Of niches and distributions: range size increases with niche breadth both globally and regionally but regional estimates poorly relate to global estimates

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

DOI

  • Stephan Kambach, University Halle-Wittenberg
  • ,
  • Jonathan Lenoir, UR Ecologie et Dynamique des Systèmes Anthropisés (EDYSAN
  • ,
  • Guillaume Decocq, UR Ecol & Dynam Syst Anthropises EDYSAN
  • ,
  • Erik Welk, University Halle-Wittenberg
  • ,
  • Gunnar Seidler, University Halle-Wittenberg
  • ,
  • Stefan Dullinger, University of Vienna
  • ,
  • Jean Claude Gégout, AgroParisTech
  • ,
  • Antoine Guisan, University of Lausanne, Vienna (BOKU)
  • ,
  • Harald Pauli, University of Lausanne
  • ,
  • Jens Christian Svenning
  • Pascal Vittoz, Vienna (BOKU)
  • ,
  • Thomas Wohlgemuth, Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL
  • ,
  • Niklaus E. Zimmermann, Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL
  • ,
  • Helge Bruelheide, University Halle-Wittenberg, German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig

The relationship between species’ niche breadth (i.e. the range of environmental conditions under which a species can persist) and range size (i.e. the extent of its spatial distribution) has mostly been tested within geographically restricted areas but rarely at the global extent. Here, we not only tested the relationship between range size (derived from species’ distribution data) and niche breadth (derived from species’ distribution and co-occurrence data) of 1255 plant species at the regional extent of the European Alps, but also at the global extent and across both spatial scales for a subset of 180 species. Using correlation analyses, linear models and variation partitioning, we found that species’ realized niche breadth estimated at the regional level is a weak predictor of species’ global niche breadth and range size. Against our expectations, distribution-derived niche breadth was a better predictor for species’ range size than the co-occurrence-based estimate, which should, theoretically, account for more than the climatically determined niche dimensions. Our findings highlight that studies focusing on the niche breadth vs range size relationship must explicitly consider spatial mismatches that might have confounded and diminished previously reported relationships.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftEcography
Vol/bind42
Nummer3
Sider (fra-til)467-477
Antal sider11
ISSN0906-7590
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 1 mar. 2019

Se relationer på Aarhus Universitet Citationsformater

ID: 137067641