ArticlePDF Available

The butterfly (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea) diversity of the Barać Caves Significant Landscape (Kordun, Croatia)

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

We studied the butterfly fauna of the protected area Barać Caves Significant Landscape, which is located in the southern part of the Kordun region. The surveys,carried out during 2020 and 2021, recorded a total of 79 butterfly species. The species recorded in the area outnumber those far recorded in northern Kordun (74) and Plitvice Lakes NP (71), but this is probably due to the lack of systematic surveys of those two areas. The comparison of habitat and biogeographical affiliation between these three areas revealed a similar number of species per habitat and affiliation type. During this survey, several interesting or rare species were recorded like Lycaena hippothoe, L. dispar, Phengaris arion, Melitaea aurelia, M. britomartis, Euphydryas aurinia, Apatura ilia, A. iris, and Boloria selene and their records are discussed. The results of the present study greatly contribute to the knowledge of the butterfly fauna of the Barać Caves Significant Landscape, and they can be used as a basis for the future conservation of butterfly species of the Kordun and Lika region. Istraživali smo faunu danjih leptira Značajnog krajobraza Baraćeve špilje smještenog u južnom dijelu Kordunske regije. Istraživanja su provedena tijekom 2020. i 2021. godine te je zabilježeno ukup-no 79 vrsta leptira. Broj vrsta zabilježenih na ovom području veći je od dosada zabilježenih vrsta na sjevernom Kordunu (74) i NP Plitvička jezera (71), no vjerojatni razlog za to je nedostatak sustavnih istraživanja ta dva područja. Usporedba staništa i biogeografske pripadnosti ova tri područja pokaza-la je sličan broj vrsta po staništu i biogeografskoj pripadnosti. Tijekom ovog istraživanja zabilježeno je nekoliko zanimljivih ili rijetkih vrsta poput Lycaena hippothoe, L. dispar, Phengaris arion, Melitaea aurelia, M. britomartis, Euphydryas aurinia, Apatura ilia, A. iris i Boloria selene čiji su nalazi dodatno raspravljeni. Rezultati ovog istraživanja uvelike doprinose poznavanju faune leptira Značajnog krajobraza Baraćeve špilje, te se mogu koristiti kao temelj za buduće očuvanje vrsta leptira Korduna i Like.
Content may be subject to copyright.
NAT. CROAT. VOL. 31 No 1 43-62 ZAGREB July 31, 2022
original scientific paper / izvorni znanstveni rad
DOI 10.20302/NC.2022.31.4
THE BUTTERFLY (LEPIDOPTERA: PAPILIONOIDEA)

LANDSCAPE (KORDUN, CROATIA)

&
Association Hyla, I. Lipovac 7, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia (katarina.koller@hhdhyla.hr,
daria.kranzelic@hhdhyla.hr, bruno.schmidt@hhdhyla.hr, toni.koren@hhdhyla.hr)




located in the southern part of the Kordun region. The surveys,carried out during 2020 and 2021, re-
corded a total of 79 butterfly species. The species recorded in the area outnumber those far recorded
in northern Kordun (74) and Plitvice Lakes NP (71), but this is probably due to the lack of systematic

three areas revealed a similar number of species per habitat and affiliation type. During this survey,
Lycaena hippothoe, L. dispar, Phengaris arion, Melitaea
aurelia, M. britomartis, Euphydryas aurinia, Apatura ilia, A. iris, and Boloria selene and their records are


of butterfly species of the Kordun and Lika region.
 distribution, biogeography, habitat affiliation, conservation, habitat management




-


-

Lycaena hippothoe, L. dispar, Phengaris arion, Melitaea aurelia,
M. britomartis, Euphydryas aurinia, Apatura ilia, A. iris i Boloria selene



INTRODUCTION
-
ly attracting increased public attention (et al., 2017; et al., 2020; 
et al., 2021; et al.,-
44 KollerŠarić,K.et al.:ThebutterflydiversityoftheBaraćCaves(Kordun,Croatia)
versity loss has been noted in Europe, is butterflies (et al., 2019; et al.,
insect groups to

a greater geographical area. Thus, butterflies make an adequate group on the basis of


monitoring ( 2005; et al., 2019; et al., 2021). Over many years
of research across Europe, a decline of grassland butterfly species of as much as 39% has
been observed (et al.,

et al., 2019; et al., 2021). To tackle these problems protected areas have been es-
tablished to prevent biodiversity loss and protect other agendas such as preservation of
habitats, preservation of gene pool, natural disaster prevention, and so on ( & -

-
gered species live (et al., 2013; et al., 2014). In Europe, the largest protect-
-

long-term survival of threatened species and habitat types ( 1992, 2010).


systems, diverse habitat, endemic biodiversity, and anthropological findings (

 2021). Apart from the cave systems, the area has a mosaic of habitats such


agricultural fields. To ensure the long-term survival of butterflies in the area, it is necessary
to have an insight into their diversity and the status of their habitats.
The butterfly diversity of this significant landscape has never been assessed. The
closest surveyed areas are northern Kordun and Plitvice Lakes NP. The list of the species
for northern Kordun, mainly Karlovac and surroundings according to (, 2009,
2012) includes 74 species and the list for Plitvice Lakes NP based on literature (
1895; et al., 1896;  1901;  1938;  1958;  1966;
 1973;  1999;  2004;  2009) contains 71 butterfly species.

Caves Significant Landscape, to categorize the habitats occupied by butterflies, and

recorded during the survey. Additionally, the goal is to compare the butterfly diversity



management in the area.
MATERIALS AND METHODS



Nat.Croat.Vol.31(1),2022 45
Dinaric Karst (et al., 2015). Lika region continues on from the Kordun region in
the south and is bordered by prominent mountain ridges of Velebit, Kapela, and

south (
-
govina in the east, and the Lika mountains in the south. The significant landscape is
-
ity of Rakovica, 7 km northeast from the border of Plitvice Lakes National Park. It has
a total area of 5.19 km2 (
 2021). According to Köp-

 &  2003). As this area is rich in elements of
cultural-historical, tourist-recreational, and aesthetic and speleological significance, in
 2016a).

sources, and caves (et al., 2015; et al., 2018). Within the significant land-





that requires the implementation of conservation measures ( 1992). Along
As.
Salicetum cinereae Zolyomi 1931) and poplars (genus Populus). Outside the floodplain, at
Erythronio-Carpinion
(Horvat 1958) is present. The highest altitudes are occupied by mountain beech forests
(Fagus sylvatica -

are today mostly in different successional stages due to the decline of agriculture. On the




gardens and orchards.
METHODS






VIII-2020, 11-V-2021, 16-V-2021, 9-VI-2021, 10-VI-2021, 17-VI-2021, and 23-VII-2021. All

contains the locality numbers and names, a short description of the habitat, altitude,

application (et al.,-
46 KollerŠarić,K.et al.:ThebutterflydiversityoftheBaraćCaves(Kordun,Croatia)
-
tian Red List of Butterflies (et al.,-
mined by the Ordinance on Strictly Protected Species (2016, b). European threat cate-
et al., 2010).
    

Locality
No. Locality name Habitat description   Altitude
(m a.s.l.)
1.  

vegetation 44,98482 15,704626 365
2. 
oak-hornbeam forest community,
montane beech forest and grass-
lands, the remains of old houses
surrounded by bushy vegetation
44,980874 15,712093 352
3. 
of the village abandoned arable land surrounded
 44,977838 15,717457 327
4. 
the surroundings

-

thickets, reeds, rushes and sedges
and bushy forest edge, neglected
agricultural areas
44,984198 15,723084 296
5. 
-
lands, bushy vegetation, mountain

succession
44,992438 15,726098 294
6. 
the village 
remains of old houses 44,98998 15,731062 348


standard field guides ( & 
restricted to the genera Leptidea, Melitaea, Lycaena, and Plebejus-

et al., 2018). Spatial analyses, data


been categorized according to several authors (et al., 2002; et al., 2015) and
are grouped into four main types: mesophilic species (species of open non-forested hab-
-

-
alists able to live in all kinds of habitats, including ruderal sites, farmlands, and urban
-



-
Nat.Croat.Vol.31(1),2022 47
ic species - species inhabiting peatlands of all types), tyrphophilic to hygrophilic species,

conducted according to  (2015). Finally, the same categories for habitat affiliation

Plitvice Lakes NP and north Kordun for the sake of a comparison of the species compo-

RESULTS



Plebejus argyrognomon (Berg-
strässer, 1779), Melitaea athalia (Rottemburg, 1775) and Aporia crataegi (Linnaeus, 1758).

-
pond to those in the Tab.1.

Plitvice Lakes NP: Glaucopsyche alexis (Poda, 1761), Leptotes pirithous (Linnaeus, 1767),
Lycaena hippothoe (Linnaeus, 1761), Plebejus argyrognomon, Polyommatus amandus (Schnei-
der, 1792), Satyrium acaciae (Fabricius, 1787), Apatura iris (Linnaeus, 1758), Brenthis hec-
ate (Denis & Schiffermüller, 1775), Erebia medusa (Denis & Schiffermüller, 1775), Melitaea
britomartis Assmann, 1847 and Zerynthia polyxena (Denis & Schiffermüller, 1775). In the
48 KollerŠarić,K.et al.:ThebutterflydiversityoftheBaraćCaves(Kordun,Croatia)

et al.,
2015). Locality numbers correspond to those in the Tab. 1 and Fig. 1. Red list categories: DD: Data De-
ficient, NT - Near Threatened, VU – Vulnerable, EN – Endangered. * Protected species according to

et al., 2018).
List of species Locality number Red List
Croatia Red list
Europe

1. Heteropterus morpheus (Pallas, 1771) 1, 4, 5 NT
2. Ochlodes sylvanus (Esper, 1777) 2, 4
3. Thymelicus sylvestris (Poda, 1761) 1, 2, 4, 5, 6
4. Thymelicus lineola (Ochsenheimer, 1808) 2, 4
5. Erynnis tages (Linnaeus, 1758) 2, 4, 5
6. Pyrgus malvae (Linnaeus, 1758) 1, 4, 5, 6

7. Iphiclides podalirius (Linnaeus, 1758) 1, 4, 5
8. Papilio machaon Linnaeus, 1758 4NT
9. Parnassius mnemosyne (Linnaeus, 1758) 2, 4 NT NT
10. Zerynthia polyxena 4NT LC

11. Leptidea sinapis (Linnaeus, 1758) 1, 2, 4, 5, 6
12. Gonepteryx rhamni (Linnaeus, 1758) 1, 2, 4, 5
13. Colias cf. hyale (Linnaeus, 1758) 4
14. Colias crocea 1, 4, 5
15. Aporia crataegi (Linnaeus, 1758) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 NT
16. Pieris brassicae (Linnaeus, 1758) 4
17. Pieris rapae (Linnaeus, 1758) 1, 4, 5
18. Pieris napi (Linnaeus, 1758) 2, 4, 5
19. Pieris balcana Lorkovic, 1970 4

20. Lycaena alciphron 4
21. Lycaena dispar 5NT
22. Lycaena hippothoe (Linnaeus, 1761) 4, 5 NT
23. Lycaena phlaeas (Linnaeus, 1761) 4
24. Lycaena virgaureae (Linnaeus, 1758) 4
25. Lycaena tityrus (Poda, 1761) 4, 5, 6
26. Callophrys rubi (Linnaeus, 1758) 4
27. Satyrium acaciae (Fabricius, 1787) 4
28. Leptotes pirithous (Linnaeus, 1767) 4
29. Celastrina argiolus (Linnaeus, 1758) 2, 4
30. Phengaris arion (Linnaeus, 1758) 1, 2 VU EN
31. Glaucopsyche alexis (Poda, 1761) 4NT
32. Cupido argiades (Pallas, 1771) 1, 4, 5
33. Cupido minimus (Fuessly, 1775) 1, 4
34. Plebejus argus (Linnaeus, 1758) 1, 3, 4, 5, 6
35. Plebejus argyrognomon (Bergsträsser, 1779) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
36. Cyaniris semiargus 2, 4, 5, 6
Nat.Croat.Vol.31(1),2022 49
List of species Locality number Red List
Croatia Red list
Europe
37. Aricia agestis 1, 2, 4, 6
38. Lysandra bellargus 1
39. Polyommatus amandus (Schneider, 1792) 1, 2, 4
40. Polyommatus icarus 1, 4, 5, 6

41. Neptis sappho (Pallas, 1771) 1, 4
42. Limenitis reducta Staudinger, 1901 5
43. Issoria lathonia (Linnaeus, 1758) 5
44. Brenthis hecate 2, 4, 5, 6
45. Brenthis ino 2, 4, 5
46. Brenthis daphne (Bergsträsser, 1779) 2, 4, 5, 6
47. Argynnis paphia (Linnaeus, 1758) 2, 4, 6
48. Speyeria aglaja (Linnaeus, 1758) 2
49. Fabriciana adippe 2, 5
50. Boloria selene 5
51. Boloria euphrosyne (Linnaeus, 1758) 4
52. Boloria dia (Linnaeus, 1767) 4, 5
53. Apatura iris (Linnaeus, 1758) 4NT
54. Apatura ilia 4, 5 NT
55. Araschnia levana (Linnaeus, 1758) 4, 5, 6
56. Vanessa cardui (Linnaeus, 1758) 4
57. Vanessa atalanta (Linnaeus, 1758) 1, 2, 4, 5
58. Aglais io (Linnaeus, 1758) 4
59. Polygonia c-album (Linnaeus, 1758) 2, 4, 5
60. Nymphalis antiopa (Linnaeus, 1758) 4
61. Euphydryas aurinia 5NT
62. Melitaea didyma (Esper, 1778) 5
63. Melitaea phoebe 4, 5
64. Melitaea cinxia (Linnaeus, 1758) 4, 5, 6
65. Melitaea diamina (Lang, 1789) 4, 5
66. Melitaea britomartis Assmann, 1847 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 DD NT
67. Melitaea athalia 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
68. Melitaea aurelia Nickerl, 1850 2, 4, 5, 6 DD NT
69. Coenonympha pamphilus (Linnaeus, 1758) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
70. Coenonympha arcania (Linnaeus, 1761) 1, 2, 4, 5, 6
71. Pararge aegeria (Linnaeus, 1758) 2, 4, 5
72. Lasiommata megera (Linnaeus, 1767) 4
73. Melanargia galathea (Linnaeus, 1758) 1, 2, 4, 5
74. Minois dryas (Scopoli, 1763) 1, 4, 5
75. Brintesia circe (Fabricius, 1775) 1, 4
76. Aphantopus hyperantus (Linnaeus, 1758) 2, 5
77. Pyronia tithonus (Linnaeus, 1767) 1, 2, 4, 5
78. Maniola jurtina (Linnaeus, 1758) 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
79. Erebia medusa 4NT
Continued
50 KollerŠarić,K.et al.:ThebutterflydiversityoftheBaraćCaves(Kordun,Croatia)
previous surveys in the most northern part of the Kordun region, in the Karlovac sur-

-

of species for the Kordun region contains 89 butterfly species.

-
-
parison of species habitat preferences in these three areas revealed a similar number

-

Plitvice Lakes NP (Tab. 3).


  Kordun NP Plitvice lakes
mesophilic 20 (25%) 15 (23%) 15 (21%)
 19 (24%) 15 (23%) 14(20%)
 13 (17%) 8 (12%) 18 (25%)
ubiquitous 13 (17%) 12 (19%) 13 (18%)
mesophilic/ hydrophilic 7 (9%) 6 (9%) 4 (6%)
 3 (4%) 4 (6%) 3 (4%)
mesophilic/ tryphophilic 1 (1%) 1 (2%) 1 (1,5%)
tyrphophilic/ hygrophilic 1 (1%) 1 (2%) 1 (1,5%)
hygrophilic 1 (1%) 1 (2%) 1 (1,5%)
 1(1%) 1 (2%) 1 (1,5%)
According to the biogeographical affiliation, most butterfly species of the significant
landscape have Euro-Siberian (53) and Euro-Oriental affiliation (15). The comparison

NP, and north Kordun revealed a similar number of species per affiliation type (Ap-



-
 2016b): Phengaris arion (Linnaeus, 1758), Lycaena dispar
Euphydryas aurinia (Rottemburg, 1775), Papilio machaon Linnaeus,
1758, Parnassius mnemosyne (Linnaeus, 1758), and Zerynthia polyxena. Altogether 14
species fall into one of the endangered categories of the Croatian Red List of Butterflies,
-
ered vulnerable (VU) (P. arion
P.
arion is assessed as Endangered (EN), four species are assessed as Near threatened
(NT): M. britomartis, M. aurelia, P. mnemosyne, and Aporia crataegi Z. polyxena is
considered as of Least concern (LC).
Nat.Croat.Vol.31(1),2022 51
DISCUSSION
Data about the butterfly diversity of some regions in Croatia, including Lika and
Kordun are very limited. In the Lika region, Plitvice Lakes National Park can be re-

frame and a total of 71 species have been recorded so far ( 1895; 
et al., 1896;  1901;  1938;  1958;  1966;  1973;
 1999;  2004; -
al is less researched and most of the studies have been conducted around Karlovac


region (, 1910; 
of the species increased to 89.




more diverse, but further surveys are needed to prove this.

-

-
-
es of deciduous forests ( & 
habitat of the studied area. Besides, the high presence of ubiquitous, species able to live


52 KollerŠarić,K.et al.:ThebutterflydiversityoftheBaraćCaves(Kordun,Croatia)
in all types of habitats may indicate that a high proportion of the recorded species can
move from one habitat to another if the conditions are unfavourable ( &
 2015). The comparison of habitat affiliation of butterfly species in the three areas,


each of them, detailed information on the occurrence and distribution in Croatia is
provided.
Lycaena dispar
This easily distinguishable species is rather local in the mountainous areas of Kordun
and Lika. Historical records from these parts are very limited ( 2009). In the

habitats as L. hippothoe. The habitat of L. dispar-

-
pillars are in hibernation, after mid-October ( 

some caterpillars survive ( Rumex spp.) and sites
L. dispar must not
et al., 2012; ,
2014).
Lycaena hippothoe

continental parts of the country ( &  1988). It is not rare but can be
local and thus the conservation status in the country is near threatened (et al., 2015).

m a.s.l. it is replaced by a very similar species, Lycaena candens. As stated by  &

processes on each side of the valva in L. hippothoeL. candens there is only one
(, 1975; 
area of Croatia is given by  & L. hippothoe the map
is presented in  et alL. candens
-
imens yielded only L. hippothoeL.
hippothoe

Phengaris arion

parts of Croatia (

(Thymmus sp., Origanum -
et al., 2007; et al., 2020). In
-
mens observed. The habitat in the area seems to be suitable for this species but the lack
Nat.Croat.Vol.31(1),2022 53


to maintain the population of P. arion-

et al., 2006). To



 2009; et al., 2012).
Apatura iris and A. ilia
Both species are considered near threatened in Croatia (et al., 2015) and are

rather sparse. According to  et al. (2015). A. iris is present only in the uppermost


 1910; et al., 2020)
and on Mt. Velebit ( et al


The second species, A. ilia is more common in Croatia and mostly inhabits river and

-
ern Kordun and Lika areas are sparse, especially recent ones (et al., 2020). Unlike
the first species, A. ilia-
mens seen together around the forest edges.
Boloria selene
The record of B. selene-


streams and rivers, but even there they tend to be local (et al., 2017). Only in
, pers. comm.) is the
-

recorded only from a single locality (et al.,


Book of Butterflies of Croatia (et al., 2015), its scarcity and dependence on the


-

Prunus sp. and Crataegus spp. While such development
B. selene habitat res-
toration is needed.
54 KollerŠarić,K.et al.:ThebutterflydiversityoftheBaraćCaves(Kordun,Croatia)
Euphydryas aurinia
 2009) the occurrence of


( 1992), therefore special care should be given to the monitoring of the
species and conservation of its habitats. The key for the management of habitats for E.
aurinia, -
venting succession (et al., 2005; et al.,

-
-
-

burning should be done at beginning of the year before larvae emerge from hibernation
(et al., 2012).
Melitaea athalia, M. britomartis, and M. aurelia

, 1975).
The distribution of these three species in Croatia is still being investigated, and is rath-


of their genital structures ( &  2012). As no previous studies have been


M. britomartis has only re-
cently been recorded ( &  2012). We dissected about 20 male specimens

species occupy the same grassland habitats and can be considered common in the area.
Accordingly, M. britomartis

Aside from the above-mentioned species, some other records can be regarded as in-
Araschnia levana, Ap-
anthopus hyperanthus, and Neptis sappho

(e.g.  2009) but very local in central parts, including the southern Kordun area.

The most significant threats for butterflies in Europe are the intensification of farm-
ing in some parts, and the abandonment of grassland habitats in others (et al.,
2015; et al., 2019; et al., 2021). Thus, if biodiversity losses are re-

kind of landscape-scale conservation includes certain necessary elements such as the
increase of the area of the breeding habitat, an increase of general habitat quality for

et al., 2011; et al.,
Nat.Croat.Vol.31(1),2022 55


-
ferent times. Such management could also be applied to the Significant Landscape of



-
cessional vegetation through clearing trees and shrubs, is favorable for butterfly species
(et al., 2013). Currently, only a minor part of the studied area is managed proper-



depopulation of the area after the Homeland War in the 90s. Accordingly, the manage-

area are educated and encouraged to manage land appropriately (et al., 2021).
Butterflies represent a good indicator group of species ( 2005; 
et al., 2012, 2019), and their diversity could be used for biodiversity and habitat quality



diversity of butterflies could be used to promote the area and make it more attractive

could be informed about the endangered, rare, or interesting butterfly species and their
relation to correct grassland and forest edge management.

We are grateful to Public Institution for the Management of Protected Natural Val-
ues on the Territory of the Municipality of Rakovica for financing this survey. We also

company and help during field trips. Our gratitude goes also to Rudi Verovnik for
useful corrections of and suggestions about the manuscript. Collection and study per-

(KLASA UP/I-612-07/19-48/44 and UP/I-612-07/21-48/65, URBROJ 517-05-1-1-19-3 and
517-10-1-1-21-5).
Received September 10, 2021

, L., , J. & , F., 1896: Fauna Regni Hungariae. Ordo Lepidoptera. Regia Societas
Scientiarum Naturalium Hungarica , 1–82.
, 1992: Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats
(206), 7–50.
, 2009: Large blue butterfly, Maculinea arion factsheet.



Narodne novine (993).
56 KollerŠarić,K.et al.:ThebutterflydiversityoftheBaraćCaves(Kordun,Croatia)

novine (73).
, J., , M., , J., , Z., , Z., , A., , V. & , Z.,

, Å., , K., , E., , R. & , J., 2013: Butterflies in semi-natural pastures
-
teristics. Insect Conservation and Diversity , 639–657.
, N., , M. & -
, 55–65.
, T., , V., , M. & , P., 2015: Land management impacts on European butter-
(5), 805–821.
, P., , P. S., , K., , F., , C., , T., , C. S.,
, R., , J. C., , C. A., , M. J., , A., , M. L., , S.,
, J., , A. B., , F., , J. S., , F. O., , J., , J. P., ,
N. E., , F., , C. & -
tinctions. Biological Conservation , 1–12.

239 pp.
, N., , N., , M. & 

processes that control speleothem formation. Quaternary International , 52–65.



, S., , D., , F., , C. & , N., 2011: Landscape-scale conservation in
practice: lessons from northern England, UK. Journal of Insect Conservation (1–2), 69–81.

, C. A., , M., , E., , H., , N., , H., , W., ,
A., , H., , T., , D. &  , H., 2017: More than 75 percent decline over 27
years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas. PLOS ONE (10), e0185809.

, H., , J.-L., , L., , A.-B., , J. D., , Y. L., , J.-C.,
, P. & , P., 2021: Insect decline: immediate action is needed. Comptes Rendus.
Biologies (3), 267–293.
-
rioidea and Papilionoidea. Verlag nicht ermittelbar Bratislava, 144 pp.
, K., , M., , J. & 

Applied Ecology (2), 333–342.
-
, 1–67.
, L. & , A., 2015: Bio-monitoring of butterfly assemblages in the vicinity of the industri-
al park Kechnec, Slovakia. Zoology and Ecology (2), 120–128.
, T. & Melitaea: M.
athalia, M. aurelia and M. britomartis (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) in the North-Western Balkans. An-
nales Series Historia Naturalis (1), 25–34.
, T., , B., , M., , I., , A., , P. & , S., 2017: Contribution to the

Croatica (2), 167–196.
, T., , B., , N. & 
48(190), 257–283.
(4), 47–49.
, O., , J. & , K., 2015: Distribution atlas of European butterflies and skippers.

, S., , M., , Y., , A., , C., , T. M., , B., , S. H.
M., , S. N., , T. & , A. S. L., 2013: Protected Areas and Effective Biodiversity
Conservation. Science (6160), 803–805.
Nat.Croat.Vol.31(1),2022 57
,
207–211.
-
logia Croatica (1), 15–78.
, Z. & , B., 1988: Prvi nalazi vrste Lycaena hippothoe Linnaeus 1761 u Bosni i Hercegvi-
L. candens leonhardi
, 119–131.
, J., , Z., , J. &  
motýli. Academia Praha, 540 pp.
, I., , M. & , M., 2007: Contribution to the butterfly fauna (Hesperoidea & Papilion-
oidea) of the Velebit mountain, Croatia. Natura Croatica (1), 29–62.


, I. & 

(pp. 3-21). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
(Lepidoptera). Entomologische Na-
chrichten (4), 49–53.
, M., , N., , T., , I., , N., , D. & , A., 2020: Biologer:
an open platform for collecting biodiversity data. Biodiversity Data Journal 8, 1–9.
, H., 1895: Verzeichnis der von Dr. R. Sturany im Jahre 1895 in Croatien gesammelten Lepidopteren.
, 390–392.
Papilio podalir-
ius L. - Monstrosität (partitus). Entomologische Rundschau (54), 629–657.
, N., , J., , P., , V. & , M., 2005: Metapopulation dynamics
and conservation of the marsh fritillary butterfly: Population viability analysis and management
options for a critically endangered species in Western Europe. Biological Conservation (4), 569–581.
, M., , W., , M., , R. & , D., 2011: Butterflies on the brink:
habitat requirements for declining populations of the marsh fritillary (Euphydryas aurinia) in SW En-
gland. Journal of Insect Conservation (1–2), 153–163.

vatreni plavac Lycaena dispar, 18 pp.
Maculinea
, 71–82.
, M., , I., & 

, T. & 8(1), 17.


, R., 2012: Butterfly fauna (Papilionoidea & Hesperioidea) in the surrounding area of Karlovac,
Croatia. Natura Croatica: Periodicum Musei Historiae Naturalis Croatici (2), 455–470.
, V., 1910: Eine grössere Sammeltour im slavischen Süden. Entomologische Zeitschrift 
(224 & 230), 224 & 230; 18–19 & 24–25.
, J. A., 2005: Monitoring change in the abundance and distribution of insects using butterflies and
other indicator groups. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences (1454),
339–357.
, T. & , R., 2008: Collins butterfly guide the most complete field guide to the butterflies
of Britain and Europe. Collins London, 384 pp.
, V., 2011: Butterflies of Europe & the Mediterranean area. Tshikolovets Publications Pardu-
bice, 544 pp.
, C., , A., , S., , D., , M., , M., , R., -
, T., , M., , M. & , I., 2010: European Red List of Butterfies. Publications

 , C. A. M., , E. B., , R., , M., , M., ,
N., , T., , J. P., , B., , P., , S., , C., , R.,
, R., , J. M., , B., , A., , C.,
58 KollerŠarić,K.et al.:ThebutterflydiversityoftheBaraćCaves(Kordun,Croatia)
, A., , J., , B., , E., , E., , D., , X., , I.,
, Y., , M. L., , T. E., , M., , E., , F., , L.
B., , J., , J., , C., , A., , R., , M. S.,
, I. & 
Report. Butterfly Conservation Europe & ABLE/EBMS.
 , C. A. M., 2000: Beschermingsplan grote vuurvlinder 2000-2004. Rapport Directie Natuurbeheer.

 , C., , S., , D., , M. L., , L., , N., , M.,
, J., , J., , R., , T., , M., , M. & , I., 2012:
Dos and Don’ts for butterflies of the Habitats Directive of the European Union. Nature Conservation
, 73–153.
, O., , R. A., , D. B., , J., , T., , S. H. M., , M.,
, T., , L., , D., , H. P., , C., , R. J., , M. &

Biology (6), e1001891.
, M. S., , D.,  , C. A. M., , P., , H., , N. A. D., , I.,
, D. & , S., 2021: The decline of butterflies in Europe: Problems, significance, and possible
solutions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2), e2002551117.
, M., , E., , V., , Z. F., , V., , M. L., ,
C. A. M., , R., , A., , N. & , R., 2018: An updated checklist of the
European Butterflies (Lepidoptera, Papilionoidea). ZooKeys , 9–45.





-
-




-
-
-
-




-
Lycaena hippothoe, Lycaena dispar, Boloria selene i Apatura
iris

Nat.Croat.Vol.31(1),2022 59


No. Species 
caves Kordun NP Plitvice
lakes Biogeo.
 Habirat type selected

1. Carterocephalus palaemon (Pallas, 1771) + HOL mesophilic/ hydrophilic
2. Erynnis tages (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES 
3. Heteropterus morpheus (Pallas, 1771) + + ES 
4. Ochlodes sylvanus (Esper, 1777) + + + ES ubiquitous
5. Pyrgus carthami (Hübner, 1813) + EO 
6. Pyrgus malvae (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + ES 
7. Spialia orbifer (Hübner, 1823) + EO 
8. Spialia sertorius + EM 
9. Thymelicus lineola (Ochsenheimer, 1808) + + HOL mesophilic
10. Thymelicus sylvestris (Poda, 1761) + + EO mesophilic

11. Aricia agestis + + ES 
12. Callophrys rubi (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES mesophilic
13. Celastrina argiolus (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + ES mesophilic
14. Cupido argiades (Pallas, 1771) + + HOL 
15. Cupido minimus (Fuessly, 1775) + + EO 
16. Cyaniris semiargus + + ES mesophilic/ hydrophilic
17. Glaucopsyche alexis (Poda, 1761) + ES 
18. Hamearis lucina (Linnaeus, 1758) + EM mesophilic
19. Leptotes pirithous (Linnaeus, 1767) + TRO 
20. Lycaena phlaeas (Linnaeus, 1761) + + + HOL ubiquitous
21. Lycaena alciphron + + + EO mesophilic/ hydrophilic
22. Lycaena dispar + + ES mesophilic/ hydrophilic
23. Lycaena hippothoe (Linnaeus, 1761) + ES mesophilic/ hydrophilic
24. Lycaena tityrus (Poda, 1761) + + ES 
60 KollerŠarić,K.et al.:ThebutterflydiversityoftheBaraćCaves(Kordun,Croatia)
No. Species 
caves Kordun NP Plitvice
lakes Biogeo.
 Habirat type selected
25. Lycaena virgaureae (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES mesophilic
26. Lysandra bellargus + + EO 
27. Lysandra coridon (Poda, 1761) + EO 
28. Phengaris alcon + ES 
29. Phengaris arion (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES 
30. Plebejus argus (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + ES 
31. Plebejus argyrognomon (Bergsträsser, 1779) + ES 
32. Plebeius idas (Linnaeus, 1761) + HOL 
33. Polyommatus amandus (Schneider, 1792) + ES mesophilic/ hydrophilic
34. Polyommatus icarus + + + ES ubiquitous
35. Satyrium acaciae (Fabricius, 1787) + EO 
36. Satyrium ilicis (Esper, 1779) + EO 
37. Satyrium spini + + EO 
38. Scolitantides orion (Pallas, 1771) + ES 
39. Thecla betulae (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES 

40. Aglais io (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + ES ubiquitous
41. Aglais urticae (Linnaeus, 1758) + ES ubiquitous
42. Apatura ilia + + ES mesophilic
43. Apatura iris (Linnaeus, 1758) + ES mesophilic
44. Aphantopus hyperantus (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES mesophilic
45. Araschnia levana (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES mesophilic/ hydrophilic
46. Argynnis pandora + EO 
47. Argynnis paphia (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + ES mesophilic
48. Boloria dia (Linnaeus, 1767) + + + ES 
49. Boloria euphrosyne (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES mesophilic
50. Boloria selene + + + HOL mesophilic/ tryphophilic
51. Brenthis daphne (Bergsträsser, 1779) + + ES 
Nat.Croat.Vol.31(1),2022 61
No. Species 
caves Kordun NP Plitvice
lakes Biogeo.
 Habirat type selected
52. Brenthis hecate + ES 
53. Brenthis ino + + + ES mesophilic/ hydrophilic
54. Brintesia circe (Fabricius, 1775) + + + EO 
55. Coenonympha arcania (Linnaeus, 1761) + + + EM 
56. Coenonympha pamphilus (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + EO 
57. Erebia aethiops (Esper, 1777) + EO 
58. Erebia ligea (Linnaeus, 1758) + ES mesophilic
59. Erebia medusa + ES mesophilic
60. Euphydryas aurinia + + + ES hygrophilic
61. Fabriciana adippe + + + ES mesophilic
62. Fabriciana niobe (Linnaeus, 1758) + ES mesophilic
63. Hipparchia semele (Linnaeus, 1758) + EM 
64. Issoria lathonia (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES ubiquitous
65. Lasiommata maera (Linnaeus, 1758) + ES 
66. Lasiommata megera (Linnaeus, 1767) + + + EO ubiquitous
67. Limenitis camilla (Linnaeus, 1764) + ES mesophilic
68. Limenitis reducta Staudinger, 1901 + + EO 
69. Maniola jurtina (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + ES ubiquitous
70. Melanargia galathea (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + EO mesophilic
71. Melitaea athalia + + + ES mesophilic
72. Melitaea aurelia Nickerl, 1850 + + EO 
73. Melitaea britomartis Assmann, 1847 + ES 
74. Melitaea cinxia (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES 
75. Melitaea diamina (Lang, 1789) + + + ES tyrphophilic/ hygrophilic
76. Melitaea didyma (Esper, 1778) + + + ES 
77. Melitaea phoebe + + + ES 
78. Minois dryas (Scopoli, 1763) + + ES 
79. Neptis rivularis (Scopoli, 1763) + + ES 
62 KollerŠarić,K.et al.:ThebutterflydiversityoftheBaraćCaves(Kordun,Croatia)
No. Species 
caves Kordun NP Plitvice
lakes Biogeo.
 Habirat type selected
80. Neptis sappho (Pallas, 1771) + + ES mesophilic
81. Nymphalis antiopa (Linnaeus, 1758) + + HOL mesophilic
82. Nymphalis polychloros (Linnaeus, 1758) + + EO 
83. Nymphalis vaualbum + ES mesophilic
84. Pararge aegeria (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + EO 
85. Polygonia c-album (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + ES mesophilic
86. Pyronia tithonus (Linnaeus, 1767) + + EM 
87. Speyeria aglaja (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES 
88. Vanessa atalanta (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + HOL ubiquitous
89. Vanessa cardui (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + COS 

90. Iphiclides podalirius (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES 
91. Papilio machaon Linnaeus, 1758 + + + ES ubiquitous
92. Parnassius apollo (Linnaeus, 1758) + ES 
93. Parnassius mnemosyne (Linnaeus, 1758) + + EO mesophilic
94. Zerynthia polyxena + EO 
95. Anthocharis cardamines (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES mesophilic/ hydrophilic
96. Aporia crataegi (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES 
97. Colias crocea + + EO 
98. Colias cf. hyale (Linnaeus, 1758) + + ES ubiquitous
99. Gonepteryx rhamni (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + ES mesophilic
100. Leptidea sinapis (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + ES 
101. Pieris balcana Lorkovic, 1970 + + ES mesophilic
102. Pieris brassicae (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + ES ubiquitous
103. Pieris ergane + EO 
104. Pieris mannii (Mayer, 1851) + + EO 
105. Pieris napi (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + ES ubiquitous
106. Pieris rapae (Linnaeus, 1758) + + + HOL ubiquitous
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
Insects appeared more than 400 million years ago and they represent the richest and most diverse taxonomic group with several million species. Yet, under the combined effect of the loss of natural habitats, the intensification of agriculture with massive use of pesticides, global warming and biological invasions, insects show alarming signs of decline. Although difficult to quantify, species extinction and population reductions are confirmed for many ecosystems. This results in a loss of services such as the pollination of plants, including food crops, the recycling of organic matter, the supply of goods such as honey and the stability of food webs. It is therefore urgent to halt the decline of Insects. We recommend implementing long-term monitoring of populations, tackling the causes of insect decline by reducing the use of synthetic insecticides, preserving natural habitats, and reinventing a positive relationship between humans and insects.
Article
Full-text available
We review changes in the status of butterflies in Europe, focusing on long-running population data available for the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Belgium, based on standardized monitoring transects. In the United Kingdom, 8% of resident species have become extinct, and since 1976 overall numbers declined by around 50%. In the Netherlands, 20% of species have become extinct, and since 1990 overall numbers in the country declined by 50%. Distribution trends showed that butterfly distributions began decreasing long ago, and between 1890 and 1940, distributions declined by 80%. In Flanders (Belgium), 20 butterflies have become extinct (29%), and between 1992 and 2007 overall numbers declined by around 30%. A European Grassland Butterfly Indicator from 16 European countries shows there has been a 39% decline of grassland butterflies since 1990. The 2010 Red List of European butterflies listed 38 of the 482 European species (8%) as threatened and 44 species (10%) as near threatened (note that 47 species were not assessed). A country level analysis indicates that the average Red List rating is highest in central and mid-Western Europe and lowest in the far north of Europe and around the Mediterranean. The causes of the decline of butterflies are thought to be similar in most countries, mainly habitat loss and degradation and chemical pollution. Climate change is allowing many species to spread northward while bringing new threats to susceptible species. We describe examples of possible conservation solutions and a summary of policy changes needed to conserve butterflies and other insects. insect decline | butterflies | conservation | Europe | monitoring
Article
Full-text available
Lička Plješevica is an elongated mountain massif situated in the Croatian Lika region, at the border with Bosnia and Herzegovina. It was never a target of any systematic butterfly surveys, and its butterfly fauna was poorly studied. During our surveys from 2007 to 2019, we recorded 142 butterfly species on 71 localities. Along with the records from the available literature, a total of 152 species were recorded from Lička Plješevica massif. This is the second most diverse butterfly fauna of a mountain chain in Croatia, lagging just behind Velebit Mts. with 153 species. Faunal composition of both mountain chains is however similar with exception of montane species which are less numerous on Ligka Pljesevica. For some species with scarce records from Croatia like: Colias caucasica, Cupido osiris, Eumedonia eumedon, Plebejus argyrognom, Thecla betulae, Melitaea britomartis, Araschnia levana and Neptis rivularis new records are discussed. Abandonment and subsequent overgrowing has been recognized as the most important factor potentially causing long term butterfly declines in the region.
Article
Full-text available
We have developed a new platform named "Biologer" intended for recording species observations in the field (but also from literature resources and collections). The platform is created as user-friendly, open source, multilingual software that is compatible with Darwin Core standard and accompanied by a simple Android application. It is made from the user’s perspective, allowing everyone to choose how they share the data. Project team members are delegated by involved organisations. The team is responsible for development of the platform, while local Biologer communities are engaged in data collection and verification. Biologer has been online and available for use in Serbia since 2018 and was soon adopted in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. In total, we have assembled 536 users, who have collected 163,843 species observation records data from the field and digitalised 33,458 literature records. The number of active users and their records is growing daily. Out of the total number of gathered data, 89% has been made open access by the users, 10% is accessible on the scale of 10×10 km and only 1% is closed. In the future, we plan to provide a taxonomic data portal that could be used by local and national initiatives in Eastern Europe, aggregate all data into a single web location, create detailed data overview and enable fluent communication between users.
Article
Full-text available
During a nine-year survey of the Hrvatsko zagorje region carried out from 2008 until 2016 we recorded 112 butterfly species. Records were supplemented with seven species known only from literature data, which amounted to 119 species representing 60 % of the Croatian butterfly fauna. The highest butterfly diversity was registered on the mountains Ivanščica and Strahinjščica and along the Sutla River valley. Several rare and endangered species were recorded in the region, mostly grassland specialists such as Phengaris teleius, Ph. alcon rebeli, Polyommatus thersites, Euphydryas aurinia and Zerynthia polyxena whose habitats are declining due to changes in the use of grasslands like abandonment or, less frequently, intensification. The population of Lycaena dispar is still locally numerous, but its habitats are now rapidly overgrown with invasive alien plants. The butterfly diversity of Hrvatsko zagorje is high in comparison with the neighbouring region of Haloze in Slovenia. In order to maintain the high butterfly diversity in the region, grasslands and forest edges in the region are in a need of conservation actions and revitalization.
Article
Full-text available
Global declines in insects have sparked wide interest among scientists, politicians, and the general public. Loss of insect diversity and abundance is expected to provoke cascading effects on food webs and to jeopardize ecosystem services. Our understanding of the extent and underlying causes of this decline is based on the abundance of single species or taxo-nomic groups only, rather than changes in insect biomass which is more relevant for ecological functioning. Here, we used a standardized protocol to measure total insect biomass using Malaise traps, deployed over 27 years in 63 nature protection areas in Germany (96 unique location-year combinations) to infer on the status and trend of local entomofauna. Our analysis estimates a seasonal decline of 76%, and midsummer decline of 82% in flying insect biomass over the 27 years of study. We show that this decline is apparent regardless of habitat type, while changes in weather, land use, and habitat characteristics cannot explain this overall decline. This yet unrecognized loss of insect biomass must be taken into account in evaluating declines in abundance of species depending on insects as a food source, and ecosystem functioning in the European landscape.
Article
Determining the processes and conditions that control and affect the precipitation of carbonates in cave environments is essential to correctly interpret speleothem-based proxies and reconstruct past climate and environmental changes. Therefore, two cave systems rich in speleothems and that are located at different distances from the Adriatic Sea were selected to conduct cave monitoring during 2013–2014: 1) the Barać caves (Lower and Upper) situated in the inner part of Croatia; 2) the Lower Cerovačka Cave located on the northern slope of the southeastern part of Velebit Mountain, closer to the Adriatic coast. The monitoring included microclimate measurements, analyses of the elemental and stable isotope composition of drip water and precipitation, as well as stable isotope and ¹⁴C measurement of modern calcite precipitates formed on light bulbs. The stable isotope composition of drip waters in the Barać caves shows systematically lower values than those found in amount-weighted annual precipitation, which indicates that the source of the infiltrating water dominantly derives from winter precipitation. In contrast, the δD and δ¹⁸O values of the drip waters in the Lower Cerovačka Cave show similar or more positive values compared with those in the amount-weighted annual precipitation, which suggests more contribution from summer precipitation. All of the studied drip sites (except one) were characterized by stable δD and δ¹⁸O values during the whole monitoring period, which implies that the karst water above these sites is well mixed and the residence time of the groundwater is more than one year. Thus, it is likely that the speleothems from these sites could preserve the multiannual isotopic changes of precipitation. The deuterium-excess values of the drip waters and precipitation show systematically higher values than 10‰ suggesting significant contribution from moisture originated in the Mediterranean Basin. Although temperature time series do not cover a whole year, it seems that the Lower and Upper Barać caves display different calcite-water fractionation. These findings emphasize the importance of measurements on the carbonate precipitates from each site, even within the same cave system, before using speleothems for past climate reconstruction.
Article
This paper represents the first systematic butterfly checklist of the surrounding area of Karlovac. The research into butterfly fauna diversity was carried out during the period 2001-2007. Sixty four butterfly species were recorded. Adding species from literature sources, the total number on check-list rises to 74, representing 37.95% of the butterfly fauna of Croatia. Forty eight butterfly species were recorded for the first time in this area, and ten species from older literature sources need to be confirmed in future surveys. Records of species are noted with sites and dates of findings. Faunistic and biogeographical analyses were made, as well as a short overview of threats, legislative protection and habitat preferences of the species.