Abundance and local-scale processes contribute to multi-phyla gradients in global marine diversity

Edgar, Graham J.; Alexander, Timothy J.; Lefcheck, Jonathan S.; Bates, Amanda E.; Kininmonth, Stuart; Thomson, Russell; Duffy, J. Emmett; Costello, Mark J.; Stuart‐Smith, Rick D.

doi:10.1126/sciadv.1700419

Cited by 74 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 72 publications

(114 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such boundaries should also mark a steep richness gradient given that tropical regions are expected to be more species rich than extratropical regions (Edgar et al . ; Ibanez‐Erquiaga et al . ; Kinlock et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, depending on the habitat specificity of the group of species in question, if habitat is sparse within regions spanning mid to low latitudes where temperate climates coincide with subtropical/tropical climates, then species turnover across these regions may be particularly abrupt due to a combination of thermal stress and low habitat availability, resulting in a biogeographic boundary. Such boundaries should also mark a steep richness gradient given that tropical regions are expected to be more species rich than extratropical regions (Edgar et al 2017;Ibanez-Erquiaga et al 2018;Kinlock et al 2018). Likewise, if biogeographic boundaries and associated species richness gradients are delimited and shaped, in part, by low habitat continuity (sparse habitat), then, relatively speaking, the central portions of biogeographic regions should be characterised by high habitat continuity (plentiful habitat) and comparatively lower species turnover.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the importance of habitat continuity for delimiting biogeographic regions and shaping richness gradients

Fenberg

Rivadeneira

2019

Ecology Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The formation and maintenance of biogeographic regions and the latitudinal gradient of species richness are thought to be influenced, in part, by the spatial distribution of physical habitat (habitat continuity). But the importance of habitat continuity in relation to other variables for shaping richness gradients and delimiting biogeographic regions has not been well established. Here, we show that habitat continuity is a top predictor of biogeographic structure and the richness gradient of eastern Pacific rocky shore gastropods (spanning c. 23 000 km, from 43°S to 48°N). Rocky shore habitat continuity is generally low within tropical/subtropical regions (compared to extratropical regions), but particularly at biogeographic boundaries where steep richness gradients occur. Regions of high rocky shore habitat continuity are located towards the centres of biogeographic regions where species turnover tends to be relatively low. Our study highlights the importance of habitat continuity to help explain patterns and processes shaping the biogeographic organisation of species.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the importance of habitat continuity for delimiting biogeographic regions and shaping richness gradients

Fenberg

Rivadeneira

2019

Ecology Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although exceptions exist (e.g., Edgar et al. ), the gradient in richness can be observed in a wide range of taxa, including aquatic and terrestrial examples (Willig et al. , Hillebrand ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the most pronounced and largest biogeographic trends in diversity is that of increasing species richness towards the tropics. Although exceptions exist (e.g., Edgar et al 2017), the gradient in richness can be observed in a wide range of taxa, including aquatic and terrestrial examples (Willig et al 2003, Hillebrand 2004a. Warmer year-round temperatures in the tropics create more favourable conditions for growth and recruitment (Stachowicz et al 2002b, Brown et al 2004, O'Connor et al 2007, Lord and Whitlatch 2015, and longer growing seasons reduce the need for seasonally synchronous recruitment (Usinowicz et al 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Habitat complexity effects on diversity and abundance differ with latitude: an experimental study over 20 degrees

Bracewell

Clark

Johnston

2018

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Habitat complexity is accepted as a general mechanism for increasing the abundance and diversity of communities. However, the circumstances under which complexity has the strongest effects are not clear. Over 20 degrees of Australia's east coast, we tested whether the effects of within-site structural habitat complexity on the diversity and community structure of sessile marine invertebrates was consistent over a latitudinal gradient where environmental conditions and species composition vary. We used experimental arrays with varied structural treatments to detect whether community cover, species richness, diversity and community composition (β-diversity) changed with increasing complexity. Community response to complexity varied over latitude due to differences in species richness and community development. Increased complexity had the greatest positive effects on community cover and species richness at higher latitudes where recruitment and growth were low. At lower latitudes, community cover and species richness were higher overall and did not vary substantially between complexity treatments. Latitudinal variation in within-treatment β-diversity relative to complexity further suggest divergent community responses. At higher latitudes, increased similarity in more complex treatments suggests community dominance of successful taxonomic groups. Despite limited effects on species richness and community cover at lower latitudes, β-diversity was higher in more complex treatments, signifying potential positive effects of increased complexity at these sites. These results demonstrate the context-dependency of complexity effects in response to variation in species richness and community development and should be taken into consideration to help direct conservation and restoration efforts.

show abstract

“…However, we did not find significant differences in the average range size of the benthic and pelagic studies analysed here ( F 1,323 = 2.82; p = .094). This weakness could also be caused by a higher frequency of studies reporting local compared to regional diversity in the benthic habitats since, overall, LDG tends to be weaker when assessed at the local scale (Hillebrand, , ; see also how local versus regional diversity may alter the resulting marine LDG in Chaudhary, Saeedi, & Costello, ; Edgar et al, ). However, our tests showed that the two habitats share a similar proportion of local and regional studies (χ 2 = 0.96; p = .328).…”

Section: Estimated Effect Size Of the Latitudinal Diversity Gradientmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benthic habitats do show a significant latitudinal diversity gradient: A comment on Kinlock et al. (2018)

Menegotto

Kurtz

Lana

2019

Global Ecol Biogeogr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The latitudinal diversity gradient (LDG) has been investigated for decades, with hundreds of studies focusing on different organisms, regions and habitat types. Meta‐analysis may be considered, therefore, a useful tool to explore the generality and limitations of this remarkable macroecological pattern. The first meta‐analysis exploring variations in the LDG, published by Hillebrand in 2004, revealed that the latitudinal decline in species richness seems to be indeed a general phenomenon. However, Kinlock et al. (2018, Global Ecology and Biogeography, 27, 125–141) revisited recently the challenge of synthesizing individual LDGs and indicated that the phenomenon is not ubiquitous among habitats of the marine realm. More precisely, they indicated that the phenomenon is non‐significant in the benthic habitat. Here, we suggest that the marine habitat categories used by them (i.e., benthic, coral reefs, coastal, open ocean) are not independent and that reclassifying the studies significantly alters one of their main results. By assigning the studies into benthic and pelagic categories, and additionally into coastal or oceanic zones, we show that non‐ambiguous, evolutionarily meaningful marine habitats display a significant latitudinal decline in species richness.

show abstract

Abundance and local-scale processes contribute to multi-phyla gradients in global marine diversity

Abstract: Latitudinal biodiversity gradients differ between reef fishes and mobile macroinvertebrates at local but not regional scales.

Cited by 74 publications

References 72 publications

On the importance of habitat continuity for delimiting biogeographic regions and shaping richness gradients

On the importance of habitat continuity for delimiting biogeographic regions and shaping richness gradients

Habitat complexity effects on diversity and abundance differ with latitude: an experimental study over 20 degrees

Benthic habitats do show a significant latitudinal diversity gradient: A comment on Kinlock et al. (2018)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About