Applying species distribution models to caves and other subterranean habitats

Schönhofer

Isaia

2019

J Zool Syst Evol Res

Self Cite

Biogeographic studies often underline the role of glacial dynamism during Pleistocene (1.806–0.011 Mya) in shaping the distribution of subterranean species. Accordingly, it is presumed that present‐day distribution of most specialized cold‐adapted (cryophilic) cave‐dwelling species should bear the signatures of past climatic events. To test this idea, we modelled the distribution of specialized cold‐adapted subterranean alpine harvestmen (Arachnida: Opiliones: Ischyropsalididae: Ischyropsalis). We found that the distance from the glacier margins during Last Glacial Maximum (LGM; about 22,000 years ago) was the most important predictor of their present‐day distribution. In particular, the peak in the probability of occurrence of alpine subterranean Ischyropsalis was found to be in close proximity to the LGM glacier, with a sharp drop at a distance of 30 km from the ice margin. In light of the role played by past climatic events in determining the species current range, we briefly discuss their biogeographic history and the role played by glacial refugia dynamics in determining the current distribution of these species. We argue that low dispersal harvestmen such as our model species can be used as biological indicators for tracking past glaciations and other similar biogeographic events.

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Environmental Predictorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Variable Source Ecological Relevance Collinearitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tracking the ice: Subterranean harvestmen distribution matches ancient glacier margins

Schönhofer

Isaia

2019

J Zool Syst Evol Res

Self Cite

“…Climatic‐driven changes in the distribution range of most subterranean species have been seldom studied (e.g., Brandmayr & Pizzolotto, ; Brandmayr et al., ; Mammola & Leroy, ; Sánchez‐Fernández et al., ). Regarding spiders, significant latitudinal shifts are expected within high dispersal species (Mammola, ; Mammola & Isaia, ).…”

Section: Future Lines Of Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In spite of that, the analysis of patterns and processes of biological diversity and diversification in subterranean environments is very incomplete for a number of reasons. Foremost, compared with epigean habitats, caves and other subterranean habitats constitute challenging working environments, making it difficult to assemble a suitable amount of data (Christman et al, 2016;Culver et al, 2006Culver et al, , 2013Mammola & Leroy, 2017;Zagmajster, Culver, Christman, & Sket, 2010). Secondly, in most regions, the vast majority of troglobionts are invertebrates, fungi or bacteria, invariably underrepresented in ecology and conservation studies (Cardoso, Erwin, Borges, & New, 2011); on the other hand, the paucity of species, compared with epigean communities, can make it simpler to understand how subterranean communities assemble and function.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A synthesis on cave-dwelling spiders in Europe

Cardoso

Ribera

et al. 2017

J Zool Syst Evol Res

Self Cite

We provide the first overview on spiders living in subterranean habitats in Europe, including the first European subterranean spider checklist. In Europe, there are 486 spider species known to dwell in caves and other subterranean habitats, distributed across 22 families. Despite a few species being able to colonize caves across the whole continent, approximately 90% of the species show a restricted distribution, occurring exclusively in one or two countries. From a biogeographic perspective, southern Europe emerges as the main hot spot of subterranean spider diversity, showing the highest richness of endemic species. Compared to other temperate regions of the world, some families appear to be well represented and other poorly represented (or lacking) in European subterranean habitats. Overall, it appears that the taxonomical knowledge on subterranean spiders in Europe is sufficient, but not evenly distributed. As this checklist represents a useful baseline for advances in this field, we point out specific areas of interest for future research.

Collecting eco‐evolutionary data in the dark: Impediments to subterranean research and how to overcome them

Lunghi

Bilandžija

et al. 2021

Ecology and Evolution

Self Cite

Caves and other subterranean habitats fulfill the requirements of experimental model systems to address general questions in ecology and evolution. Yet, the harsh working conditions of these environments and the uniqueness of the subterranean organisms have challenged most attempts to pursuit standardized research. Two main obstacles have synergistically hampered previous attempts. First, there is a habitat impediment related to the objective difficulties of exploring subterranean habitats and our inability to access the network of fissures that represents the elective habitat for the so‐called “cave species.” Second, there is a biological impediment illustrated by the rarity of most subterranean species and their low physiological tolerance, often limiting sample size and complicating laboratory experiments. We explore the advantages and disadvantages of four general experimental setups ( in situ , quasi in situ , ex situ , and in silico ) in the light of habitat and biological impediments. We also discuss the potential of indirect approaches to research. Furthermore, using bibliometric data, we provide a quantitative overview of the model organisms that scientists have exploited in the study of subterranean life. Our over‐arching goal is to promote caves as model systems where one can perform standardized scientific research. This is important not only to achieve an in‐depth understanding of the functioning of subterranean ecosystems but also to fully exploit their long‐discussed potential in addressing general scientific questions with implications beyond the boundaries of this discipline.