EDP Sciences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 3 / No 1 (January-March 2004) Environ. Biosafety Res., 3 1 (2004) 55-66 References
Free Access
Issue
Environ. Biosafety Res.
Volume 3, Number 1, January-March 2004
Page(s) 55 - 66
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/ebr:2003018
Published online 15 March 2004
  • Barrett KL, Grandy N, Harrison EG, Hassan SA, Oomen PA, eds (1994) Guidance document on regulatory testing procedures for pesticides and non-target arthropods. SETAC Europe, Brussels [Google Scholar]
  • Bayerisches Landesamt für Umweltschutz (2003) Entwurf zur Neufassung der Roten Liste der Tagfalter (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera) Bayerns. Unpublished report of the Bavarian Environmental Protection Agency (LfU) [Google Scholar]
  • Bourguet D, Chaufaux J, Micoud A, Delos M, Naibo B, Bombarde F, Marque G, Eychenne N, Pagliari C (2002) Ostrinia nubilalis parasitism and the field abundance of non-target insects in transgenic Bacillus thuringiensis corn (Zea mays). Environ. Biosafety Res. 1: 49–60 [Google Scholar]
  • Brunzel S, Plachter H (1999) Bewerten mit Tagfaltern im Naturschutz. In Settele J, Feldmann R, Reinhardt R, eds, Die Tagfalter Deutschlands. Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, pp 186–213 [Google Scholar]
  • Chazdon RL, Colwell RK, Denslow JS, Guariguata MR (1998) Statistical methods for estimating species richness of woody regeneration in primary and secondary rain forests of NE Costa Rica. In Dallmeier F, Comiskey JA, eds, Forest biodiversity research, monitoring and modeling: Conceptual background and Old World case studies. Parthenon Publishing, Paris. pp 285–309 [Google Scholar]
  • Collinge SK, Prudic KL, Oliver JC (2003) Effects of local habitat characteristics and landscape context on grassland butterfly diversity. Conserv. Biol. 17: 178–187 [Google Scholar]
  • Colwell RK (1997) EstimateS: Statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 5. User’s Guide and application published at: http://viceroy.eeb.uconn.edu/estimates [Google Scholar]
  • Colwell RK, Coddington JA (1994) Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. 345: 101–118 [Google Scholar]
  • Connor EF, McCoy ED (1979) The statistics and biology of the species-area relationship. Am. Nat. 113: 791–833 [Google Scholar]
  • Conner AJ, Glare TR, Nap J-P (2003) The release of genetically modified crops into the environment. Part II. Overview of ecological risk assessment. Plant J. 33: 19–46 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Dennis RLH, Shreeve TG (1997) Diversity of butterflies on British islands: ecological influences underlying the roles of area, isolation and the size of the faunal source. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 60: 257–275 [Google Scholar]
  • Diamond E (2003) Science as a smokescreen? A report on the farm scale evaluations of GM herbicide tolerant crops. Report to the Friends of the Earth (FOE), England, published at: http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/reports/science_smokescreen.pdf, May 19, 2003 [Google Scholar]
  • Dutton A, Romeis J, Bigler F (2003) Test procedure to evaluate the risk that insect-resistant transgenic plants pose to entomophagous arthropods. In Van Driesche RG, ed, Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Biological Control of Arthropods, Honolulu, Hawaii, 14–18 Jan. 2002, United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Morgantown, WV, FHTET-2003-05, pp 466–472 [Google Scholar]
  • Ebert G, Rennwald E (1991a) Die Schmetterlinge Baden-Württembergs. Band 1: Tagfalter I. Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart [Google Scholar]
  • Ebert G, Rennwald E (1991b) Die Schmetterlinge Baden-Württembergs. Band 2: Tagfalter II. Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart [Google Scholar]
  • European Parliament and Council (2001) Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EC – Commission Declaration. Official Journal L 106: 1–39 [Google Scholar]
  • Feber RE, Smith H, Macdonald DW (1996) The effects on butterfly abundance of the management of uncropped edges of arable fields. J. Appl. Ecol. 33: 1191–1205 [Google Scholar]
  • Feber RE, Smith H, Macdonald DW (1999) The importance of spatially variable field margin management for two butterfly species. Asp. Appl. Biol. 54: 155–162 [Google Scholar]
  • Feber RE, Firbank LG, Johnson PJ, Macdonald DW (1997) The effects of organic farming on pest and non-pest butterfly abundance. Agric. Ecosys. Environ. 64: 133–139 [Google Scholar]
  • Felke M, Langenbruch GA (2001) Gefährdet Bt-Pollen Schmetterlinge? Ges. Pflanzen 53: 24–28 [Google Scholar]
  • Felke M, Lorenz N, Langenbruch GA (2002) Laboratory studies on the effects of pollen from Bt-maize on larvae of some butterfly species. J. Appl. Ent. 126: 320–325 [Google Scholar]
  • Firbank LG, Heard MS, Woiwod IP, Hawes C, Haughton AJ, Champion GT, Scott RJ, Hill MO, Dewar AM, Squires GR, May MJ, Brooks DR, Bohan DA, Daniels RE, Osborne JL, Roy DB, Black HIJ, Rothery P, Perry JN (2003) An introduction to the Farm-Scale Evaluations of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. J. Appl. Ecol. 40: 2–16 [Google Scholar]
  • Gutiérrez D, Thomas CD, Léon-Cortés JL (1999) Dispersal, distribution, patch network and metapopulation dynamics of the dingy skipper butterfly (Erynnis tages). Oecologia 121: 506–517 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hansen Jesse LC, Obrycki JJ (2000) Field deposition of Bt transgenic corn pollen: lethal effects on the monarch butterfly. Oecologia 125: 241–248 [Google Scholar]
  • Hellmich RL, Siegfried BD, Sears MK, Stanley-Horn DE, Daniels MJ, Mattila HR, Spencer T, Bidne KG, Lewis LC (2001) Monarch larvae sensitivity to Bacillus thuringiensis-purified proteins and pollen. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 98: 11925–11930 [Google Scholar]
  • Hermann G (1992) Tagfalter und Widderchen – Methodisches Vorgehen bei Bestandsaufnahmen zu Naturschutz- und Eingriffsplanungen. In Trautner J., ed, Arten und Biotopschutz in der Planung: Methodische Standards zur Erfassung von Tierartengruppen. Margraf, Weikersheim, pp 219–238 [Google Scholar]
  • Hermann G (1999) Methoden der qualitativen Erfassung von Tagfaltern. In Settele J, Feldmann R, Reinhardt R, eds, Die Tagfalter Deutschlands. Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, pp 124–143 [Google Scholar]
  • Hodgson JG (1993) Commonness and rarity in British butterflies. J. Appl. Ecol. 30: 407–427 [Google Scholar]
  • Jepson PC, Croft BA, Pratt GE (1994) Test systems to determine the ecological risks posed by toxin release from Bacillus thuringiensis genes in crop plants. Mol. Ecol. 3: 81–89 [Google Scholar]
  • Johnson KS, Scriber JM, Nitao JK, Smitley DR (1995) Toxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis var. kurstaki to three nontarget Lepidoptera in field studies. Environ. Entomol. 24: 288–297 [Google Scholar]
  • Kruess A, Tscharntke T (2002) Grazing intensity and the diversity of grasshoppers, butterflies, and trap-nesting bees and wasps. Conserv. Biol. 16: 1570–1580 [Google Scholar]
  • Lang A, Abdel-Kader K, Arndt M, Bauchhenß J, Beck R, Benker U, Herrmann A, Mautz D, Zellner M, Pommer G (2004) Monitoring der Umweltwirkungen von Bt-Mais. Ein Forschungsprojekt des Bayerischen Staatsministeriums für Landesentwicklung und Umweltfragen und der Bayerischen Landesanstalt für Landwirtschaft. Mitt. BBA, in press [Google Scholar]
  • Losey JE, Rayor LS, Carter ME (1999) Transgenic pollen harms monarch larvae. Nature 399: 214 [Google Scholar]
  • Luff ML (2002) Carabid assemblage organization and species composition. In Holland JM, ed, The Agroecology of Carabid Beetles, Intercept, Andover, pp 41–79 [Google Scholar]
  • Lövei GL (2001) Ecological risks and benefits of transgenic plants. Proc. New Zealand Plant Protect. Conf. 54: 93–100 [Google Scholar]
  • MacArthur R, Wilson EO (1967) The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. [Google Scholar]
  • Miller JC (1990) Field assessment of the effects of a microbial pest control agent on nontarget Lepidoptera. Am. Entomol. 26: 135–139 [Google Scholar]
  • Mühlhofer G (1999) Tagfalter. In Schlumprecht H, ed, Handbuch landschaftsökologischer Leistungen. Veröffentlichungen der VUBD, Band 1. VUBD, Nürnberg, pp 248–257 [Google Scholar]
  • Munguira ML, Thomas JA (1992) Use of road verges by butterfly and burnet populations, and the effect of roads on adult dispersal and mortality. J. Appl. Ecol. 29: 316–329 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Nap J-P, Metz PL, Escaler M, Conner AJ (2003) The release of genetically modified crops into the environment. Part I. Overview of current status and regulations. Plant J. 33: 1–18 [Google Scholar]
  • Niemelä J, Baur B (1998) Threatened species in a vanishing habitat: plants and invertebrates in calcareous grasslands in the Swiss Jura mountains. Biodiv. Conserv. 7: 1407–1416 [Google Scholar]
  • Perry JN, Rothery P, Clark SJ, Heard MS, Hawes C (2003) Design, analysis and statistical power of the Farm-Scale Evaluations of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. J. Appl. Ecol. 40: 17–31 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pleasants JM, Hellmich RL, Dively GP, Sears MK, Stanley-Horn DE, Mattila HR, Foster JE, Clark TL, Jones GD (2001) Corn pollen deposition on milkweeds in and near corn fields. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 98: 11919–11924 [Google Scholar]
  • Pretscher P (1998) Rote Liste der Großschmetterlinge (Macrolepidoptera). Tagfalter (Rhopalocera) einschließlich Dickkopffalter (Hesperiidae). In Bundesamt für Naturschutz, ed, Rote Liste gefährdeter Tiere Deutschlands. Landwirtschaftsverlag GmbH, Münster-Hiltrup, pp 87–98 [Google Scholar]
  • Pollard E (1977) A method for assessing changes in the abundance of butterflies. Biol. Conserv. 12: 115–134 [Google Scholar]
  • Pollard E (1984) Fluctuations in the abundance of butterflies, 1976–1982. Ecol. Entomol. 9: 179–188 [Google Scholar]
  • Samu F, Szinetár C (2002) On the nature of agrobiont spiders. J. Arachnol. 30: 389–402 [Google Scholar]
  • Schmitz G, Bartsch D, Pretscher P (2003) Selection of relevant non-target herbivores for monitoring the environmental effects of Bt maize pollen. Environ. Biosafety Res. 2: 117–132 [Google Scholar]
  • Schneider C, Dover J, Fry GLA (2003) Movement of two grassland butterflies in the same habitat network: the role of adult resources and size of the study area. Ecol. Entomol. 28: 219–227 [Google Scholar]
  • Settele J, Feldmann R, Henle K, Kockelke K, Poethke H-J (1999) Methoden der quantitativen Erfassung von Tagfaltern. In Settele J, Feldmann R, Reinhardt R, eds, Die Tagfalter Deutschlands. Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, pp 144–185 [Google Scholar]
  • Stanley-Horn DE, Dively GP, Hellmich RL, Mattila HR, Sears MK, Rose R, Hansen Jesse LC, Losey JE, Obrycki JJ, Lewis L (2001) Assessing the impact of Cry1Ab-expressing corn pollen on monarch butterfly larvae in field studies. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 98: 11931–11936 [Google Scholar]
  • Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (1997) Early succession of butterfly and plant communities on set-aside fields. Oecologia 109: 294–302 [Google Scholar]
  • Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2000) Butterfly community structure in fragmented habitats. Ecol. Letters 3: 449–456 [Google Scholar]
  • Summerville KS, Crist TO (2001) Effects of experimental habitat fragmentation on patch use by butterflies and skippers (Lepidoptera). Ecology 85: 1360–1370 [Google Scholar]
  • Tischler W (1958) Synökologische Untersuchungen an der Fauna der Felder und Feldgehölze. Z. Morph. Ökol. Tiere 47: 54–114 [Google Scholar]
  • Tolman T, Lewington R (1998) Die Tagfalter Europas und Nordwestafrikas. Franckh-Kosmos, Stuttgart [Google Scholar]
  • Thomas CD, Harrison S (1992) Spatial dynamics of a patchily distributed butterfly species. J. Anim. Ecol. 61: 437–446 [Google Scholar]
  • Thomas JA, Bourn NAD, Clarke RT, Stewart KE, Simcox DJ, Pearman GS, Curtis R, Goodger B (2001) The quality and isolation of habitat patches both determine where butterflies persist in fragmented landscapes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268: 1791–1796 [Google Scholar]
  • Van Rie J (2000) Bacillus thuringiensis and its use in transgenic insect control technologies. Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 290: 463–469 [Google Scholar]
  • Villiger M (1999) Effekte transgener insektenresistenter Bt-Kulturpflanzen auf Nichtzielorganismen am Beispiel der Schmetterlinge. WWF Schweiz, Zürich [Google Scholar]
  • Wagner DL, Peacock JW, Carter JL, Talley SE (1996) Field assessment of Bacillus thuringiensis on nontarget Lepidoptera. Environ. Entomol. 25: 1444–1454 [Google Scholar]
  • Weibull A-C, Bengtsson J, Nohlgren E (2000) Diversity of butterflies in the agricultural landscape: the role of farming system and landscape heterogeneity. Ecography 23: 743–750 [Google Scholar]
  • Wilhelm R, Beißner L, Schiemann J (2002) Gestaltung des Monitoring der Auswirkungen gentechnisch veränderter Pflanzen im Agrarökosystem. Ges. Pflanzen 54: 194–206 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Wraight CL, Zangerl AR, Carroll MJ, Berenbaum MR (2000) Absence of toxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis pollen to black swallowtails under field conditions. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 97: 7700–7703 [Google Scholar]
  • Zangerl AR, McKenna D, Wraight CL, Carroll M, Ficarello P, Warner R, Berenbaum MR (2001) Effects of exposure to event 176 Bacillus thuringiensis corn pollen on monarch and black swallowtail caterpillars under field conditions. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 98: 11908–11912 [Google Scholar]
  • Züghart W, Breckling B (2003) Konzeptionelle Entwicklung eines Monitoring von Umweltwirkungen transgener Kulturpflanzen. UBA-Texte 50/2003 [Google Scholar]