scholarly journals Biotic interactions help explain variation in elevational range limits of birds among Bornean mountains

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 760-771 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan C. Burner ◽  
Andy J. Boyce ◽  
David Bernasconi ◽  
Alison R. Styring ◽  
Subir B. Shakya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Biotic Interactions ◽  
Range Limits ◽  
Elevational Range

scholarly journals Biotic interactions and seed deposition rather than abiotic factors determine recruitment at elevational range limits of an alpine tree

2017 ◽  
Vol 106 (3) ◽  
pp. 948-959 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eike Lena Neuschulz ◽  
Dominik Merges ◽  
Kurt Bollmann ◽  
Felix Gugerli ◽  
Katrin Böhning-Gaese
Keyword(s):  
Abiotic Factors ◽  
Biotic Interactions ◽  
Range Limits ◽  
Seed Deposition ◽  
Elevational Range

scholarly journals The Coupled Influence of Thermal Physiology and Biotic Interactions on the Distribution and Density of Ant Species along an Elevational Gradient

Diversity ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 456
Author(s):  
Lacy D. Chick ◽  
Jean-Philippe Lessard ◽  
Robert R. Dunn ◽  
Nathan J. Sanders
Keyword(s):  
Observational Data ◽  
Species Interactions ◽  
Phylogenetic Signal ◽  
Environmental Filtering ◽  
Null Model ◽  
Biotic Interactions ◽  
Elevational Gradient ◽  
High Elevation ◽  
Elevational Range ◽  
Stressful Environments

A fundamental tenet of biogeography is that abiotic and biotic factors interact to shape the distributions of species and the organization of communities, with interactions being more important in benign environments, and environmental filtering more important in stressful environments. This pattern is often inferred using large databases or phylogenetic signal, but physiological mechanisms underlying such patterns are rarely examined. We focused on 18 ant species at 29 sites along an extensive elevational gradient, coupling experimental data on critical thermal limits, null model analyses, and observational data of density and abundance to elucidate factors governing species’ elevational range limits. Thermal tolerance data showed that environmental conditions were likely to be more important in colder, more stressful environments, where physiology was the most important constraint on the distribution and density of ant species. Conversely, the evidence for species interactions was strongest in warmer, more benign conditions, as indicated by our observational data and null model analyses. Our results provide a strong test that biotic interactions drive the distributions and density of species in warm climates, but that environmental filtering predominates at colder, high-elevation sites. Such a pattern suggests that the responses of species to climate change are likely to be context-dependent and more specifically, geographically-dependent.

scholarly journals Anomalous needle numbers on dwarf shoots of Pinus mugo and P. uncinata (Pinaceae)

2011 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krystyna Boratyńska ◽  
Adam Boratyński
Keyword(s):  
Iberian Peninsula ◽  
Central Europe ◽  
Average Frequency ◽  
Range Limits ◽  
Frequency Of Occurrence ◽  
Pinus Mugo ◽  
Central European ◽  
Elevational Range ◽  
Two Populations

The frequency of occurrence of abnormal, three- (or more) needle dwarf shoots of most southern and central European two-needle pine (<em>Pinus</em>) species were studied. No specimens with more than two-needle dwarf shoots were found in a population of <em>P. nigra </em>Arnold subsp. <em>salzmannii </em>(Dunal) Franco from the Iberian Peninsula and in two populations of <em>P. uliginosa</em> Neumann from the Sudeten Mountains in Central Europe. Single specimens were found within one population of <em>P. pinaster </em>Aiton from the Iberian Peninsula and among six populations of <em>P. sylvestris </em>L. from the Iberian Peninsula and Central Europe. Abnormal dwarf shoots mostly with three, but also four, five or six needles were found among 24 of 25 surveyed populations of <em>P. mugo </em>Turra and <em>P. uncinata </em>Ramond. The average frequency of specimens with at least one three-needle dwarf shoot was 24% for <em>P. mugo</em> and 20% for <em>P. uncinata</em>. The frequencies of occurrence varied significantly among studied populations and were highest in samples collected from the upper elevational range limits of the species in the mountains and near the northern limits of their ranges. The frequency of abnormal dwarf shoots in the same populations was significantly high in 2-3 consecutive years. Needles from three-needle dwarf shoots were not significantly shorter than those of two-needle shoots.

scholarly journals Biotic interactions are more important at species’ warm vs. cool range-edges: a synthesis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Paquette ◽  
Anna L. Hargreaves
Keyword(s):  
Abiotic Factors ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Ecological Factors ◽  
Biotic Interactions ◽  
High Elevation ◽  
Range Limits ◽  
Low Latitude ◽  
Comprehensive Literature Review ◽  
Mixed Support ◽  
Species Being

ABSTRACTPredicting which ecological factors constrain species distributions is a fundamental question in ecology and critical to forecasting geographic responses to global change. Darwin hypothesized that abiotic factors generally impose species’ high-latitude and high-elevation (typically cool) range limits, whereas biotic interactions more often impose species’ low-latitude/low-elevation (typically warm) limits, but empirical support has been mixed. Here, we clarify three predictions arising from Darwin’s hypothesis, and show that previously mixed support is partially due to researchers testing different predictions. Using a comprehensive literature review (886 range limits), we find that biotic interactions, including competition, predation, and parasitism, influenced species’ warm limits more often than species’ cool limits. At cool limits, abiotic factors were consistently more important than biotic interactions, but temperature contributed strongly to cool and warm limits. Our results suggest that most range limits will be sensitive to climate warming, but warm limit responses will depend strongly on biotic interactions. “When we travel southward and see a species decreasing in numbers, we may feel sure that the cause lies quite as much in other species being favored, as in this one being hurt. (Whereas)… the number of species, and therefore of competitors, deceases northwards; hence in going northward or in ascending a mountain, we far oftener meet with stunted forms, due to the directly injurious action of climate” –Darwin 1859

scholarly journals Combined effects of climate and biotic interactions on the elevational range of a phytophagous insect

2008 ◽  
Vol 77 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard M. Merrill ◽  
David Gutiérrez ◽  
Owen T. Lewis ◽  
Javier Gutiérrez ◽  
Sonia B. Díez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Biotic Interactions ◽  
Combined Effects ◽  
Phytophagous Insect ◽  
Elevational Range

scholarly journals Biotic interactions are more important at species’ warm vs. cool range-edges: a synthesis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Paquette ◽  
Anna Hargreaves
Keyword(s):  
Abiotic Factors ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Ecological Factors ◽  
Biotic Interactions ◽  
High Elevation ◽  
Fundamental Question ◽  
Range Limits ◽  
Low Latitude ◽  
Comprehensive Literature Review ◽  
Mixed Support

Predicting which ecological factors constrain species distributions is a fundamental question in ecology and critical to forecasting geographic responses to global change. Darwin hypothesized that abiotic factors generally impose species’ high-latitude and high-elevation (typically cool) range limits, whereas biotic interactions more often impose species’ low-latitude/low-elevation (typically warm) limits, but empirical support has been mixed. Here, we clarify three predictions arising from Darwin’s hypothesis, and show that previously mixed support is partially due to researchers testing different predictions. Using a comprehensive literature review (886 range limits), we find that biotic interactions, including competition, predation, and parasitism, influenced species’ warm limits more often than species’ cool limits. At cool limits, abiotic factors were consistently more important than biotic interactions, but temperature contributed strongly to cool and warm limits. Our results suggest that most range limits will be sensitive to climate warming, but warm limit responses will depend strongly on biotic interactions.

scholarly journals Context dependency of biotic interactions and its relation to plant rarity

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Kempel ◽  
Hugo Vincent ◽  
Daniel Prati ◽  
Markus Fischer
Keyword(s):  
Rare Species ◽  
Competitive Ability ◽  
Biotic Interactions ◽  
Common Species ◽  
Context Dependency ◽  
Range Limits ◽  
Widespread Species ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Resource Availability Hypothesis ◽  
Plant Characteristics

AbstractAimBiotic interactions can determine rarity and commonness of species, however evidence that rare and common species respond differently to biotic stress is scarce. This is because biotic interactions are notoriously context-dependent and traits leading to success in one habitat might be costly or unimportant in another. We aim to identify plant characteristics that are related to biotic interactions and may drive patterns of rarity and commonness, taking environmental context into account.LocationSwitzerlandMethodsIn a multi-species experiment, we compared the response to biotic interactions of 19 rare and 21 widespread congeneric plant species in Switzerland, while also accounting for variation in environmental conditions of the species’ origin.ResultsOur results restrict the long-standing hypothesis that widespread species are superior competitors to rare species to only those species originating from resource rich habitats, in which competition is usually strong. Tolerance to herbivory and ambient herbivore damage on the other hand, did not differ between widespread and rare species. In accordance to the resource-availability hypothesis, widespread species from resource rich habitats where more damaged by herbivores (less defended) than widespread species from resource poor habitats – such a growth-defense tradeoff was lacking in rare species. This indicates that the evolutionary important tradeoff between traits increasing competitive-ability and defence is present in widespread species but may have been lost in rare species.Main conclusionsOur results indicate that biotic interactions, above all competition, might indeed set range limits, and underlines the importance of including context-dependency in studies comparing traits of common and rare or invasive and non-invasive species.

scholarly journals Behavior influences range limits and patterns of coexistence across an elevational gradient in tropical bird diversity

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin G Freeman ◽  
Joseph A Tobias ◽  
Dolph Schluter
Keyword(s):  
Interference Competition ◽  
Bird Species ◽  
Elevational Gradient ◽  
Range Limits ◽  
Bird Diversity ◽  
Basic Question ◽  
Evolutionary Relatedness ◽  
Range Overlap ◽  
Elevational Range ◽  
Close Relatives

AbstractDoes competition influence patterns of coexistence between closely related taxa? Here we address this basic question in ecology by analyzing patterns of range overlap between related bird species (“sister pairs”) distributed along a Neotropical elevational gradient. We explicitly contrast the behavioral dimension of interspecific competition (interference competition) with similarity in resource acquisition traits (exploitative competition). We find that behavioral interactions are generally important in setting elevational range limits and preventing coexistence of closely related species. Specifically, close relatives that defend year-round territories tend to live in non-overlapping elevational distributions, while close relatives that do not defend territories tend to broadly overlap in distribution. In contrast, neither similarity in beak morphology nor evolutionary relatedness was associated with patterns of range limitation. Our main result is that interference competition can be an important driver of species ranges at the scale of entire diverse assemblages. Consequently, we suggest that behavioral dimensions of the niche should be more broadly incorporated in macroecological studies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document