It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Exploring shifts in the climatic niches of introduced species can provide significant insight into the mechanisms underlying the invasion process and the associated impacts on biodiversity. We aim to test the phylogenetic signal hypothesis in native and introduced species in Europe by examining climatic niche similarity. We examined data from 134 ant species commonly found in western Europe; 130 were native species, and 4 were introduced species. We characterized their distribution patterns using species records from different databases, determined their phylogenetic relatedness, and tested for a phylogenetic signal in their optimal climatic niches. We then compared the introduced species’ climatic niches in Europe with their climatic niches in their native ranges and with the climatic niches of their closest relative species in Europe. We found a strong phylogenetic signal in the optimal climatic niches of the most common ant species in Europe; however, this signal was weak for the main climatic variables that affect the distributions of introduced versus native species. Also, introduced species occupied different climatic niches in Europe than in their native ranges; furthermore, their European climatic niches did not resemble those of their closest relative species in Europe. We further discovered that there was not much concordance between the climatic niches of introduced species in their native ranges and climatic conditions in Europe. Our findings suggest that phylogenetics do indeed constrain shifts in the climatic niches of native European ant species. However, introduced species would not face such constraints and seemed to occupy relatively empty climatic niches.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Universidade de Pernambuco – Campus Garanhuns, Garanhuns, Brazil (GRID:grid.26141.30) (ISNI:0000 0000 9011 5442); CREAF, Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain (GRID:grid.452388.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 0722 403X)
2 Estación Biológica de Doñana, CSIC, Sevilla, Spain (GRID:grid.418875.7) (ISNI:0000 0001 1091 6248)
3 University François Rabelais of Tours, Institute of Insect Biology, Tours, France (GRID:grid.12366.30) (ISNI:0000 0001 2182 6141)
4 CREAF, Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain (GRID:grid.452388.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 0722 403X)
5 CREAF, Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain (GRID:grid.452388.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 0722 403X); Univ Autònoma Barcelona, Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain (GRID:grid.7080.f)