. To clarify the haplotype number of D. plexippus from North America I conducted chromosome squashes of male 5th instar larvae. All specimens examined had a haploid chromosome count of n = 28. Following these new data, I then reconstructed the evolution of haplotypes throughout the Danainae subfamily to provide a testable hypothesis on the evolution of chromosome number for this group.

scholarly journals Testing the hypothesis that routine sea ice coverage of 3-5 mkm2 results in a greater than 30% decline in population size of polar bears (Ursus maritimus)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan J Crockford
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Population Size ◽  
Habitat Loss ◽  
Polar Bear ◽  
Population Decline ◽  
Ursus Maritimus ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
Population Declines ◽  
Sea Ice Decline

The polar bear (Ursus maritimus) was the first species to be classified as threatened with extinction based on predictions of future conditions rather than current status. These predictions were made using expert-opinion forecasts of population declines linked to modeled habitat loss – first by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)’s Red List in 2006, and then by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2008 under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), based on data collected to 2005 and 2006, respectively. Both assessments predicted significant population declines of polar bears would result by mid-century as a consequence of summer sea ice extent rapidly reaching 3-5 mkm2 on a regular basis: the IUCN predicted a >30% decline in total population, while the USFWS predicted the global population would decline by 67% (including total extirpation of ten subpopulations within two vulnerable ecoregions). Biologists involved in these conservation assessments had to make several critical assumptions about how polar bears might be affected by future habitat loss, since sea ice conditions predicted to occur by 2050 had not occurred prior to 2006. However, summer sea ice declines have been much faster than expected: low ice levels not expected until mid-century (about 3-5 mkm2) have occurred regularly since 2007. Realization of predicted sea ice levels allows the ‘rapid sea ice decline = population decline’ assumption for polar bears to be treated as a testable hypothesis. Data collected between 2007 and 2015 reveal that polar bear numbers have not declined as predicted and no subpopulation has been extirpated. Several subpopulations expected to be at high risk of decline remained stable and five showed increases in population size. Another at-risk subpopulation was not counted but showed marked improvement in reproductive parameters and body condition with less summer ice. As a consequence, the hypothesis that repeated summer sea ice levels of below 5 mkm2 will cause significant population declines in polar bears is rejected, a result that indicates the ESA and IUCN judgments to list polar bears as threatened based on future risks of habitat loss were scientifically unfounded and that similar predictions for Arctic seals and walrus may be likewise flawed. The lack of a demonstrable ‘rapid sea ice decline = population decline’ relationship for polar bears also potentially invalidates updated survival model outputs that predict catastrophic population declines should the Arctic become ice-free in summer.

scholarly journals Testing the hypothesis that routine sea ice coverage of 3-5 mkm2 results in a greater than 30% decline in population size of polar bears (Ursus maritimus)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan J Crockford
Keyword(s):  
Sea Ice ◽  
Population Size ◽  
Habitat Loss ◽  
Polar Bear ◽  
Population Decline ◽  
Ursus Maritimus ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Polar Bears ◽  
Population Declines ◽  
Sea Ice Decline

The polar bear (Ursus maritimus) was the first species to be classified as threatened with extinction based on predictions of future conditions rather than current status. These predictions were made using expert-opinion forecasts of population declines linked to modeled habitat loss – first by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)’s Red List in 2006, and then by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2008 under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), based on data collected to 2005 and 2006, respectively. Both assessments predicted significant population declines of polar bears would result by mid-century as a consequence of summer sea ice extent reaching 3-5 mkm2 on a regular basis: the IUCN predicted a >30% decline in total population, while the USFWS predicted the global population would decline by 67% (including total extirpation of ten subpopulations within two vulnerable ecoregions). Biologists involved in these conservation assessments had to make several critical assumptions about how polar bears might be affected by future habitat loss, since sea ice conditions predicted to occur by 2050 had not occurred prior to 2006. However, summer sea ice declines have been much faster than expected: low ice levels not expected until mid-century (about 3-5 mkm2) have occurred regularly since 2007. Realization of predicted sea ice levels allows the ‘sea ice decline = population decline’ assumption for polar bears to be treated as a testable hypothesis. Data collected between 2007 and 2015 reveal that polar bear numbers have not declined as predicted and no subpopulation has been extirpated. Several subpopulations expected to be at high risk of decline have remained stable and at least one showed a marked increase in population size over the entire period. Another at-risk subpopulation was not counted but showed marked improvement in reproductive parameters and body condition with less summer ice. As a consequence, the hypothesis that repeated summer sea ice levels of below 5 mkm2 will cause significant population declines in polar bears is rejected. This result indicates that the ESA and IUCN judgments to list polar bears as threatened based on future risks of habitat loss were hasty generalizations that were scientifically unfounded, which suggests that similar predictions for Arctic seals and walrus may be likewise flawed, while the lack of a demonstrable ‘sea ice decline = population decline’ relationship for polar bears invalidates updated survival model outputs that predict catastrophic population declines should the Arctic become ice-free in summer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document