2008
DOI: 10.1080/00222930701835365
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Elevational diversity of reptiles on two Dinaric mountains

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
3
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
2
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, McCain (2010) found that the most common richness–elevation pattern in reptiles across the globe was a monotonic decline, and this was largely explained by temperature. Similar findings have been reported for Himalayan reptiles (Chettri et al., 2010), the Costa Rican herpetofauna (Fauth et al., 1989), reptiles in the Dinaric Alps (Kryštufek et al., 2008), and a suite of other ectotherms from around the globe (Bishop et al., 2014; Peters et al., 2016). Although negative richness–temperature relationships are reported for many taxa, including endotherms such as birds and bats (McCain, 2007, 2009), a monotonic decline pattern is most reported for ectothermic taxa (McCain, 2010).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 72%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, McCain (2010) found that the most common richness–elevation pattern in reptiles across the globe was a monotonic decline, and this was largely explained by temperature. Similar findings have been reported for Himalayan reptiles (Chettri et al., 2010), the Costa Rican herpetofauna (Fauth et al., 1989), reptiles in the Dinaric Alps (Kryštufek et al., 2008), and a suite of other ectotherms from around the globe (Bishop et al., 2014; Peters et al., 2016). Although negative richness–temperature relationships are reported for many taxa, including endotherms such as birds and bats (McCain, 2007, 2009), a monotonic decline pattern is most reported for ectothermic taxa (McCain, 2010).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 72%
“…We test each hypothesis separately for the two main subgroups of reptile: snakes and lizards. This is typically done in studies of reptile diversity (Chettri et al., 2010; Fu et al., 2007; Kryštufek et al., 2008) because of their different morphology and life‐history strategies (Shine & Charnov, 1992). Snakes tend to occupy higher trophic positions compared with lizards, and move through the environment very differently as they do not have legs (Gove, 1979; Parker & Plummer, 1987).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Preliminary data on the vertical distribution of Orthoptera and Mantodea on the southern slopes of Mt Sniježnica Konavoska show the expected altitudinal pattern, a decline in species richness with increasing elevation (e.g. Kryštufek et al, 2008). However, our results also highlight the importance of geomorphological features like isolated peaks (e.g.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 63%
“…Nonetheless, many publications still contrast lizard and snake groupings in diversity studies, even recent works (e.g. Savage, 2002;Fu et al, 2007;Kryštufek et al, 2008). To encompass both a monophyletic perspective and a useful comparative tool, all elevational richness patterns will be presented for the monophyletic clades (reptiles, iguanids, geckos, anguimorphs and scincomorphs) and for the functional groupings of lizards and snakes.…”
Section: Reptile Elevational Datamentioning
confidence: 99%