BDS Logo

British Dragonfly Society

Draft Management Fact File

Please note: These MFFs are still draft versions.
Any comments sent to the Conservation Officer would be most welcome.

The Scarce Emerald Damselfly
Lestes dryas Kirby 1890

Identification

Figure 1, Male Scarce Emerald Damselfly

The Scare Emerald Damselfly (L. dryas) is a medium sized metallic green insect that1, unlike most other damselflies, usually rests with its wings half open2 at an angle of approximately 45deg. Once mature the male and female develop different colouration with the males usually being more noticeable than the females. Adult males have bright blue eyes and develop a powder blue pruinescence on the thorax between the wings and on the segments at the top and bottom of the abdomen (Fig. 1). In comparison, the females tend to be a much duller green and consequently are less easy to see (Fig. 2.).

The Scarce Emerald Damselfly can easily be confused with the more common Emerald Damselfly (Lestes sponsa)2,3 especially as they are often found together in the same habitat4. However, the Scarce Emerald Damselfly is more robust than its more common counterpart, and has subtle differences such as brighter blue eyes and less extensive pruinescence2 in the male, and different abdominal markings on segment two in the female. The female Scarce Emerald Damselfly has rectangular paired spots as opposed to the rounded marks seen on the female Emerald Damselfly and the side of its body is also chocolate brown. Close examination of the anal appendages or the ovipositor is required to confirm identification beyond doubt3.


Figure 2, Female Scarce Emerald Damselfly

Lestes larvae and exuviae can be separated from other damselfly species firstly by the shape of the labium and prementum and banding of the caudal lamellæ3. However, separating the Scarce Emerald Damselfly and the Emerald Damselfly can only be achieved definitely by close examination of the mouthparts (i.e. labium and prementum)2.

Status

As the name suggests, the Scarce Emerald Damselfly is a rare and local species, which has been recognised as vulnerable by the UK statutory conservation agencies5,6. It is listed under category 2 (vulnerable) in the British Red Data Book on Insects. In 1980 this species was declared as "probably extinct", but in 1983 the species was rediscovered in Essex3,7. The decline was thought to be a result of habitat loss and pollution8, although it is likely that the species was under recorded and overlooked at the time. Consequently, the exact status of L. dryas is unclear9. Recent records suggest that the species is out of immediate danger, although there are "no grounds for complacency"3 as the reasons for the recent decline still remain largely unexplained.

Distribution

L. Dryas is a Holarctic species and is widespread in the Northern Hemisphere2, where its range extends across North America and Eurasia. In Europe it is widespread and can be found from Portugal to southern Finland, although it is more local in northern and central parts. It is also present in the Near East and Japan3.

In Britain the species has never been common, although historically it was more widely distributed in eastern England than it is today1, ranging from East Sussex to South Yorkshire3. Currently the species has strongholds on the coastal and estuarine marshes of Essex and North Kent and in the Norfolk Brecklands. However, a few scattered colonies have also been discovered at other locations in East Anglia1,3.

Distribution map from the National Biodiversity Network Gateway website.

Ecology and Habitat Requirements

L. dryas can occur in two types of habitat in the UK:

The occasional drying out of both types of habitat stops the presence of fish, which are major predators of Lestes larvae. These larvae tend to float in mid-water and so are easy preys for fish. Lestes are adapted to overwinter as eggs in vegetation, in order to survive drought conditions. However, an additional danger with this technique is that of the vegetation containing the eggs could be grazed, resulting in the potential eradication of a population13.

If water is present all year in well-vegetated ditches, the very dense vegetation makes predation difficult if fish are present.

Active management is required to prevent succession and to maintain the habitat for these populations. The shallow and temporary nature of such sites means that they often dry out during the summer months2 and consequently L. dryas is adapted to cope with this. It seems likely that these habitat conditions actually eliminate both competitors and predators3. In the Norfolk Brecks, colonies populate seasonal water bodies (pingos) which dry out in summer and therefore contain no fish as predators. As there is little or no grazing on these sites, eggs that are laid in marginal plants are free to hatch the following year after water levels have risen13.

Unlike many Odonata species L. dryas often lives in brackish water although the degree of saline tolerance has not yet been established3. At sites where it is found, it appears that populations are extremely localised, and often nearby ditches that could also provide an apparently suitable habitat remain uncolonised. This suggests that there are subtle habitat preferences that have not yet been identified and require further research3.

After a lengthy mating, L. dryas lay their eggs while in tandem, inserting them into the stems of marginal plants, usually above the level of the water2,3. Individuals have also been observed ovipositing into the vegetation in dried out pools9. Unlike most other species of damselfly the eggs overwinter, hatching in the spring. The larvae then develop rapidly and can mature within 8 weeks. Generally, the larvae live among the dense vegetation although it is thought that they can also survive in mud beneath matted vegetation, which remains cool and moist9. Adults begin to emerge towards the end of June2 and can be seen on the wing until the end of August, although they are not always easy to see preferring to stay within the marginal vegetation, especially in dull weather7,8. Also when disturbed, they often feign death, folding legs and wings and falling down into the dense vegetation base.

Figure 3. The Flight Period L. dryas
Figure 3. The Flight Period L. dryas

Current Threats

Adapted from Benton et al, 19963

Management

General Management Guidelines

Best Management Practice

Habitat Creation and Restoration

Adapted from EA

Case Study?

References

  1. Merrit, R., Moore, N. W., Eversham, B. C., 1996, Atlas of the dragonflies of Britain and Ireland. ITE Research Publication, No. 9. HMSO, London, pp.

  2. Nelson, 1997 in Field Guide to the Dragonflies and Damselflies of Great Britain and Ireland, Eds Brooks S. and Lewington R. British Wildlife Publishing, Hampshire.

  3. Benton, E., Moore N. W., Silsby J., 1996, Management Guidelines: Scarce emerald damselfly Lestes dryas Kirby 1890 in the Species and Habitats Handbook, Environment Agency.

  4. Benton, E., 1985, The dragonflies of Essex, Journal of the British Dragonfly Society 1(5), pp. 77-82.

  5. Parr, A., 2000, An Annotated List of the Odonata of Britain and Ireland, Atropos 11, pp. 10 - 20

  6. Moore, N. M., 2000, Applying IUCN criteria to assess threats to British dragonflies Dragonfly News (Newsletter of the British Dragonfly Society)37, pp. 19-20

  7. Benton E., and Payne, R. G., 1983, On the Rediscovery of Lestes dryas Kirby, in Britain, Journal of the British Dragonfly Society 1 (2), pp. 28 - 30.

  8. Hammond, C. O., 1983 (2nd Edition revised by R Merrit), The Dragonflies of Great Britain and Ireland, Harley Books, Colchester.

  9. Perrin, V. L., 1995, Observations on Lestes dryas Kirby habitat in Norfolk: is there a typical inland site for this species? Journal of the British Dragonfly Society 11(2), pp. 25-26.

  10. Benstead, P., Drake, M., Jose, P., Mountford, O., Newbold , C., and Treweek, J., 1997, The Wet Grassland Guide, RSPB, Sandy, Bedfordshire

  11. Moore, N. W., 1980, Lestes dryas Kirby - a declining species of dragonfly (Odonata) in need of conservation: notes on its status and habitat in England and Ireland. Biological Conservation 17, pp. 143 - 148

  12. Heath, P., 1999, The Past and Present Status of Norfolk Hawker Aeshna isosceles Mull in Britain, Atropos 8, pp. 13-21.

  13. Donnithorne, N., pers.comm. (March 2004)

Management file updated on 4 April 2004