Positive forestry: The effect of rubber tree plantations on fruit feeding butterfly assemblages in the Brazilian Atlantic forest Elaine Cristina Barbosa Cambui a , Rodrigo Nogueira de Vasconcelos b , Eduardo Mariano-Neto c , Blandina Felipe Viana d , Márcio Zikán Cardoso e,⇑ a PPG Multi-Institucional e Multidisciplinar em Difusão do Conhecimento, Universidade Federal da Bahia, Salvador, BA 40110-100, Brazil b PPG em Modelagem e Ciências da Terra e do Ambiente, Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana, Feira de Santana, BA 44036-900, Brazil c Departamento de Botânica, Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Federal da Bahia, Salvador, BA 40170-290, Brazil d Departamento de Zoologia, Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Federal da Bahia, Salvador, BA 40170-290, Brazil e Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN 59078-900, Brazil article info Article history: Received 26 August 2016 Received in revised form 24 February 2017 Accepted 27 April 2017 Keywords: Mosaic landscape Planted forest Hevea brasiliensis Sustainable forestry Biodiversity conservation abstract Agroforestry systems have increased in area in tropical regions in recent decades and many studies have sought to evaluate their impact on native biodiversity. Yet, few have assessed the impact of perennial plantations such as rubber-tree harvesting on native biodiversity. The goal of our study was to assess the effect of rubber tree plantations on fruit-feeding butterflies of the endangered Brazilian Atlantic Forest in Brazil. To do so, we sampled fruit- feeding butterfly species in a landscape mosaic composed of primary forest, rubber tree plantations under two management regimes (active production with intense management and undergrowth suppression and low management plantations with no under- growth suppression), and forest fragments immersed in rubber tree plantation matrix. By trap-baiting butterflies for a year, we captured 5800 individuals of 85 butterfly species. Species richness was higher in unmanaged (no growth suppression) plantation and forest fragments (57–60 species) and lower in managed plantation (with growth suppression) (47) and primary forest (43). Ordination analysis suggests three main community groups formed by primary forest samples, a cluster combining unmanaged plan- tation and fragments, and managed plantation. There was substantial variation in butterfly abundance in the landscape, but our data suggest that several forest specialists species are able to occur along the mosaic on the landscape, and despite differences in management the entire landscape can contribute for a rich biota. Loss of understory vegetation led to simplified communities, with skewed dominance of a few species. By allowing understory development, a low impact management can provide adequate habitat for native butterflies. Yet, current rubber tree plantation technology does not normally use this method, opting to use the high management approach instead. We hypothesize that these minimally benign plantations may serve as conduits for butterflies in forest patches. Thus, we suggest that rubber tree plantations near Atlantic forest fragments should encourage understory development and establish a landscape mosaic, allowing forest fragments immersed in plantation matrix to be able to exchange indi- viduals and colonize more complex plantation habitat. Intensive suppression of undergrowth should be avoided, except for trail maintenance, and isolation of fragments in this matrix should be kept to a min- imum. If undergrowth suppression cannot be avoided, then establishment of stepping stones in planta- tion matrix should be encouraged to reduce isolation of fragments. Ó 2017 Published by Elsevier B.V. 1. Introduction The loss of natural environments throughout the tropics calls for practical solutions that reconcile human needs with biodiver- sity conservation (Kaimowitz et al., 2007). In this context, there is great need not only to conserve natural habitats but also to rec- oncile habitat modification caused by agricultural systems with biodiversity conservation (Harvey et al., 2006; Power, 1996). The ability of native species to persist in agricultural mosaics depends not only on the biological needs of these species but also on the structural aspects of the landscape (Di Giulio et al., 2001), such as the percentage and distribution of native forest and the quality of the matrix (Faria et al., 2006). Encouraging results show that http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2017.04.043 0378-1127/Ó 2017 Published by Elsevier B.V. ⇑ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: elainecambui@gmail.com (E. Cristina Barbosa Cambui), rodrigodevasconcelos@yahoo.com.br (R. Nogueira de Vasconcelos), marianon@ gmail.com (E. Mariano-Neto), bfviana@ufba.br (B. Felipe Viana), mzc@cb.ufrn.br (M. Zikán Cardoso). Forest Ecology and Management 397 (2017) 150–156 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Forest Ecology and Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foreco