Appendix A
Appendix A. List of all search strings used during planning of our systematic review, showing the
number of papers returned from Web of Science. The search string eventually used to conduct our
systematic review is shaded in grey.
Search String
Number of Results Returned
Web of Science
Butterfly* OR Lepidoptera AND fragmentation
Butterfly* OR Lepidoptera AND fragmentation AND
conservation
Butterfl* AND matrix
Lepidoptera AND matrix
Butterfly* OR Lepidoptera AND matrix AND conservation
Butterfl* AND habitat mosaic
Butterfly* OR Lepidoptera AND fragmentation AND matrix
Butterfl* AND matrix quality
Butterfly* biodiversity AND matrix
Butterfl* AND matrix type
Lepidoptera AND matrix type
Butterfl* AND habitat surround* remnant*
Butterfl* AND surrounding matrix
Butterfl* AND agricult* matrix
Butterfly* OR Lepidoptera AND fragmentation AND matrix
AND conservation
Lepidoptera AND matrix quality
Lepidoptera biodiversity AND matrix
Lepidoptera AND surrounding matrix
Butterfl* biodiversity and matrix quality
Butterfl* AND matrix surround* remnant*
Butterfly* AND agricult* mosaic
Butterfl* biodiversity AND surrounding matrix
Butterfl* AND matrix condition
Lepidoptera AND matrix quality
Lepidoptera AND surrounding matrix
Lepidoptera AND matrix condition
Butterfl* AND pine matrix
Butterfl* biodiversity AND matrix type
Lepidoptera biodiversity AND matrix type
Butterfl* AND pine mosaic
Butterfl* biodiversity AND matrix condition
Lepidoptera AND matrix condition
Butterfl*OR Lepidoptera AND habitat surround* remnant*
460
255
253
194
57
39
34
34
29
24
20
17
16
16
14
14
13
12
10
9
9
7
5
5
5
2
2
2
2
1
0
0
0
Appendix B
Appendix B. Analysis of our summary statistics and fragment-related questions.
Overview
Study Location, Fragments and Topic
We found significantly more papers conducted their research in the Northern Hemisphere (n=98) as
compared to the Southern Hemisphere (n=2) (t1,99 =115.66, P<0.001). Europe had the most studies (n =
63), followed by the Americas (n=30, Fig 2). Only five papers reported findings of research conducted
in Asia, Africa or Australasia, while the remaining two papers detailed experiments that were
conducted in more than one region (for example, countries of Europe and Asia; Fig 2).
70
Number of Studies
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Europe
Americas
Asia
Africa
Australasia
Mixed
Region of Study
Fig 2 Graph showing the number of papers reporting research from each geographical region.
Americas includes North, South and Central America. Mixed represents those studies that
compiled work from more than one broad geographical region (i.e. Asia and the Americas)
Our review revealed grasslands and meadows were the most commonly studied fragment type (n=46,
Fig 3). Grasslands included all meadows, calcareous grasslands, prairies, savannah grasslands as well
as non-descript grassland areas. We found that other common fragment types studied included; areas of
forest and rainforest (n=14), peat bogs/wet meadows (n=13), patches of a specific plant species (n=10)
and woodlands (n=7). The remaining 10 papers were classed as ‘other’ and included fragments of sand
dunes and desert, and often referred to situations where a mixture of fragment types was included in
one study (i.e. meadows as well as woodlands and open areas), and so could not easily be classified
(Fig 2).
50
Number of Papers
40
30
20
10
0
Fragment Habitat Type
Fig 3 Graph showing the most common habitat types for remnant fragments in studies we
reviewed
We found that papers included in our review were most likely to address issues of biodiversity (n=36),
followed by dispersal (n=21) and genetics (n=16). Less common themes included studying aspects of
edge effects, extinction debt, flight patterns, mate locating, and resource requirements (total n=27).
We also found that papers were almost evenly divided between those that dealt solely with one species
of butterfly (n=49) and those that studied fragmentation in reference to two or more species (n=51).
Methods
We found the most commonly used sampling method in reviewed studies was the use of transects
(n=37), followed by various methods of trapping or baiting butterflies (n=21) and mark/recapture
methods (n=18). Much less common methods (with 6 papers or less using each of these methods)
included; live tissue sampling, physically tracking individual butterflies, surveying entire sites and
monitoring host plants for signs of butterfly use.
Results
We found 86% of all papers (t1,99=24.66, P<0.001) reported a significant effect of fragmentation, with
the remaining 14% reporting either no change in species/community responses or insignificant
changes. Of the papers that did report an effect of fragmentation, we found almost 77% (n=66) reported
it as having a negative impact on butterfly populations (whether at the species or community level)
(t1,99=14.18, P<0.001). We also found just under 60% (n=51) of papers that reported a negative impact
of fragmentation went on to make management recommendations of some kind (either explicit or
general advice as to how to avoid or lessen the negative impacts of fragmentation).