|
Monarch Overwintering
Ecology
Overview: Monarchs regularly congregate in
two major regions of North America during the winter: central Mexico and
coastal California (Brower 1995). They also reside in southern Florida
throughout the year, but this population receives an influx of migratory
individuals from the eastern migratory each fall (Knight 1997; Altizer
2001). The degree to which monarchs from Florida move back into the larger
population is not understood.
It has been generally assumed that monarchs spending the summer breeding
season west of the Rocky Mountains overwinter along the coast of southern
California, although the recent observations by Pyle (1999) described above
suggest that there are exceptions to this pattern. The California sites are
usually wooded areas dominated by eucalyptus trees, Monterey pines, and
Monterey cypresses, and are located in sheltered bays or farther inland.
These sites provide moderated microclimate extremes and protection from
strong winds. More than 300 different aggregation sites have been reported
(Frey and Schaffner 2004; Leong et al., 2004).
North American monarchs that spend the
summer breeding season east of the Rocky Mountains overwinter in oyamel fir
(Abies
religiosa) forests in the Transvolcanic mountains of central Mexico. The
location of these overwintering sites was unknown to the scientific
community until 1975 when associates of Dr. Fred Urquhart located colonies
on Cerro Pelón and Sierra Chincua in the state of Michoacan (Urquhart 1976;
Brower 1995). Since then, several more overwintering locations have been
located; colonies within the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve are found
in the states of Michoacán and México (Cerro Altamirano, Cerros
Chivatí-Huacal, Sierra Chincua, Sierra El Campanario and Cerro Pelón).
Outside the Reserve, colonies are found in San Andres, Pizcuaro, Puerto
Morillo and Puerto Bermeo (Michoacán) and Palomas, Piedra Herrada and San
Francisco Oxtotilpan (México) (Garcia et al. 2004). While scientists have
learned much about the phenomenon of monarch overwintering in the past few
decades, several basic questions remain. Measuring the density of an
organism that congregates by the millions presents a formidable challenge.
Scientists also seek to understand the characteristics of the overwintering
sites that are most important to monarch survival, and the factors that
influence patterns of colony formation and dispersal.
Colony formation and dispersal: Throughout the winter, North American
monarchs cluster together, covering whole tree trunks and branches (Figure
13). Calvert
(2004b) describes four phases typical of colony development in Mexico sites:
recruitment and consolidation, settling and compaction of clusters,
expansion and rapid movement, and mating and dispersal. This pattern is
similar in California (Frey and Schaffner 2004). Initially monarchs occupy
many local habitats, but abandon many of them by late November and join
nearby colonies. Before the monarchs disperse, many of them become
reproductive, and the colonies are often filled with mating pairs.
The timing of the last phase, mating and dispersal, depends on the timing of
completion of reproductive diapause, which varies considerably among
individuals. Goehring and Oberhauser (2004) studied post-diapause
reproductive development in monarchs overwintering in Mexico. They found a
great deal of variation in reproductive status of monarchs collected in late
February and early March, with some butterflies fully reproductive while
most were still in diapause. Females collected while mating were more likely
to have developed oocytes (an indication that they were no longer in diapause) than females collected from clusters. If there is a cause and
effect relationship that results in this correlation, it is not clear
whether females were more likely to be mating because they were further
along in their reproductive development, or if mating actually triggered the
end of diapause. Both Van Hook (1993) and Oberhauser and Frey (1999) found
that males which began mating first at the end of the overwintering period
had shorter wingspans, were lighter, and had poorer wing condition than
males that were collected in roosts at the same time. They suggest that
these males are unlikely to survive the return migration north, and are thus
taking advantage of their last, and only, opportunity to mate.
Overwintering densities: Scientists use many methods to estimate population
sizes of insects and other animals, but determining overwintering monarch
abundance is particularly challenging because of their mobility and huge
numbers. Nearly 30 years after the discovery of the Mexican overwintering
sites, scientists are still debating how to best estimate monarch density
there.
Calvert (2004b) used mark, release, recapture techniques to estimate the
population densities of 7 to 61 million monarchs per ha, with higher
densities occurring later in the season when the colony had contracted. At a
different colony, he measured monarch density on sub-samples of tree
branches and trunks to estimate 12 million monarchs per hectare.
These
numbers are within the ranges suggested by Brower (1977) and Brower et al.
(1977), but the large variation suggests that densities probably are not
constant across the season and between different colonies.
Garcia et al. (2004) monitored 22 Mexican overwintering sites from 1993
to 2002. Using an estimate of 10 million monarchs per hectare, they found
that the overwintering population ranged from 23 million monarchs in
2000-2001 to 176 million in 1996-1997 (Figure 14). They measured the highest mortality
(27.7%) during a low population year (1997-1998, 45.5 million monarchs) and
suggest that mortality rate may decrease with increasing population size.
Microclimate conditions in the overwintering sites: Monarchs migrate to
specific overwintering sites because they require particular environmental
characteristics to survive throughout the winter. Survival of overwintering
monarchs in Mexico from November through March depends on a delicate balance
of macro- and microclimatic factors that characterize the oyamel fir forests located within the reserve (Calvert and Brower 1986;
Alonso et al. 1992, 1997). High humidity and temperatures that fluctuate
between 3o and 18o C characterize these forests, and several studies
(Calvert and Brower 1981; Calvert and Cohen 1983; Calvert et al. 1982, 1983,
1984, 1986; Alonso-Mejia et al. 1992; Anderson and Brower 1993; Brower 1999)
have shown that an intact forest ecosystem promotes winter survival.
Butterflies in thinned forests are more likely to get wet during winter
storms, and wet monarchs are unable to survive extremely cold temperatures,
such as those that occurred during storms in 2002 (Brower et al. 2004) and
2004. In addition, thinned forests become colder at night because heat
escapes from them more easily. Thus, an intact forest serves as both an
umbrella, protecting the butterflies from snow and rain during winter
storms, and a blanket, keeping the butterflies from freezing (Anderson and
Brower 1996).
Recent modeling efforts (Bojórquez-Tapia 2003, Missrie 2004) show that
preferred habitats of overwintering monarchs share four features: 1) high
elevations (most colony sites are located at altitudes over 2890 m); 2)
proximity to streams (most sites occur less than 400 m from permanent or
ephemeral streams; 3) moderately steep slopes (between 23° and 26°); and 4)
south-southwest orientation. In most cases, these conditions occur in oyamel
fir forests, but colony sites also exist below these forests, primarily
because the butterflies move to lower altitudes (where mixed forest stands
occur) as spring advances.
Frey and Schaffner (2004) examined abundance on three temporal scales
(spanning 1, 4 and 20 years) for western overwintering sites, using data
from the California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base
and The Monarch Program Thanksgiving Count (Marriott 2001). During the
period 1997 through
2000, from 101 to 141 known sites were surveyed. Numbers of monarchs per
site ranged from 0 to 120,000, with large year to year and site to site
variation (Frey and Schaffner 2004). Sites near the coast
that contained eucalyptus, pine and cypress tended to have more monarchs. Leong et al. (2004) found that higher monarch abundance in central
California was associated with high ambient moisture, substantial morning
dew and moderate winter temperatures. GIS analyses showed that most winter
groves occurred within 2.4 km of the coastline, on slopes with a south to
west orientation. Larger winter sites were associated with the lower slope of
valleys, bays and coastal inlets. Frey and Schaffner (2004) placed their
findings in a continent-wide context by making comparisons between recent
population trends in the western and eastern North American populations.
While the eastern population is larger than the western by at least two
orders of magnitude (Brower 1985), it appears that both populations
fluctuate from year to year by about half an order of magnitude. However,
because no correlation between abundance in the two populations was found,
their patterns may be caused by different factors.
Both Frey and Schaffner (2004) and Leong et al. (2004) advocate the use of
these and similar analyses in evaluating land management practices and
structuring conservation goals. Leong et al. argue that preservation of the
monarch winter aggregations in California will depend on active and
long-term habitat management that focuses on enhancement activities, such as
tree planting, trimming and, in some cases, removal.
Winter mortality. Monarchs in the overwintering congregations in Mexico and
California face numerous threats. In addition, forest degradation and
resultant changes in climatic conditions, predation by birds and mice,
starvation, desiccation and freezing represent significant sources of
mortality. Although monarchs are protected from vertebrate predators by the cardenolides
sequestered from the milkweed they consume as larvae, any concentration of
potential prey this large is likely to result in predators that evolve to
overcome their defenses. Bird predation is an important cause of winter mortality, with mortality rates ranging
from 1% to 18% across several colonies studied by Garcia et al. (2004) and
from to 7% to 44% in colonies studied by Brower and Calvert (1985). The two
main bird predators are the black-headed grosbeak (Pheucticus melanocephalus)
and the black-backed oriole (Icterus abeillei). The grosbeaks consume the
entire fat-rich abdomens of the monarchs, somehow tolerating the cardenolide
toxins stored below the exoskeleton. The orioles slit open the abdomen with
their sharp beak and scoop the contents of the abdomen and thorax out with
their tongue, thus avoiding the toxins. These different prey consumption
methods make it easy to distinguish which species is responsible for the
deaths of monarchs found on the forest floor. At least five species of mice,
the most conspicuous of which is Peromyscus melanotis, feed on butterflies
that have fallen to the ground.
Extreme weather conditions, such as those caused by winter rains and
snowstorms, can also kill overwintering monarchs. For example, the intense
cold that followed a prolonged period of cloudy, wet weather early in 1992
may have killed up to 80% of monarchs in several overwintering colonies (Brower et al.
2004). Systematic documentation of mortality that followed another severe
storm in January 2002 is reported by Brower et al. (2004). They estimated
75-80% mortality at two overwintering colonies, and suggest that similar
rates occurred throughout the Mexico sites. Their estimates of the number of
monarchs killed per hectare (26-72 million) far exceeded previous estimates
of the number of monarchs occupying these sites, but agree with estimates
presented by Calvert (2004) for the same time of year. Oberhauser and
Peterson (2003) used ecological niche modeling to delineate the
environmental conditions that favor survival, and found that occupied sites
exhibited cool temperatures and low precipitation during the wintering
months. Unfortunately, global climate change models predict more
precipitation in these areas over the next decades, suggesting that those
kinds of winter storms may become more frequent.
While there is no documentation of the effects of extremely dry years on
monarch survival, the fact that individuals are often observed imbibing
water that collects as dew on plants or from streams or wet ground suggests
that a lack of moisture would increase mortality. Likewise, little is known
about factors that increase the risks of starving. Monarchs eat little
during the overwintering period, so it is likely that starvation would be
more likely under conditions that promote increased metabolism, such as warm
ambient air temperatures, or when monarchs do not obtain enough food as
larvae.
Forest dynamics and conservation of overwintering sites: The Mexican overwintering sites first achieved protected status under a 1986
presidential decree. While this was an important first step, the decree did
not protect all important overwintering sites, failed to compensate local
landowners for imposed restrictions on land use and offered no effective
economic alternatives to previous means of subsistence (such as agriculture
and logging). A consortium of geographers, monarch biologists and Mexican
government officials conducted a geographic information system (GIS)
analysis of deforestation that occurred between 1971 and 1999. This
analysis revealed that 44% of the high quality forest present in 1971 had
been degraded and fragmented, resulting in lower quality forest for overwintering monarchs (Brower et al. 2002). The rate of deforestation had
accelerated over this period.
In 1998, an international group of scientists and policy makers joined to
redefine the protected area and address some of the concerns with the
original decree. Missrie (2004) described the 4-year process that led to a
new presidential decree and improved protection of the overwintering sites.
The boundaries of the expanded Reserve were determined using models based on
current knowledge of the biological requirements of monarchs during the
winter. As a result of the new decree, the total amount of land that was
protected increased from 16,110 ha (4491 and 11,619 in the core and buffer
zones, respectively) to 56,259 ha (13,552 and 42,707 ha in the core and
buffer zones respectively). The new reserve protects a contiguous area of
land, instead of the separate "islands" of land that were protected by the
old decree (Missrie 2004). However, as is the case with all conservation
laws, effectiveness requires enforcement of the law, and logging and forest
degradation are still occurring.
Keiman and Franco (2004) studied the response of the Mexican oyamel fir forests
to disturbance. Their finding that trees within forest patches tend to be
similar in size, and that homogeneity tends to increase with stand age,
along with the fact that monarchs typically form colonies in mature forests,
suggests that it will be important to ensure replacement as forest patches
age.
End of the section on "Monarch
Overwintering Ecology."
Next Page
|
Pages
of this Review (Monarch Butterfly Ecology): |
|
© Copyright 2004-2012
Ecology Online Sweden. All rights reserved. |
|