The role of management and landscape context in the restoration of grassland phytophagous beetles

1. Declines in area and quality of species-rich mesotrophic and calcareous grasslands have occurred all across Europe.While the European Union has promoted schemes to restore these grasslands, the emphasis for management has remained largely focused on plants. Here we focus on restoration of the phytophagous beetles of these grasslands. Although local management, particularly that which promotes the establishment of host plants, is key to restoration success, dispersal limitation is also likely to be an important limiting factor during the restoration of phytophagous beetle assemblages. 2. Using a 3-year multi-site experiment, we investigated how restoration success of phytophagous beetles was affected by hay-spreading management (intended to introduce target plant species), success in restoration of the plant communities and the landscape context within which restoration was attempted. 3. Restoration success of the plants was greatest where green hay spreading had been used to introduce seeds into restoration sites. Beetle restoration success increased over time, although hayspreading had no direct effect. However, restoration success of the beetles was positively correlated with restoration success of the plants. 4. Overall restoration success of the phytophagous beetles was positively correlated with the proportion of species-rich grassland in the landscape, as was the restoration success of the polyphagous beetles. Restoration success for beetles capable of flight and those showing oligophagous host plant specialism were also positively correlated with connectivity to species-rich grasslands. There was no indication that beetles not capable of flight showed greater dependence on landscape scale factors than flying species. 5. Synthesis and applications. Increasing the similarity of the plant community at restoration sites to target species-rich grasslands will promote restoration success for the phytophagous beetles. However, landscape context is also important, with restoration being approximately twice as successful in those landscapes containing high as opposed to low proportions of species-rich grassland. By targeting grassland restoration within landscapes containing high proportions of species-rich grassland, dispersal limitation problems associated with restoration for invertebrate assemblages are more likely to be overcome.

The restoration of phytophagous beetles in species-rich chalk grasslands

This study focuses on the restoration of chalk grasslands over a 6-year period and tests the efficacy of two management practices, hay spreading and soil disturbance, in promoting this process for phytophagous beetles. Restoration success for the beetles, measured as similarity to target species-rich chalk grassland, was not found to be influenced by either management practice. In contrast, restoration success for the plants did increase in response to hay spreading management. Although the presence of suitable host plants was considered to dictate the earliest point at which phytophagous beetles could successfully colonized, few beetle species colonized as soon as their host plants became established. Morphological characteristics and feeding habits of 27 phytophagous beetle species were therefore tested to identify factors that limited their colonization and persistence. The lag time between host plant establishment and colonization was greatest for flightless beetles. Beetles with foliage-feeding larvae both colonized at slower rates than seed-, stem-, or root-feeding species and persisted within the swards for shorter periods. Although the use of hay spreading may benefit plant communities during chalk grassland restoration, it did not directly benefit phytophagous beetles. Without techniques for overcoming colonization limitation for invertebrate taxa, short-term success of restoration may be limited to the plants only.