Disparity between range map- and survey-based analyses of species richness: patterns, processes and implications
Disparity between range map- and survey-based analyses of species richness: patterns, processes and implications
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00726.x
复制
发表时间：
2005-03-01
期刊：
影响因子：
8.8
通讯作者：
White, EP
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hurlbert, AH;White, EP
物种丰富度模式的特点是覆盖物种分布图或汇编地理上广泛的调查数据，多个当地社区。虽然这两种方法显然是相关的，但它们不需要产生相同的丰富度模式，因为物种并不是在其地理范围内的任何地方都存在。使用北美繁殖鸟类，我们提出了第一个大陆范围内的调查和范围图数据的比较。平均而言，40.5%的调查在其范围内发现了鸟类。由于这一范围的孔隙度，地理丰富度模式差异显着，在干旱地区和高海拔地区的差距最大。环境生产力是一个更强的预测调查丰富度，而海拔异质性更重要的是在确定范围图丰富度。此外，范围图丰富度表现出更大的空间自相关和较低的估计物种组成的空间营业额。我们的研究结果突出了这样一个事实，即范围图丰富度代表物种共存在一个更粗的尺度比调查数据，并表明，从物种丰富度研究得出的结论可能取决于用于分析的数据类型。
Species richness patterns are characterized either by overlaying species range maps or by compiling geographically extensive survey data for multiple local communities. Although, these two approaches are clearly related, they need not produce identical richness patterns because species do not occur everywhere in their geographical range. Using North American breeding birds, we present the first continent-wide comparison of survey and range map data. On average, bird species were detected on 40.5% of the surveys within their range. As a result of this range porosity, the geographical richness patterns differed markedly, with the greatest disparity in arid regions and at higher elevations. Environmental productivity was a stronger predictor of survey richness, while elevational heterogeneity was more important in determining range map richness. In addition, range map richness exhibited greater spatial autocorrelation and lower estimates of spatial turnover in species composition. Our results highlight the fact that range map richness represents species coexistence at a much coarser scale than survey data, and demonstrate that the conclusions drawn from species richness studies may depend on the data type used for analyses.