4.7 Review

What's missing from avian global diversification analyses?

期刊

MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION
卷 77, 期 -, 页码 159-165

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2014.04.023

关键词

Biodiversity; Birds; Diversity patterns; DNA sequences; Sampling bias; Taxonomy

资金

  1. US National Science Foundation [DEB-0962078]
  2. National Centre for Biological Sciences (India)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The accumulation of vast numbers of molecular phylogenetic studies has contributed to huge knowledge gains in the evolutionary history of birds. This permits subsequent analyses of avian diversity, such as how and why diversification varies across the globe and among taxonomic groups. However, available genetic data for these meta-analyses are unevenly distributed across different geographic regions and taxonomic groups. To comprehend the impact of this variation on the interpretation of global diversity patterns, I examined the availability of genetic data for possible biases in geographic and taxonomic sampling of birds. I identified three main disparities of sampling that are geographically associated with latitude (temperate, tropical), hemispheres (East, West), and range size. Tropical regions, which host the vast majority of species, are substantially less studied. Moreover, Eastern regions, such as the Old World Tropics and Australasia, stand out as being disproportionately undersampled, with up to half of communities not being represented in recent studies. In terms of taxonomic discrepancies, a majority of genetically undersampled clades are exclusively found in tropical regions. My analysis identifies several disparities in the key regions of interest of global diversity analyses. Differential sampling can have considerable impacts on these global comparisons and call into question recent interpretations of latitudinal or hemispheric differences of diversification rates. Moreover, this review pinpoints understudied regions whose biota are in critical need of modern systematic analyses. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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