Biomedical subjects

Atte Komonen

Publications and source records attributed to Atte Komonen.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Ecological determinants of distribution decline and risk of extinction in moths.

For successful conservation of species it is important to identify traits that predispose species to the risk of extinction. By identifying such traits conservation efforts can be directed toward species that are most at risk of becoming threatened. We used data derived from the literature to determine ecological traits that affect distribution, distribution change, and the risk of extinction in Finnish noctuid moths (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae). The ecological traits we examined included body size, larval specificity, length of the flight period, and overwintering stage. In addition, in monophagous species we examined the effects of resource distribution. Larval specificity, length of the flight period, and the overwintering stage each had an independent effect on the risk of extinction when the effects of other traits were controlled by entering all traits into the same regression model. Not a single trait predicted the risk of extinction when analysis was conducted without controlling for the other traits. This discrepancy among the results suggests that a single trait may not be enough to allow prediction of the risk of extinction. Instead, it seems that for successful, predictive conservation science data on several ecological characteristics are needed.

Animals↗

PubMed2005

Negative density-distribution relationship in butterflies.

BACKGROUND: Because "laws of nature" do not exist in ecology, much of the foundations of community ecology rely on broad statistical generalisations. One of the strongest generalisations is the positive relationship between density and distribution within a given taxonomic assemblage; that is, locally abundant species are more widespread than locally sparse species. Several mechanisms have been proposed to create this positive relationship, and the testing of these mechanisms is attracting increasing attention. RESULTS: We report a strong, but counterintuitive, negative relationship between density and distribution in the butterfly fauna of Finland. With an exceptionally comprehensive data set (data includes all 95 resident species in Finland and over 1.5 million individuals), we have been able to submit several of the mechanisms to powerful direct empirical testing. Without exception, we failed to find evidence for the proposed mechanisms creating a positive density-distribution relationship. On the contrary, we found that many of the mechanisms are equally able to generate a negative relationship. CONCLUSION: We suggest that one important determinant of density-distribution relationships is the geographical location of the study: on the edge of a distribution range, suitable habitat patches are likely to be more isolated than in the core of the range. In such a situation, only the largest and best quality patches are likely to be occupied, and these by definition can support a relatively dense population leading to a negative density-distribution relationship. Finally, we conclude that generalizations about the positive density-distribution relationship should be made more cautiously.

Animals↗

PubMed2005

Predicting the risk of extinction from shared ecological characteristics.

Understanding the ultimate causes of population declines and extinction is vital in our quest to stop the currently rampant biodiversity loss. Comparison of ecological characteristics between threatened and nonthreatened species may reveal these ultimate causes. Here, we report an analysis of ecological characteristics of 23 threatened and 72 nonthreatened butterfly species. Our analysis reveals that threatened butterflies are characterized by narrow niche breadth, restricted resource distribution, poor dispersal ability, and short flight period. Based on the characteristics, we constructed an ecological extinction risk rank and predicted which of the currently nonthreatened species are at the highest risk of extinction. Our analysis reveals that two species currently classified as nonthreatened are, in fact, at high risk of extinction, and that the status of a further five species should be reconsidered.

Animals↗