1 / 21

Mammalian Macroecology in Latin America

Mammalian Macroecology in Latin America. Pablo A. Marquet. P. Universidad Cat ólica de Chile Departamento de Ecología Casilla 114 -D, Santiago Chile pmarquet@puc.cl. GOALS Provide an overview of the kind of macroecological patterns so far documented for mammals. EMPHASIS

hovan
Download Presentation

Mammalian Macroecology in Latin America

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Mammalian Macroecology in Latin America Pablo A. Marquet P. Universidad Católica de Chile Departamento de Ecología Casilla 114-D, Santiago Chile pmarquet@puc.cl

  2. GOALS • Provide an overview of the kind of macroecological • patterns so far documented for mammals • EMPHASIS • Mostly terrestrial, non-volant mammals • South America, Latin America, Neotropics

  3. Macroecology (a working definition) • Macroecology is a research program that aims to • discover the general principles or natural laws underlying • the complexity of ecological systems. To some extent it • proposes a complementary view to the experimental • reductionistic approaches that have dominated • ecology, emphasizing, but not restricted to, • the analysis of large scale statistical patterns • in the distribution and abundance of species at the interface • several scientific disciplines, especially • physiology, ecology, biogeography, and evolution.

  4. Patterns in abundance • Patterns in distribution • Patterns in body size

  5. Patterns in abundance Table.1. Selected analysisi reporting the relationship between abundance and Body size in Norh and South American mammals. T= tropical, fo=frugivore-ommnivores, Io= Insectivore-ommnivore, my =Myrmecophagous. Region habitat slope intercept n Source SA & CA --- -0.70 4.06 40 (0.64) Damuth (1987) NA --- -0.75 4.33 84 (0.66) “ NEOTR. fo T -0.60 3.13 38 (0.38) Damuth (1993) NEOTR. Io T -0.55 2.92 24 (0.40) “ NEOTR. my T -0.81 3.36 6 (0.75) “ NEOTR. T -0.61 3.12 103 (0.45) “

  6. Patterns in abundance • Abundance decreases with body mass • Species at higher trophic levels tend to occur • at lower densities than primary consumers. • Within the Americas mammalian species in • tropical areas tend to occur at lower densities than • extra-tropical species. This pattern have been shown • to hold for Africa, Australia and worldwide (Currie & • Fritz 1993, Fa & Purvis 1997, Johnson 1998).

  7. Patterns in distribution • The number of species is not uniformly distributed • across South America. There is a consistent pattern of • an increase in species richness as we go from the poles to • tropical latitudes. • This pattern hold at the species as well as at macrotaxonomic • levels (orders, families, and genera).(Willig and Sandlin 1989, • Willig and Selcer 19889, Ruggiero 1994, Kaufman 1995, • Willig and Gannon 1997, Kaufman and Willig 1998, Willig • and Lyons 1998, Lyons and Willig 1999)

  8. Patterns in distribution • The relationship between richness and latitude is • nonlinear, with several groups of species such as • marsupials, edentates, carnivores, artiodactyls and • hystricognath rodents, reaching maximum • richness in subtropical areas. (e.g., Ruggiero 1994, Willig • and Gannon 1997). • Latitude, but not area, is the best explanatory variable • of the patterns (e.g., Kaufman 1995, Kaufman and Willig • 1998, Lyons and Willig 1999).

  9. Patterns in distribution • The size of species’ geographic ranges vary with latitude. • Geographic ranges tend to be smaller at tropical latitudes • (Rapoport’s rule) (Ropoport 1975, 1982; Anderson and • Koopman 1981, Stevens 1989) • This patterns holds for some taxonomic groups (bats, primates • carnivora) but not for others (edentates, artiodactyls, • hystricognath rodents) (Ruggiero 1994) • Restricted range specie cluster around coastal and Andean • areas (Ruggiero 1994, Ruggiero et al. 1998)

  10. Mammalian species in South American Biomes (Udvardy 1975)

  11. Mammalian species in South American Biomes (Udvardy 1975)

  12. 3 2 Number of species 1 Total Endemic 0 Threatened 4 5 6 7 Log Biome Area

  13. Patterns in body size • Body size distributions are highly modal and • right skewed

  14. There is a strong historical signal apparent in the • shape of the distribution, which is related to the origin of • taxa (Marquet and Cofre 1999, Oikos).

  15. Mapping effort currently underway or already implemented in Latin America. Mexico Conabio-Arita

  16. CHILE (Samaniego et al.) Chilean biodiversity mapping • 0.5x0.5 degree grid • Abiotic data incorporated -NDVI & Elevation : http://edcaac.usgs.gov -Pp & Tmp : http://ipcc-ddc.cru.uea.ac.uk -Habitat heterog. : Gajardo (1994).

  17. Number of species

  18. Latitudinal Patterns

  19. Latitudinal patterns in Chilean tree, shrub, and vines species richness (Villagran & Hinojosa 1997)

More Related