4.6 Article

Regional Variation Exaggerates Ecological Divergence in Niche Models

Journal

SYSTEMATIC BIOLOGY
Volume 59, Issue 3, Pages 298-306

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/sysbio/syq005

Keywords

Allopatric speciation; cohesion species concept; ecological divergence; ecological niche model; environmental gradients; species delimitation; species distributions

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [DEB-0516841]
  2. Canadian National Science and Engineering Research Council
  3. University of Idaho
  4. National Institutes of Health/National Center for Research Resources [P20RR16448, P20RR016454]
  5. National Science Foundation
  6. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
  7. U.S. Department of Agriculture [EF-0832858]
  8. University of Tennessee, Knoxville
  9. NATIONAL CENTER FOR RESEARCH RESOURCES [P20RR016448, P20RR016454] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Traditionally, the goal of systematics has been to produce classifications that are both strongly supported and biologically meaningful. In recent years several authors have advocated complementing phylogenetic analyses with measures of another form of evolutionary change, ecological divergence. These analyses frequently rely on ecological niche models to determine if species have comparable environmental requirements, but it has heretofore been difficult to test the accuracy of these inferences. To address this problem, I simulate the geographic distributions of allopatric species with identical environmental requirements. I then test whether existing analyses based on geographic distributions will correctly infer that the 2 species' requirements are identical. This work demonstrates that when taxa disperse to different environments, many analyses can erroneously infer changes in environmental requirements, but the severity of the problem depends on the method used. As this could exaggerate the number of ecologically distinct taxa in a clade, I suggest diagnostics to mitigate this problem.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available