Of niches and distributions: range size increases with niche breadth both globally and regionally but regional estimates poorly relate to global estimates

The relationship between species’ niche breadth (i.e. the range of environmental conditions under which a species can persist) and range size (i.e. the extent of its spatial distribution) has mostly been tested within geographically restricted areas but rarely at the global extent. Here, we not only...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Ecography (Copenhagen) 2019-03, Vol.42 (3), p.467-477
Hauptverfasser: Kambach, Stephan, Lenoir, Jonathan, Decocq, Guillaume, Welk, Erik, Seidler, Gunnar, Dullinger, Stefan, Gégout, Jean‐Claude, Guisan, Antoine, Pauli, Harald, Svenning, Jens‐Christian, Vittoz, Pascal, Wohlgemuth, Thomas, Zimmermann, Niklaus E., Bruelheide, Helge
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 477
container_issue 3
container_start_page 467
container_title Ecography (Copenhagen)
container_volume 42
creator Kambach, Stephan
Lenoir, Jonathan
Decocq, Guillaume
Welk, Erik
Seidler, Gunnar
Dullinger, Stefan
Gégout, Jean‐Claude
Guisan, Antoine
Pauli, Harald
Svenning, Jens‐Christian
Vittoz, Pascal
Wohlgemuth, Thomas
Zimmermann, Niklaus E.
Bruelheide, Helge
description The relationship between species’ niche breadth (i.e. the range of environmental conditions under which a species can persist) and range size (i.e. the extent of its spatial distribution) has mostly been tested within geographically restricted areas but rarely at the global extent. Here, we not only tested the relationship between range size (derived from species’ distribution data) and niche breadth (derived from species’ distribution and co‐occurrence data) of 1255 plant species at the regional extent of the European Alps, but also at the global extent and across both spatial scales for a subset of 180 species. Using correlation analyses, linear models and variation partitioning, we found that species’ realized niche breadth estimated at the regional level is a weak predictor of species’ global niche breadth and range size. Against our expectations, distribution‐derived niche breadth was a better predictor for species’ range size than the co‐occurrence‐based estimate, which should, theoretically, account for more than the climatically determined niche dimensions. Our findings highlight that studies focusing on the niche breadth vs range size relationship must explicitly consider spatial mismatches that might have confounded and diminished previously reported relationships.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/ecog.03495
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_hal_p</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_02179548v1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2186958400</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3713-c470f11bce1c9caaa384e20cbb910c6feb93c3e638fe98e28e646abbdad074533</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1uGyEUhVHUSnGTbvoESF2l0iSXYX6gO8tyk0qWvEnXCJg7Y6zp4MI4kfMofdpij-XuwgJ0Lt89F3QI-cLgnqX1gNZ398ALWV6RGasAMihF_YHMQEKV1aWEa_Ipxi0Ay2UlZuTvuqWDsxuMVA8NbVwcgzP70fkhfqdBDx3S6N6QusEG1DFxr27cTD3UpFKTlPFp63pvdN8fTkYBu2RxksntIinG0f3WY7LZeR_SbcA-STr6c_9_4pZ8bHUf8fP5vCG_fiyfF0_Zav34czFfZZbXjGe2qKFlzFhkVlqtNRcF5mCNkQxs1aKR3HKsuGhRCswFVkWljWl0A3VRcn5D7ibfje7VLqTh4aC8duppvlLHGuSslmUhXlhiv07sLvg_-_RUtfX7kD4WVc5EJUtRACTq20TZ4GMM2F5sGahjTuqYkzrllGA2wa-ux8M7pFou1o8s5wXn_wC4vZjF</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2186958400</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Of niches and distributions: range size increases with niche breadth both globally and regionally but regional estimates poorly relate to global estimates</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Kambach, Stephan ; Lenoir, Jonathan ; Decocq, Guillaume ; Welk, Erik ; Seidler, Gunnar ; Dullinger, Stefan ; Gégout, Jean‐Claude ; Guisan, Antoine ; Pauli, Harald ; Svenning, Jens‐Christian ; Vittoz, Pascal ; Wohlgemuth, Thomas ; Zimmermann, Niklaus E. ; Bruelheide, Helge</creator><creatorcontrib>Kambach, Stephan ; Lenoir, Jonathan ; Decocq, Guillaume ; Welk, Erik ; Seidler, Gunnar ; Dullinger, Stefan ; Gégout, Jean‐Claude ; Guisan, Antoine ; Pauli, Harald ; Svenning, Jens‐Christian ; Vittoz, Pascal ; Wohlgemuth, Thomas ; Zimmermann, Niklaus E. ; Bruelheide, Helge</creatorcontrib><description>The relationship between species’ niche breadth (i.e. the range of environmental conditions under which a species can persist) and range size (i.e. the extent of its spatial distribution) has mostly been tested within geographically restricted areas but rarely at the global extent. Here, we not only tested the relationship between range size (derived from species’ distribution data) and niche breadth (derived from species’ distribution and co‐occurrence data) of 1255 plant species at the regional extent of the European Alps, but also at the global extent and across both spatial scales for a subset of 180 species. Using correlation analyses, linear models and variation partitioning, we found that species’ realized niche breadth estimated at the regional level is a weak predictor of species’ global niche breadth and range size. Against our expectations, distribution‐derived niche breadth was a better predictor for species’ range size than the co‐occurrence‐based estimate, which should, theoretically, account for more than the climatically determined niche dimensions. Our findings highlight that studies focusing on the niche breadth vs range size relationship must explicitly consider spatial mismatches that might have confounded and diminished previously reported relationships.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0906-7590</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1600-0587</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/ecog.03495</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Correlation analysis ; Environmental conditions ; global distribution ; Life Sciences ; Niche breadth ; Spatial distribution ; Species ; vegetation database</subject><ispartof>Ecography (Copenhagen), 2019-03, Vol.42 (3), p.467-477</ispartof><rights>2018 The Authors</rights><rights>Ecography © 2019 Nordic Society Oikos</rights><rights>Attribution</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3713-c470f11bce1c9caaa384e20cbb910c6feb93c3e638fe98e28e646abbdad074533</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3713-c470f11bce1c9caaa384e20cbb910c6feb93c3e638fe98e28e646abbdad074533</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0638-9582 ; 0000-0003-3585-5837 ; 0000-0002-3415-0862 ; 0000-0002-5760-9920 ; 0000-0002-2685-3795 ; 0000-0001-9262-5873 ; 0000-0002-4623-0894 ; 0000-0003-3135-0356</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fecog.03495$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fecog.03495$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,777,781,882,1412,27905,27906,45555,45556</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-02179548$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kambach, Stephan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lenoir, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Decocq, Guillaume</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Welk, Erik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seidler, Gunnar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dullinger, Stefan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gégout, Jean‐Claude</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guisan, Antoine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pauli, Harald</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Svenning, Jens‐Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vittoz, Pascal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wohlgemuth, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zimmermann, Niklaus E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bruelheide, Helge</creatorcontrib><title>Of niches and distributions: range size increases with niche breadth both globally and regionally but regional estimates poorly relate to global estimates</title><title>Ecography (Copenhagen)</title><description>The relationship between species’ niche breadth (i.e. the range of environmental conditions under which a species can persist) and range size (i.e. the extent of its spatial distribution) has mostly been tested within geographically restricted areas but rarely at the global extent. Here, we not only tested the relationship between range size (derived from species’ distribution data) and niche breadth (derived from species’ distribution and co‐occurrence data) of 1255 plant species at the regional extent of the European Alps, but also at the global extent and across both spatial scales for a subset of 180 species. Using correlation analyses, linear models and variation partitioning, we found that species’ realized niche breadth estimated at the regional level is a weak predictor of species’ global niche breadth and range size. Against our expectations, distribution‐derived niche breadth was a better predictor for species’ range size than the co‐occurrence‐based estimate, which should, theoretically, account for more than the climatically determined niche dimensions. Our findings highlight that studies focusing on the niche breadth vs range size relationship must explicitly consider spatial mismatches that might have confounded and diminished previously reported relationships.</description><subject>Correlation analysis</subject><subject>Environmental conditions</subject><subject>global distribution</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Niche breadth</subject><subject>Spatial distribution</subject><subject>Species</subject><subject>vegetation database</subject><issn>0906-7590</issn><issn>1600-0587</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1uGyEUhVHUSnGTbvoESF2l0iSXYX6gO8tyk0qWvEnXCJg7Y6zp4MI4kfMofdpij-XuwgJ0Lt89F3QI-cLgnqX1gNZ398ALWV6RGasAMihF_YHMQEKV1aWEa_Ipxi0Ay2UlZuTvuqWDsxuMVA8NbVwcgzP70fkhfqdBDx3S6N6QusEG1DFxr27cTD3UpFKTlPFp63pvdN8fTkYBu2RxksntIinG0f3WY7LZeR_SbcA-STr6c_9_4pZ8bHUf8fP5vCG_fiyfF0_Zav34czFfZZbXjGe2qKFlzFhkVlqtNRcF5mCNkQxs1aKR3HKsuGhRCswFVkWljWl0A3VRcn5D7ibfje7VLqTh4aC8duppvlLHGuSslmUhXlhiv07sLvg_-_RUtfX7kD4WVc5EJUtRACTq20TZ4GMM2F5sGahjTuqYkzrllGA2wa-ux8M7pFou1o8s5wXn_wC4vZjF</recordid><startdate>201903</startdate><enddate>201903</enddate><creator>Kambach, Stephan</creator><creator>Lenoir, Jonathan</creator><creator>Decocq, Guillaume</creator><creator>Welk, Erik</creator><creator>Seidler, Gunnar</creator><creator>Dullinger, Stefan</creator><creator>Gégout, Jean‐Claude</creator><creator>Guisan, Antoine</creator><creator>Pauli, Harald</creator><creator>Svenning, Jens‐Christian</creator><creator>Vittoz, Pascal</creator><creator>Wohlgemuth, Thomas</creator><creator>Zimmermann, Niklaus E.</creator><creator>Bruelheide, Helge</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>1XC</scope><scope>VOOES</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0638-9582</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3585-5837</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3415-0862</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5760-9920</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2685-3795</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9262-5873</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4623-0894</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3135-0356</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201903</creationdate><title>Of niches and distributions: range size increases with niche breadth both globally and regionally but regional estimates poorly relate to global estimates</title><author>Kambach, Stephan ; Lenoir, Jonathan ; Decocq, Guillaume ; Welk, Erik ; Seidler, Gunnar ; Dullinger, Stefan ; Gégout, Jean‐Claude ; Guisan, Antoine ; Pauli, Harald ; Svenning, Jens‐Christian ; Vittoz, Pascal ; Wohlgemuth, Thomas ; Zimmermann, Niklaus E. ; Bruelheide, Helge</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3713-c470f11bce1c9caaa384e20cbb910c6feb93c3e638fe98e28e646abbdad074533</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Correlation analysis</topic><topic>Environmental conditions</topic><topic>global distribution</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Niche breadth</topic><topic>Spatial distribution</topic><topic>Species</topic><topic>vegetation database</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kambach, Stephan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lenoir, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Decocq, Guillaume</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Welk, Erik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seidler, Gunnar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dullinger, Stefan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gégout, Jean‐Claude</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guisan, Antoine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pauli, Harald</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Svenning, Jens‐Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vittoz, Pascal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wohlgemuth, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zimmermann, Niklaus E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bruelheide, Helge</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>Wiley Free Content</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL) (Open Access)</collection><jtitle>Ecography (Copenhagen)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kambach, Stephan</au><au>Lenoir, Jonathan</au><au>Decocq, Guillaume</au><au>Welk, Erik</au><au>Seidler, Gunnar</au><au>Dullinger, Stefan</au><au>Gégout, Jean‐Claude</au><au>Guisan, Antoine</au><au>Pauli, Harald</au><au>Svenning, Jens‐Christian</au><au>Vittoz, Pascal</au><au>Wohlgemuth, Thomas</au><au>Zimmermann, Niklaus E.</au><au>Bruelheide, Helge</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Of niches and distributions: range size increases with niche breadth both globally and regionally but regional estimates poorly relate to global estimates</atitle><jtitle>Ecography (Copenhagen)</jtitle><date>2019-03</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>467</spage><epage>477</epage><pages>467-477</pages><issn>0906-7590</issn><eissn>1600-0587</eissn><abstract>The relationship between species’ niche breadth (i.e. the range of environmental conditions under which a species can persist) and range size (i.e. the extent of its spatial distribution) has mostly been tested within geographically restricted areas but rarely at the global extent. Here, we not only tested the relationship between range size (derived from species’ distribution data) and niche breadth (derived from species’ distribution and co‐occurrence data) of 1255 plant species at the regional extent of the European Alps, but also at the global extent and across both spatial scales for a subset of 180 species. Using correlation analyses, linear models and variation partitioning, we found that species’ realized niche breadth estimated at the regional level is a weak predictor of species’ global niche breadth and range size. Against our expectations, distribution‐derived niche breadth was a better predictor for species’ range size than the co‐occurrence‐based estimate, which should, theoretically, account for more than the climatically determined niche dimensions. Our findings highlight that studies focusing on the niche breadth vs range size relationship must explicitly consider spatial mismatches that might have confounded and diminished previously reported relationships.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/ecog.03495</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0638-9582</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3585-5837</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3415-0862</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5760-9920</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2685-3795</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9262-5873</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4623-0894</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3135-0356</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0906-7590
ispartof Ecography (Copenhagen), 2019-03, Vol.42 (3), p.467-477
issn 0906-7590
1600-0587
language eng
recordid cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_02179548v1
source Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Correlation analysis
Environmental conditions
global distribution
Life Sciences
Niche breadth
Spatial distribution
Species
vegetation database
title Of niches and distributions: range size increases with niche breadth both globally and regionally but regional estimates poorly relate to global estimates
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T11%3A29%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_hal_p&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Of%20niches%20and%20distributions:%20range%20size%20increases%20with%20niche%20breadth%20both%20globally%20and%20regionally%20but%20regional%20estimates%20poorly%20relate%20to%20global%20estimates&rft.jtitle=Ecography%20(Copenhagen)&rft.au=Kambach,%20Stephan&rft.date=2019-03&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=467&rft.epage=477&rft.pages=467-477&rft.issn=0906-7590&rft.eissn=1600-0587&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/ecog.03495&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_hal_p%3E2186958400%3C/proquest_hal_p%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2186958400&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true