Efectos jerárquicos sobre la evolución del tamaño corporal y la macroecología de los mamíferos de las selvas pluviales de América del Sur

Autores/as

  • Jose A.F. Diniz-Filho Departamento de Biologia Geral, Instituto de Ciencias Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Goids. Cx. P. 131, 74.001-970, Goiânia, GO, Brasil.
  • Rackel Balestra Departamento de Biologia Geral, Instituto de Ciencias Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Goids. Cx. P. 131, 74.001-970, Goiânia, GO, Brasil.

Resumen

The relationship between geographic range size and body size analyzed at the continental scale for many species has been described recently by an envelope region defined in bivariate space and limited by ecological and physical constraints. These constraints can be explained by stochastic extinction related to m inimum population density and energetic theories for an optimal body size. However, since data are obtained for different species in a large taxonomic group, it is possible that these variables may be strongly affected by phylogenetic autocorrelation. In this paper, we analyzed data on geographic range size and body size for 87 species of Neotropical rainforest mammals from South America, searching for phylogenetic effects changing the shape of constraint space. We used a nested ANOVA design to evaluate and remove large scale hierarchical (phylogenetic) trends in the two variables. Body size was more affected by phylogenetic effects than geographic range size. After removing these effects, we noted that the two macroecological variables analyzed support the shape of constraint space previously observed in North American species. The most important aspect of our analyses is that a model for optimal body size related to life-history variations provides an useful theoretical framework to understand how processes of species dynamics can lead to the observed macroecological patterns.

Citas

Arita,H.T.,J.G.Robinson andK.H.Redford. 1990.Rarity in Neotropical mammals and its ecological correlates. Conserv. Biol. 4:181-192.

Bell, G. 1989. A comparative method. Am. Nat. 133:553-571.

Blackburn,T.M. and K.J. Gaston. 1994. Animal body size distributions: patterns,mechanisms and implications. Trends. Ecol. Evol. 9:471-474.

Blackburn, T.M. and K.J. Gaston. 1996. On being the rightsize: different definitions of ‘right’ . Oikos 75:551- 557.

Blackburn, T.M.,J.H. Lawton and J.N.Perry. 1992. Amethod for estimating the slope of upper bounds of plots of body size and abundance for natural assemblages. Oikos 65:107-112.

Blackburn, T.M., J.H. Lawton and R.D. Gregory. 1996. Relationships between abundance and life history of British birds.J. Anim. Ecol. 65:52-62.

Brown, J.H. 1995. Macroecology. Chicago University press, Chicago.269 pp.

Brown, J.H. and B.A. Maurer. 1987. Evolution of species assemblages: effects of energetic constraints and species dynamics on the diversification of North American avifauna. American Naturalist 130:1-17.

Brown, J.H. and B.A. Maurer. 1989.Macroecology:the division offood and space among species on continents. Science 243:1145-1150.

Brown,J.H. andP.F. Nicoletto. 1991.Spatialscaling ofspecies composition: body masses of North American land mammals. Am. Nat. 138:1478-1512.

Brown, J.H., P. Marquet and M.L. Taper. 1993. Evolution of body size: consequences of an energetic definition of fitness. Am. Nat. 142:573-584.

Cheverud,J., M.M. Dow and W. Leutenegger. 1985. The quantitative assessment of phylogenetic constraints in comparative analysis:sexual dimorphism in body weight among primates. Evolution 39:1335-1351.

Emmons, E. 1990. NeotropicalRainforest Mammals: a field guide. Chicago University press, Chicago. 282 pp.

Felsenstein, J. 1985.Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am. Nat. 125:1-15

Gaston, K. J. 1991. How large is a species’ geographic range. Oikos 61:434-438.

Gaston, K.J. 1996.Speciesrange-size distributions: patterns, mechanisms and implications. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11:197-201.

Gaston, K.J. and T.M. Blackburn. 1996. Range size-body size relationships: evidence of scale dependence. Oikos 75:479-485.

Gaston, K.J. and J. H. Lawton. 1988a.Patternsin the distribution and abundance ofinsect populations. Nature 331:709-712.

Gittleman,J. L. and M. Kot. 1990. Adaptation:statistics and a null model for estimating phylogenetic effects. Syst. Zool. 39:227-241.

Grantham, T.A. 1995. Hierarchical approaches to macroevolution: recent work on species selection and the “effect hypothesis”. Ann. Rev. Ecol.Syst. 26:301-321.

Harvey,P.H. and M.D.Pagel. 1992. TheComparative Method in Evolutionary Biology. Cambridge University press, Cambridge. 239 pp.

Letcher, A.J. andP.H. Harvey. 1994. Variation in geographic range size among mammals ofthe paleartic. Am. Nat. 144:30-42.

Lomolino,M.V. andR.Channell. 1995.Splendid isolation: patterns of geographic range collapse in endangered mammals. J. Mammal. 76:335-347.

Marquet,P.A.,S.A.Navarrete and J.C.Castella. 1995.Body size, population density and the energetic equivalence rule. J. Anim. Ecol. 64:325-352.

Maurer, B.A., J.H. Brown and R.D. Rusler. 1992. The micro and macro in body size evolution. Evolution 46:939-953.

Pagel, M.D., R.M. May and A.R. Collie. 1991. Ecological aspects of the geographic distribution and diversity ofmammalian species. American Naturalist 137:791-815.

Peters, R.H. 1983. The ecologicalimplications of body size. Cambridge, Cambridge UniversityPress. 329 pp.

Ruggiero, A. 1994. Latitudinal correlates of the size of mammalian geographical ranges inSouth America. J. Biogeo. 21:545-559.

Sokal, R.R. and F.J. Rohlf. 1995. Biometry. 3rd ed. W.H. Freeman, New York. 887 pp.

Stearns,S.C. 1983. The influence ofsize and phylogeny on patterns of covariation among life-history traitsin the mammals. Oikos 41:173-187.

Taylor, C.M. and N.J. Gotelli. 1994. The macroecology of Cyprinella: correlates of phylogeny, body size and geographic range. American Naturalist 144:549-569.

Wilson,J.W. 1974. Analytical zoogeography of North American mammals. Evolution 28:124-140.

Wilkinson, L. 1989.SYSTAT/SYGRAPH: The system for statistics. Systat Inc., Evanston. 677 pp.

Descargas

Publicado

1998-06-01

Cómo citar

Diniz-Filho, J. A., & Balestra, R. (1998). Efectos jerárquicos sobre la evolución del tamaño corporal y la macroecología de los mamíferos de las selvas pluviales de América del Sur. Ecología Austral, 8(1), 023–030. Recuperado a partir de https://ojs.ecologiaaustral.com.ar/index.php/Ecologia_Austral/article/view/1631

Número

Sección

Artículos