Importance of species traits for species distribution in fragmented landscapes.
Importance of species traits for species distribution in fragmented landscapes.
复制标题
物种性状对于破碎景观中物种分布的重要性。
DOI：
10.1890/06-0924
复制
发表时间：
2007
期刊：
影响因子：
4.8
通讯作者：
Z. Münzbergová
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Katerina Tremlová;Z. Münzbergová
了解破碎化景观中物种特征与物种分布之间的关系对于理解当前的分布格局以及作为未来景观变化影响预测模型的背景信息具有重要意义。关于这一主题的现有研究存在一些缺陷。首先，他们通常只考虑与扩散能力有关的性状，而不考虑与生长有关的性状。此外，他们没有应用系统发育校正，因此我们不知道如何考虑系统发育关系可以改变结论。最后，他们通常只使用一种技术来计算栖息地隔离，我们不知道其他隔离措施会如何改变结果。研究了干旱化破碎草原上30种形成同源对的植物。我们测量了该物种的传播、生存和生长特征，并记录了该物种在215个草地碎片中的分布。研究结果表明，生境占用率与风速呈正相关，而生境占用率与种子休眠呈负相关。然而，这些关系的方向在应用系统发育校正后经常改变。例如，更孤立的栖息地寄主种子较小的物种。然而，经过系统发育校正后，它们变成了拥有更大种子的宿主物种。结论也在一定程度上取决于我们如何计算栖息地隔离。具体而言，从已占用生境计算的生境隔离仅具有最高的预测能力。这表明了物种的缓慢动态。这些结果支持了物种特征在解释物种在景观中的分布格局方面具有很高的潜力，并可用于建立物种分布的预测模型。然而，具体的结论取决于所使用的技术，在比较不同的研究时，我们应该仔细考虑这一点。由于不同的技术回答的问题略有不同，我们应该尝试使用有或没有系统发育校正的分析，并尽可能探索不同的分离措施，并比较结果。
Knowledge of the relationship between species traits and species distribution in fragmented landscapes is important for understanding current distribution patterns and as background information for predictive models of the effect of future landscape changes. The existing studies on the topic suffer from several drawbacks. First, they usually consider only traits related to dispersal ability and not growth. Furthermore, they do not apply phylogenetic corrections, and we thus do not know how considerations of phylogenetic relationships can alter the conclusions. Finally, they usually apply only one technique to calculate habitat isolation, and we do not know how other isolation measures would change the results. We studied the issues using 30 species forming congeneric pairs occurring in fragmented dry grasslands. We measured traits related to dispersal, survival, and growth in the species and recorded distribution of the species in 215 grassland fragments. We show many strong relationships between species traits related to both dispersal and growth and species distribution in the landscape, such as the positive relationship between habitat occupancy and anemochory and negative relationships between habitat occupancy and seed dormancy. The directions of these relationships, however, often change after application of phylogenetic correction. For example, more isolated habitats host species with smaller seeds. After phylogenetic correction, however, they turn out to host species with larger seeds. The conclusions also partly change depending on how we calculate habitat isolation. Specifically, habitat isolation calculated from occupied habitats only has the highest predictive power. This indicates slow dynamics of the species. All the results support the expectation that species traits have a high potential to explain patterns of species distribution in the landscape and that they can be used to build predictive models of species distribution. The specific conclusions are, however, dependent on the technique used, and we should carefully consider this when comparing among different studies. Since different techniques answer slightly different questions, we should attempt to use analyses both with and without phylogenetic correction and explore different isolation measures whenever possible and compare the results.