Spatial analysis of species richness of shrews [Soricomorpha: Soricidae] in North America North of Mexico

• Autorzy: Berman J. , McCay T. , Scull P.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

We used geographic ranges of North American shrews and environmental data to better understand spatial distribution of species richness in the Soricidae. Richness was examined as a function of latitude and longitude and was compared with climatic variables at random points (≥90 km apart). Latitudinal trend in richness was parabolic with a maximum near 48°N, consistent with the general hypothesis that diversity is limited by energy to the north and by moisture to the south. Precipitation, snowfall, and July heating degree days were positively related to shrew richness. Richness of North American Soricidae was high in areas where topographic relief allowed for a variety of forested habitats and precipitation was high, such as the Southern Appalachians and Pacific Northwest. This broad, geographic study supports the idea that environmental moisture importantly limits distributions of shrews, which has been suggested by much autecological work in this group .

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Geographic Information System; shrew; diversity; information system; species richness; Soricidae; climate; North America; spatial analysis; Soricomorpha; Mexico

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Theriologica
• Rocznik: 2007
• Tom: 52
• Numer: 2
• Opis fizyczny: p.151-158,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Berman J.

• Colgate University, Hamilton, New York, 13346, USA

autor

McCay T.

autor

Scull P.

Bibliografia

• Badgley C. and Fox D. L. 2000. Ecological biogeography of North American mammals: species density and ecological structure in relation to environmental gradients. Journal of Biogeography 27: 1437–1467.
• Baker R. J., Bradley L. C., Bradley R. D., Dragoo J. W., Engstrom M. D., Hoffman R. S., Jones C. A., Reid F., Rice D. W. and Jones C. 2003. Revised checklist of North American mammals north of Mexico, 2003. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Texas Tech University 229: 1–23.
• Brannon M. P. 2000. Niche relationships of two syntopic species of shrews,Sorex fumeus andS. cinereus, in the southern Appalachian Mountains. Journal of Mammalogy 81: 1053–1061.
• Chew R. M. 1951. The water exchanges of some small mammals. Ecological Monographs 21: 215–225.
• Currie D. J. 1991. Energy and large-scale patterns of animal and plant species richness. American Naturalist 137: 27–49.
• Daly C., Neilson R. P. and Phillips D. L. 1994. A statistical — topographic model for mapping climatological precipitation over mountainous terrain. Journal of Applied Meteorology 33: 140–158.
• Fleishman E., Fay J. P. and Murphy D. D. 2000. Upsides and downsides: contrasting topographic gradients in species richness and associated scenarios for climate change. Journal of Biogeography 27: 1209–1219.
• Gaston K. J. 1991. How large is a species’ geographic range? Oikos 61: 434–438.
• George S. B. 1986. Evolution and historical biogeography of soricine shrews. Systematic Zoology 35: 153–162.
• Getz L. L. 1961. Factors influencing the local distribution of shrews. American Midland Naturalist 65: 67–88.
• Goldstein D. L. and Newland S. 2004. Water balance and kidney function in the least shrew (Cryptotis parva). Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, Part A 139: 71–76.
• Hafner D. J. and Shuster C. J. 1996. Historical bio-ge ography of western peripheral isolates of the least shrew,Cryptotis parva. Journal of Mammalogy 77: 536–545.
• Hawkins B. A., Field R., Cornell H. V., Currie D. J., Guegan J. F., Kaufman D. M., Kerr J. T., Mittelbach G. G., Oberdorff T., OBrien E. M., Porter E. E. and Turner J. R. 2003. Energy, water, and broad scale geographic patterns of species richness. Ecology 84: 3105–3117.
• Hutchinson G. E. 1959. Homage to Santa Rosalia or why are there so many kinds of animals? American Naturalist 155: 280–293.
• Kirkland G. L. Jr 1985. Small mammal communities in temperate North American forests. Australian Mammalogy 8: 137–144.
• Kirkland G. L. Jr 1991. Competition and coexistence in shrews (Insectivora: Soricidae). [In: The biology of the Soricidae. Findley J. S. and Yates T. L., eds]. The Museum of Southwestern Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque: 15–22.
• Kirkland G. L. Jr, Parmenter R. R. and Skoog R. E. 1997. A five-species assemblage of shrews from the sagebrush--steppe of Wyoming. Journal of Mammalogy 78: 83–89.
• Laerm J., Ford W. M., McCay T. S., Menzel M. A., Lepardo L. T. and Boone J. L. 1999. Soricid communities in the southern Appalachians. [In: Proceedings of the Appalachian Biogeography Symposium, Special Publication Number 7. R. P. Eckerlin, ed]. Virginia Museum of Natural History, Martinsville, Virginia: 177–193.
• Lima M., Merritt J. F. and Bozinovic F. 2002. Numerical fluctuations in the northern short-tailed shrew: evidence of non-linear feedback signatures on population dynamics and demography. Journal of Animal Ecology 71: 159–172.
• Lyons K. S. and Willig M. R. 1999. A hemispheric assessment of scale dependence in latitudinal gradients of species richness. Ecology 80: 2483–2491.
• Martin I. G. 1983. Daily activity of short-tailed shrews (Blarina brevicauda) in simulated natural conditions. American Midland Naturalist 109: 136–144.
• Matlack R. S., Kaufman D. W., Kaufman G. A., and McMillan B. R. 2002. Long-term variation in abundance of Elliot’s short-tailed shrew (Blarina hylophaga) in tallgrass prairie. Journal of Mammalogy 83: 280–289.
• McCay T. S., Lovallo M. J., Ford W. M., and Menzel M. A. 2004. Assembly rules for functional groups of North American shrews: effects of geographic range and habitat partitioning. Oikos 107: 141–147.
• McCay T. S. and Storm G. L. 1997. Masked shrew (Sorex Cinereus) abundance, diet and prey availability in an irrigated forest. American Midland Naturalist 138: 268–275.
• Merritt J. F. 1986. Winter survival adaptations of the short-tailed shrew (Blarina brevicauda) in an Appalachian montane forest. Journal of Mammalogy 67: 450–464.
• Merritt J. F., Lima M. and Bozinovic F. 2001. Seasonal regulation in fluctuating small mammal populations: feedback structure and climate. Oikos 94: 505–514.
• Mortelliti A., Amori G., Sammuri G. and Boitani L. 2007. Factors affecting the distribution ofSorex samniticus, an endemic Italian shrew, in an heterogeneous landscape. Acta Theriologica 52: 75–84.
• Nagorsen D. W. 1996. Opossums, shrews and moles of British Columbia. Royal British Columbia Museum Handbook, UBC Press, Vancouver: 1–169.
• Pruitt W. O. Jr 1959. Microclimates and local distribution of small mammals on the George Reserve, Michigan. Miscellaneous Publication, Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan 109: 1–27.
• Spencer A. W. and Pettus D. 1966. Habitat preferences of five sympatric species of long-tailed shrews. Ecology 47: 677–683.
• Stoms D. M. 1994. Scale dependence of species richness maps. Professional Geographer 46: 346–358.
• Whittaker R. J. and Heegaard E. 2003. What is the observed relationship between species richness and productivity? Ecology 84: 3384–3390.
• Williams D. F. and Braun S. E. 1983. Comparison of pitfall and conventional traps for sampling small mammal populations. The Journal of Wildlife Management 47: 841–845.
• Wilson D. E. and Ruff S. (eds) 1999. The Smithsonian book of North American mammals. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press: 1–750.
• Wright D. H. 1983. Species-energy theory: an extension of species-area theory. Oikos 41: 496–506.
• Wrigley R. E., Dubois J. E. and Copland H. W. R. 1979. Habitat, abundance, and distribution of six species of shrews in Manitoba. Journal of Mammalogy 60: 505–520.