Hypolestes (Odonata, Zygoptera) is a damselfly genus endemic to the Greater Antilles. The genus comprises three species: H. clara from Jamaica, H. trinitatis from Cuba, and H. hatuey from Hispaniola, which are currently evaluated by the IUCN as Endangered (EN), Vulnerable (VU) and Data Deficient, respectively. Here, we re-assess the conservation status of these species based on their extent of occurrence, as estimated from ecological niche models. In addition, we analyse the coverage offered to each of the three species by the protected areas from Jamaica, Cuba, Dominican Republic and Haiti. Our results support the maintenance H. trinitatis in the category of VU, and suggest the re-classification of H. hatuey as Near Threatened. The estimated extent of occurrence for H. clara is 6422 km2, a value close to the threshold of 5000 km2 between VU and EN. Therefore, we recommend keeping H. clara as EN, until new evidence based on population size and trend could support a change from this category to VU. We found that 14 % of the extent of occurrence for H. clara and H. hatuey, and 33 % for H. trinitatis, are within protected areas. However, the ongoing extensive deforestation in Hispaniola, coupled with the lack of protection in Haiti, could cause a decrease of the extent of occurrence of H. hatuey in the future.
HypolestesEcological niche model Species distribution model Hypolestidae Odonata Damselfly
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
We thank Chris Hassall, R. Isabel Aguirre-Alcolea and two anonymous referees for their valuables comments and suggestions on early versions of the manuscript. YT-C was supported by a project Ciencia y Conciencia funded by Universidad de Oriente (Project Code 9617) and a WDA Conservation Research Grant. MOL-C is funded by the European Commission, through an Individual European Marie Curie Fellowship (PIEFGA-2013-626504—ODOGEN). AC-R was funded by grants from the Spanish Ministry with competences in science, which included FEDER Funds (CGL2008-02799 and CGL2010-11959E).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Corbet PS (2004) Dragonflies, behavior and ecology of odonata. Harley Books, EssexGoogle Scholar
Corbet PS (2006) Forest as habitats for dragonflies (Odonata). In: Cordero-Rivera A (ed) Forest and dragonflies. Pensoft, Sofia, pp 13–36Google Scholar
Cuevas-Yáñez K, Rivas M, Muñoz J, Córdoba-Aguilar A (2015) Conservation status assessment of Paraphlebia damselflies in Mexico. Insect Conserv Divers. doi:10.1111/icad.12132Google Scholar
Daigle J (1993) A checklist of the Odonata of the Dominican Republic by province. Bull Am Odonatol 1(4):65–69Google Scholar
De Almeida MC, Côrtes LG, De Marco P (2010) New records and a niche model for the distribution of two Neotropical damselflies: Schistolobos boliviensis and Tuberculobasis inversa (Odonata: Coenagrionidae). Insect Conserv Divers 3:252–256. doi:10.1111/j.1752-4598.2010.00096.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elith J, Graham CH, Anderson RP et al (2006) Novel methods improve prediction of species’ distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29:129–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAO (2010) Global forest resources assessment 2010. Main report. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
Flint O (1996) The Odonata of Cuba, with a report on a recent collection and checklist of the cuban species. Cocuyo 5:17–20Google Scholar
Flint O, Bastardo RH, Perez-Gelabert DR (2006) Distribution of the Odonata of the Dominican Republic. Bull Am Odonatol 9:67–84Google Scholar
Fontenla JL (2003) Libélulas (Insecta: Odonata) de Sierra de los Órganos. Cocuyo 13:28–29Google Scholar
Radosavljevic A, Anderson RP (2014) Making better MAXENT models of species distributions: complexity, overfitting and evaluation. J Biogeogr 41:629–643. doi:10.1111/jbi.12227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley SJ, DeGloria SD, Elliot R (1999) A terrain ruggedness index that quantifies topographic heterogeneity. Intermt J Sci 5:23–27Google Scholar
Rissler LJ, Apodaca JJ (2007) Adding more ecology into species delimitation: ecological niche models and phylogeography help define cryptic species in the black salamander (Aneides flavipunctatus). Syst Biol 56:924–942. doi:10.1080/10635150701703063CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Sahlén G (1999) The impact of forestry on dragonfly diversity in central Sweden. Int J Odonatol 2:177–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shcheglovitova M, Anderson RP (2013) Estimating optimal complexity for ecological niche models: a jackknife approach for species with small sample sizes. Ecol Model 269:9–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simard M, Pinto N, Fisher JB, Baccini A (2011) Mapping forest canopy height globally with spaceborne lidar. J Geophys Res Biogeosci. doi:10.1029/2011JG001708Google Scholar
Torres-Cambas Y, Fonseca-Rodríguez R (2011) Sex ratio, survival, and recapture rate in a Cuban population of the damselfly Hypolestes trinitatis (Odonata: Megapodagrionidae). Acta Ethol 14:69–76. doi:10.1007/s10211-011-0095-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torres-Cambas Y, Lorenzo-Carballa MO, Ferreira S, Cordero-Rivera A (2015b) Hypolestes hatuey sp. nov.: a new species of the enigmatic genus Hypolestes (Odonata, Hypolestidae) from Hispaniola. Zootaxa 4000:207–226CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Trapero-Quintana AD, Naranjo-López C (2003) Revision of the order Odonata in Cuba. Bull Am Odonatol 2:23–40Google Scholar
Warren DL, Wright AN, Seifert SN, Shaffer HB (2014) Incorporating model complexity and spatial sampling bias into ecological niche models of climate change risks faced by 90 California vertebrate species of concern. Divers Distrib 20:334–343. doi:10.1111/ddi.12160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wellenreuther M, Larson KW, Svensson EI (2012) Climatic niche divergence or conservatism? environmental niches and range limits in ecologically similar damselflies. Ecology 93:1353–1366CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Westfall MJ (1976) Taxonomic relationships of Diceratobasis macrogaster (Selys) and Phylolestes ethelae Christiansen of the West Indies as revealed by their larvae. Odonatologica 5:65–76Google Scholar