Wing morphology predicts geographic range size in vespertilionid bats

Abstract

Why some species are widespread across continents while others are confined geographically remains an open question in ecology and biogeography. Previous research has attempted to explain interspecific variation in geographic range size based on differences in dispersal ability. However, the relationship between dispersal ability and geographic range size remains uncertain, particularly in mammals. The goal of this study is to test whether geographic range size can be predicted by dispersal capacity among vespertilionid bats within a phylogenetic comparative framework. We integrated a large dataset on range area, longitudinal extent, wing morphology (a proxy for dispersal ability), migratory habit, and biogeographic realm across 126 vespertilionid bat species. We used phylogenetic regressions to disentangle the associations between these predictor factors and species range size while controlling for the effects of migration and biogeographic realm. Our analyses revealed that bat species with higher wing loading exhibit larger distribution ranges than those with lower wing loading, and that the size of geographic ranges was associated with wing aspect ratio in bats. These results highlight the relationship between wing morphology and range size in flying mammals, and suggest a role of dispersal capacity in shaping species’ geographic distributions.

Strong but opposing effects of climatic niche breadth and dispersal ability shape bat geographical range sizes across phylogenetic scales

“…To test the influence of dispersal abilities on phyllostomid geographical range sizes, we assembled from the literature data on a morphological variable widely related to flight performance in bats and other flying animals: relative wing loading (RWL;Luo et al, 2019;Marinello & Bernard, 2014;Norberg & Rayner, 1987; Supporting Information Table S1). For each species, RWL is calculated as its wing loading (weight divided by wing area)/mass 1/3 .…”

“…In a broad sense, flight reduces barriers to dispersal by allowing species to move across longer distances (Luo et al, 2019;McCulloch et al, 2017). For bats, RWL is tightly related to flight performance and the ability to disperse, since it is a wing ecomorphological variable related to the optimization of flight costs from local to broad geographical scales (Luo et al, 2019;Norberg & Rayner, 1987).…”

“…In a broad sense, flight reduces barriers to dispersal by allowing species to move across longer distances (Luo et al, 2019;McCulloch et al, 2017). For bats, RWL is tightly related to flight performance and the ability to disperse, since it is a wing ecomorphological variable related to the optimization of flight costs from local to broad geographical scales (Luo et al, 2019;Norberg & Rayner, 1987). Thus, we initially expected a positive relationship between phyllostomid flight abilities and their range sizes, as increased RWL translates into energetically efficient flight and long-distance dispersal (Luo et al, 2019;Marinello & Bernard, 2014;Norberg & Raynier 1987) However, we observed the opposite pattern: species with higher RWL and, therefore, increased dispersal abilities, presented reduced ranges (Figure 2, Table 1).…”

“…Chiroptera, leaf-nosed bats, New World, niche width, non-stationarity, relative wing loading, species distributions (Luo et al, 2019), phyllostomids have smaller and highly variable range sizes compared to other New World bat families (Willig, Patterson, & Stevens, 2003). Furthermore, there is a strong spatial signature associated with phyllostomid distribution that is likely related to the landscape configuration, which limits species dispersal in the New World, regardless of dispersal abilities that flight suggests (Varzinczak, Lima, Moura, & Passos, 2018).…”

Abundance and Distribution of Korean Flower Flies (Diptera: Syrphidae): Dominant Influence of Latitude on Regional Distribution

“…These two dimensions have different ecological aspects. In the northern hemisphere, latitudinal range size is closely related to the temperature range of each species, whereas longitudinal range size is related to natural dispersal, biogeographical history (e.g., location of origin), continental drift, and anthropogenic dispersal, such as biological invasions through local or international trade [21][22][23][24]. Therefore, the two types of range size influence regional or local fauna differently.…”