Journal of Insect Conservation

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 39–52 | Cite as

Patterns of microhabitat and larval host-plant use by an imperiled butterfly in northern Florida

  • Matthew D. Thom
  • Jaret Daniels


The quality of habitat for a given species is fundamental to its persistence in that habitat space. Herbivorous insects often require a specific combination of host plants, floral resources, and physical features such as shelter. Identifying these different habitat features is a focus of ecology and conservation, particularly for managing rare or imperiled taxa. We investigated the patterns of microhabitat and host plant use of the rare frosted elfin butterfly, Callophrys irus, a larval host-plant specialist found in frequently disturbed sand plains, barrens, and sandhill pine-oak forests of the eastern United States. Previous studies have been conducted on populations in the Northeastern and Midwestern US, but the southern part of its range remains unstudied. Our efforts focused on a persistent C. irus colony in northeastern Florida, resulting in a geographically referenced census of larval host-plant Lupinus perennis, along with a multiple year survey of microhabitat features relevant to both C. irus adults and immatures. Results of the larval host-plant census revealed that the highest densities of host plants were located distant to the highest densities of C. irus. Hot-spot analysis confirmed the significance of this pattern, suggesting different habitat requirements for larval host-plant L. perennis and C. irus individuals in order to achieve maximum potential densities. Our survey of C. irus immatures showed a similar pattern of microhabitat affinity that was previously recorded in the Northeast and Midwestern US, including large larval host-plants, low amounts of ground cover vegetation, and the presence of some shade. Unique to our study we found that the presence of other herbivores of L. perennis such as larvae of the crambid moth Uresiphita reversalis had a negative effect on encountering C. irus immatures. Our results suggest that management that aims to conserve these species needs to include habitat factors that favor the overlap of these species and to consider where their densities are the highest.


Feeding Damage Focal Plant Larval Host Plant Evidence Ratio Microhabitat Variable 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We would like to personally thank J. Colburn for help with design, field work, and analysis. Additional thanks goes to M. Trager for logistical and conceptual guidance. We also thank L. Thom, M. Standridge, L. Barszczak, and M. Streifel for help in the field, and R. Fletcher, M Branham, L. Kobziar, and H. MacAuslane for reviewing previous drafts of this work. We thank the two anonymous reviewers that provided comments on a previous draft of this manuscript. We finally thank St. Johns River Water Management District staff J. Hart and B. Camposano for access and logistical support. This work was conducted as part of M. Thom’s dissertation funded through a University of Florida Alumni Assistantship.


  1. Albanese G, Vickery PD, Sievert PR (2007) Habitat characteristics of adult frosted elfins (Callophrys irus) in sandplain communities of southeastern Massachusetts, USA. Biol Conserv 136:53–64. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2006.10.055 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albanese G, Vickery PD, Sievert PR (2008) Microhabitat use by larvae and females of a rare barrens butterfly, frosted elfin (Callophrys irus). J Insect Conserv 12:603–615. doi: 10.1007/s10841-007-9097-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson DR (2008) Model based inference in the life sciences. Springer-Verlage New York, New York. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-74075-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnes JK (2003) Natural History of the Albany Pine Bush. New York State Museum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Bauerfeind SS, Theisen A, Fischer K (2009) Patch occupancy in the endangered butterfly Lycaena helle in a fragmented landscape: effects of habitat quality, patch size and isolation. J Insect Conserv 13:271–277. doi: 10.1007/s10841-008-9166-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bernays EA, Montllor CB (1989) Aposematism of Uresiphita reversalis larvae (Pyralidae). J Lepid Soc 43:231–273Google Scholar
  7. Čelik T et al (2015) Winter-green host-plants, litter quantity and vegetation structure are key determinants of habitat quality for Coenonympha oedippus in Europe. J Insect Conserv 19:359–375. doi: 10.1007/s10841-014-9736-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Frye JA (2012) The effect of deer browse on sundial lupine: implications for frosted elfins. Northeast Nat 19:421–430 doi: 10.1656/045.019.0305 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grigore MT, Tramer EJ (1996) The short-term effect of fire on Lupinus perennis (L). Nat Areas J 16:41–48Google Scholar
  10. Grundel R, Pavlovic NB (2007) Resource availability, matrix quality, microclimate, and spatial pattern as predictors of patch use by the Karner blue butterfly. Biol Conserv 135:135–144. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2006.10.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Grundel R, Pavlovic NB, Sulzman CL (1998a) The effect of canopy cover and seasonal change on host plant quality for the endangered Karner blue butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis). Oecologia 114:243–250Google Scholar
  12. Grundel R, Pavlovic NB, Sulzman CL (1998b) Habitat use by the endangered Karner blue butterfly in oak woodlands: the influence of canopy cover. Biol Conserv 85:47–53Google Scholar
  13. Heisswolf A, Reichmann S, Poethke H, Schroder B, Obermaier E (2009) Habitat quality matters for the distribution of an endangered leaf beetle and its egg parasitoid in a fragmented landscape. J Insect Conserv 13:165–175. doi: 10.1007/s10841-008-9139-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kopper BJ, Charlton RE, Margolies DC (2000) Oviposition site selection by the regal fritillary, Speyeria idalia, as affected by proximity of violet host plants. J Insect Behav 13:651–665. doi: 10.1023/a:1007887809621 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leen R (1998) Host plant preferences of Uresiphita reversalis (Guenée) (Lep., Crambidae). J Appl Entomol 122:537–541. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0418.1998.tb01540.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nagelkerke NJD (1991) A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination. Biometrika 78:691–692. doi: 10.1093/biomet/78.3.691 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pavlovic NB, Grundel R (2009) Reintroduction of wild lupine (Lupinus perennisL.) depends on variation in canopy, vegetation, and litter cover. Restor Ecol 17:807–817. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-100X.2008.00417.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pfitsch WA, Williams EH (2009) Habitat restoration for lupine and specialist butterflies. Restor Ecol 17:226–233. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-100X.2008.00370.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pulliam HR (1988) Sources, sinks, and population regulation. Am Nat 132:652–661. doi: 10.1086/284880 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Salvato MH, Salvato HL (2010) Notes on the status and ecology of Strymon acis bartrami (Lycaenidae) in Everglades National Park. J Lepidopterists’ Soc 64:154–160. doi: 10.18473/lepi.v64i3.a4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schweitzer DF, Minno MC, Wagner DL (2011) Rare, declining, and poorly known butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera) of forests and woodlands in the eastern United States. U.S. Forest Service, Forest Health Technology Enterprise TeamGoogle Scholar
  22. Shapiro AM (1974) Partitioning of resources among lupine-feeding lepidoptera The. Am Midl Nat 91:243–248. doi: 10.2307/2424527 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stehr FW (2005) Immature Insects, vol 1. Kendall Hunt Publishing, Dubuque, IAGoogle Scholar
  24. Swengel AB (1996) Observations of Incisalia irus (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in central Wisconsin 1988–95. Great Lakes Entomol 29:47–62Google Scholar
  25. Thom MD, Daniels JC, Kobziar LN, Colburn JR (2015) Can butterflies evade fire? Pupa location and heat tolerance in fire prone habitats of Florida. PLoS One 10:e0126755. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0126755 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Thomas JA, Simcox DJ, Hovestadt T (2011) Evidence based conservation of butterflies. J Insect Conserv 15:241–258. doi: 10.1007/s10841-010-9341-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Trager MD, Boyd BM, Daniels JC, Pence JA (2009) Host plant selection, larval survival, and reproductive phenology in Megathymus yuccae (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae). Environ Entomol 38:1211–1218CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Minnesota Twin CitiesMinneapolisUSA
  2. 2.Florida Museum of Natural History, University of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations