Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Geographically variable biotic interactions and...

Electronic data

  • Early_Keith_GEB30thAnniversary_R1

    Rights statement: This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Early, R, Keith, SA. Geographically variable biotic interactions and implications for species ranges. Global Ecol Biogeogr. 2018; 28: 42– 53. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12861 which has been published in final form at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/geb.12861 This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.

    Accepted author manuscript, 687 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Geographically variable biotic interactions and implications for species ranges

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Geographically variable biotic interactions and implications for species ranges. / Early, Regan; Keith, Sally Anne.

In: Global Ecology and Biogeography, Vol. 28, No. 1, 30.01.2019, p. 42-53.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Early, Regan ; Keith, Sally Anne. / Geographically variable biotic interactions and implications for species ranges. In: Global Ecology and Biogeography. 2019 ; Vol. 28, No. 1. pp. 42-53.

Bibtex

@article{f00a447a28284d959d76bf553793b5d5,
title = "Geographically variable biotic interactions and implications for species ranges",
abstract = "The challenge Understanding how biotic interactions affect species' geographical ranges, biodiversity patterns and ecological responses to environmental change is one of the most pressing challenges in macroecology. Extensive efforts are underway to detect signals of biotic interactions in macroecological data. However, efforts are limited by bias in the taxa and spatial scale for which occurrence data are available and by difficulty in ascribing causality to co-occurrence patterns. Moreover, we are not necessarily looking in the right places; analyses are largely ad hoc, depending on availability of data, rather than focusing on regions, taxa, ecosystems or interaction types where biotic interactions might affect species' geographical ranges most strongly. Unpicking biotic interactions We suggest that macroecology would benefit from the recognition that abiotic conditions alter two key components of biotic interaction strength: frequency and intensity. We outline how and why variation in biotic interaction strength occurs, explore the implications for species' geographical ranges and discuss the challenges inherent in quantifying these effects. In addition, we explore the role of behavioural flexibility in mediating biotic interactions potentially to mitigate impacts of environmental change. New data We argue that macroecology should take advantage of {"}independent{"} data on the strength of biotic interactions measured by other disciplines, in order to capture a far wider array of taxa, locations and interaction types than are typically studied in macroecology. Data on biotic interactions are readily available from community, disease, microbial and parasite ecology, evolution, palaeontology, invasion biology and agriculture, but most are yet to be exploited within macroecology. Integrating biotic interaction strength data into macroecology Harmonization of data across interdisciplinary sources, taxa and interaction types could be achieved by breaking down interactions into elements that contribute to frequency and intensity. This would allow quantitative biotic interaction data to be incorporated directly into models of species distributions and macroecological patterns.",
keywords = "climate envelope model, competition, encounter rate, facilitation, latitudinal biodiversity gradient, mutualism, niche, species distribution model, stress gradient hypothesis, trophic interaction",
author = "Regan Early and Keith, {Sally Anne}",
note = "This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Early, R, Keith, SA. Geographically variable biotic interactions and implications for species ranges. Global Ecol Biogeogr. 2018; 28: 42– 53. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12861 which has been published in final form at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/geb.12861 This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.",
year = "2019",
month = jan,
day = "30",
doi = "10.1111/geb.12861",
language = "English",
volume = "28",
pages = "42--53",
journal = "Global Ecology and Biogeography",
issn = "1466-822X",
publisher = "Blackwell Publishing Ltd",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Geographically variable biotic interactions and implications for species ranges

AU - Early, Regan

AU - Keith, Sally Anne

N1 - This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Early, R, Keith, SA. Geographically variable biotic interactions and implications for species ranges. Global Ecol Biogeogr. 2018; 28: 42– 53. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12861 which has been published in final form at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/geb.12861 This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance With Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.

PY - 2019/1/30

Y1 - 2019/1/30

N2 - The challenge Understanding how biotic interactions affect species' geographical ranges, biodiversity patterns and ecological responses to environmental change is one of the most pressing challenges in macroecology. Extensive efforts are underway to detect signals of biotic interactions in macroecological data. However, efforts are limited by bias in the taxa and spatial scale for which occurrence data are available and by difficulty in ascribing causality to co-occurrence patterns. Moreover, we are not necessarily looking in the right places; analyses are largely ad hoc, depending on availability of data, rather than focusing on regions, taxa, ecosystems or interaction types where biotic interactions might affect species' geographical ranges most strongly. Unpicking biotic interactions We suggest that macroecology would benefit from the recognition that abiotic conditions alter two key components of biotic interaction strength: frequency and intensity. We outline how and why variation in biotic interaction strength occurs, explore the implications for species' geographical ranges and discuss the challenges inherent in quantifying these effects. In addition, we explore the role of behavioural flexibility in mediating biotic interactions potentially to mitigate impacts of environmental change. New data We argue that macroecology should take advantage of "independent" data on the strength of biotic interactions measured by other disciplines, in order to capture a far wider array of taxa, locations and interaction types than are typically studied in macroecology. Data on biotic interactions are readily available from community, disease, microbial and parasite ecology, evolution, palaeontology, invasion biology and agriculture, but most are yet to be exploited within macroecology. Integrating biotic interaction strength data into macroecology Harmonization of data across interdisciplinary sources, taxa and interaction types could be achieved by breaking down interactions into elements that contribute to frequency and intensity. This would allow quantitative biotic interaction data to be incorporated directly into models of species distributions and macroecological patterns.

AB - The challenge Understanding how biotic interactions affect species' geographical ranges, biodiversity patterns and ecological responses to environmental change is one of the most pressing challenges in macroecology. Extensive efforts are underway to detect signals of biotic interactions in macroecological data. However, efforts are limited by bias in the taxa and spatial scale for which occurrence data are available and by difficulty in ascribing causality to co-occurrence patterns. Moreover, we are not necessarily looking in the right places; analyses are largely ad hoc, depending on availability of data, rather than focusing on regions, taxa, ecosystems or interaction types where biotic interactions might affect species' geographical ranges most strongly. Unpicking biotic interactions We suggest that macroecology would benefit from the recognition that abiotic conditions alter two key components of biotic interaction strength: frequency and intensity. We outline how and why variation in biotic interaction strength occurs, explore the implications for species' geographical ranges and discuss the challenges inherent in quantifying these effects. In addition, we explore the role of behavioural flexibility in mediating biotic interactions potentially to mitigate impacts of environmental change. New data We argue that macroecology should take advantage of "independent" data on the strength of biotic interactions measured by other disciplines, in order to capture a far wider array of taxa, locations and interaction types than are typically studied in macroecology. Data on biotic interactions are readily available from community, disease, microbial and parasite ecology, evolution, palaeontology, invasion biology and agriculture, but most are yet to be exploited within macroecology. Integrating biotic interaction strength data into macroecology Harmonization of data across interdisciplinary sources, taxa and interaction types could be achieved by breaking down interactions into elements that contribute to frequency and intensity. This would allow quantitative biotic interaction data to be incorporated directly into models of species distributions and macroecological patterns.

KW - climate envelope model

KW - competition

KW - encounter rate

KW - facilitation

KW - latitudinal biodiversity gradient

KW - mutualism

KW - niche

KW - species distribution model

KW - stress gradient hypothesis

KW - trophic interaction

U2 - 10.1111/geb.12861

DO - 10.1111/geb.12861

M3 - Journal article

VL - 28

SP - 42

EP - 53

JO - Global Ecology and Biogeography

JF - Global Ecology and Biogeography

SN - 1466-822X

IS - 1

ER -