English   español  
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/120851
Share/Impact:
Statistics
logo share SHARE logo core CORE   Add this article to your Mendeley library MendeleyBASE

Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL
Exportar a otros formatos:
Title

Do geographic, climatic or historical ranges differentiate the performance of central versus peripheral populations?

AuthorsPironon, S. ; Villellas, Jesús ; Morris, W.F.; Doak, D. F.; García González, María Begoña
Keywordsspecies distribution models
population performance
plant demography
latitude
Last Glacial Maximum
genetic diversity
Abundant-centre model
central–marginal hypothesis
climatic niche
Issue Date1-Jun-2015
PublisherWiley-Blackwell
CitationGlobal Ecology and Biogeography 24(6): 611-620 (2015)
AbstractAim: The 'centre-periphery hypothesis' (CPH) predicts that species performance (genetics, physiology, morphology, demography) will decline gradually from the centre towards the periphery of the geographic range. This hypothesis has been subjected to continuous debate since the 1980s, essentially because empirical studies have shown contrasting patterns. Moreover, it has been proposed that species performance might not be higher at the geographic range centre but rather at the environmental optimum or at sites presenting greater environmental stability in time. In this paper we re-evaluate the CPH by disentangling the effects of geographic, climatic and historical centrality/marginality on the demography of three widely distributed plant species and the genetic diversity of one of them. Location: Europe and North America. Methods: Based on a species distribution modelling approach, we test whether demographic parameters (vital rates, stochastic population growth rates, density) of three plant species of contrasting life-forms, and the genetic diversity of one of them, are higher at their geographic range centres, climatic optima or projected glacial refugia. Results: While geographic, climatic and historical centre-periphery gradients are often not concordant, overall, none of them explain well the distribution of species demographic performance, whereas genetic diversity responds positively only to a historical centrality, related to post-glacial range dynamics. Main conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first assessment of the response of species performance to three centrality gradients, considering all the components of different species life cycles and genetic diversity information across continental distributions. Our results are inconsistent with the idea that geographically, climatically or historically marginal populations generally perform worse than central ones. We particularly emphasize the importance of adopting an interdisciplinary approach in order to understand the relative effects of contemporary versus historical and geographic versus ecological factors on the distribution of species performance. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Publisher version (URL)http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/geb.12263
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/120851
DOI10.1111/geb.12263
ISSN1466-8238
Appears in Collections:(IPE) Artículos
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Pironon_Do geographic, climatic or historical_GEB2015.pdf4,35 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Show full item record
Review this work
 

Related articles:


WARNING: Items in Digital.CSIC are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.