IMPACTS OF PHYLOGENETIC DILUTION AND CONCENTRATION EFFECTS ON SPECIES DIVERSITY AND DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In theoretical ecology and community ecology, it is still unclear how phylogenetic community structure and species distributions are linked together. In this paper, a neutral model for evaluating phylogenetic constraints on species diversity and distribution patterns is developed to address these issues. To accomplish this, temporal species distribution and diversity patterns are evaluated and simulated by considering the impact of phylogenetic relatedness of species in a lattice landscape with square grids. A continuous patch for the resultant distributional range map of a species is defined as a group of grids in which the interior grids are adjacent to each other while the edge grids of the patch are isolated from other remaining grids in the range map. The adjacency or isolation of a grid with respect to another grid follows the von Neumann neighborhood criterion. The hypothesis tested is: phylogenetically closely related species tend to avoid each other (phylogenetic dilution), which produces a phylogenetic overdispersion pattern. In this case, all species have similar species abundances and distribution-patch size patterns. In contrast, if closely related species tend to associate together (phylogenetic concentration), a phylogenetic clustering pattern emerges: phylogenetically distinct species tend to have higher abundances and more large distribution patches. Using simulations, this paper presents results which demonstrate the reverse phenomenon: if it is assumed that phylogenetic relatedness of species is modeled as a dilution effect, the resultant distributional maps for evolutionarily distinct species present significantly increased numbers of continuous large patches. An evolutionarily distinct clade tends to have significantly higher relative abundance than other clades in all simulations. It was also found that if phylogenetic relatedness of species is modeled as a concentration effect, the simulated distributional map of each species would present a similar percentage of large patches for both evolutionarily unique and common clades for many cases when the community size is large enough. However, being similar to dilution effect, the resultant species relative abundance for evolutionarily unique clade is significantly higher than that for evolutionarily common clade. In conclusion, evolutionary distinct species will have more chances to survive with high populations and less fragmented distributional range in environments where the phylogenetic dilution effect is functioning. It is hoped that these results contributed to clarifying the complex associations generated by phylogenetic community structure in future ecological and evolutionary studies.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».