4.2 Article

Assembling the modern Great Basin mammal biota: insights from molecular biogeography and the fossil record

期刊

JOURNAL OF MAMMALOGY
卷 95, 期 6, 页码 1107-1127

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1644/14-MAMM-S-064

关键词

climate change; cryptic lineage; cryptic species; geomorphology; intermontane region; North American Land Mammal Age (NALMA); phylogeography; range expansion; range shifting; refuge

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reconstructing the assembly of local ecological communities requires insight from a wide range of disciplines including biogeography, paleontology, ecology, and evolutionary biology. Community assembly depends on the availability of species in a regional species pool (a biota''), which itself is assembled through a history of diversification, geographic range shifting, and adaptive responses to environmental change. The Great Basin contains a diverse mammal biota sorted into communities along elevational, latitudinal, and structural habitat gradients. Molecular genetic approaches have clarified the timing of diversification events in response to dynamic Neogene landscapes in several iconic Great Basin mammals, although the role of Great Basin landscape evolution on species diversification remains largely unexplored. Divergence continued into the Quaternary, as widespread species formed genetically unique lineages in and around the Great Basin. In response to Quaternary climatic oscillation, some mammalian species maintained their ranges whereas others exhibited dramatic range contractions or expansions, impacting the composition of regional species pools available for local community assembly. Advances will come from elucidating phylogenetic and phylogeographic structure in more taxa, but also from emerging genomic and modeling approaches to address how ecological traits, niche shifts, and adaptive evolution have influenced specific responses to dynamic landscapes and climates resulting in the species assemblages that characterize the Great Basin.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据