4.5 Article

Reconciling ecological and phytogeographical spatial boundaries to clarify the limits of the montane and alpine regions of sub-Sahelian Africa

期刊

SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY
卷 98, 期 -, 页码 64-75

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.sajb.2015.01.014

关键词

Afroalpine; Afromontane; Boundary reconciliation; Cape element; Great Escarpment; High elevation floras; High elevation vegetation; Microrefugia; Migration corridor; Northern track; Phytogeography; Spatial scale-based; Southern track; Sub-Sahelian Africa; Thermal belts; Treeline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Afromontane phytochorion is a region delineated on the basis of shared plant species distributions and centres of plant endemism occurring mainly in the high elevation regions of sub-Sahelian Africa. We have provided in this study a synthesis of the various contexts in which the Afromontane concept has been applied in the past, highlighting many complexities, nuances and shortcomings. A complicating factor is that the Afromontane region has both a phytogeographical and ecological context, operating at different spatial scales. We note that use of the Afromontane region as a broad floristic framework is problematic because it incorporates non-montane (alpine) regions above the treeline. Going back to first principles of phytogeography and ecology, we have developed a novel framework to resolve the aforementioned challenges. We argue that the best way to make sense of the Afromontane region is to reconcile the phytogeographical and ecological contexts to a common and unambiguous spatial boundary. We also question the recognition of the Afromontane phytochorion as a floristic region in future. Spanning some 48 of latitude, it is a rather ungainly frame of reference probably immune to detecting the nuances of floristic, physiognomic, elevational, climatic and topographic variability at finer scales, particularly in the species-rich grasslands and plateau margins. (C) 2015 SAAB. Published by Elsevier B.V. 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

4.5
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