Ecological Specialisation of Reef Fishes Peaks in Global Biodiversity Hotspots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Aim The role of ecological specialisation in shaping biogeographic and evolutionary patterns remains unresolved. To date, few studies have quantitatively examined consumer niche breadth at a global scale. We describe global biogeographic and diversification patterns of specialisation, measured using trophic and thermal niches, for a highly diverse assemblage of consumers: reef fishes. First, we investigated the confluence of specialisation with global biogeographic patterns in species richness and reef area. Then, we tested whether these patterns could be explained by differences in diversification rates and geographic ranges. Location Tropical reefs across the globe. Time Period Present. Major Taxa Studied Reef fishes. Methods To estimate trophic specialisation, we compiled a comprehensive dataset on reef fish trophic interactions from published gut content analyses, including dietary information for ~5000 individuals across 387 fish species. We used the geographic range of species and global temperature data to estimate thermal specialisation of reef fishes. We used distributional data and Bayesian Structural Equation Modelling to test for the correlation between biogeographic variables, species richness, and the prevalence of trophic or thermal specialisation in reef fish assemblages. Moreover, we used linear models to test for a correlation between reef fish diversification rates, geographic range, and their degree of trophic and thermal specialisation. Results Our analysis suggests that species richness is positively associated with trophic specialisation in reef fishes, with isolated and species‐depauperate communities supporting assemblages dominated by trophic and thermal generalists. We found no effect of trophic and thermal specialisation on diversification rates and geographic range at the species level. Main Conclusions Our findings indicate that specialisation is favoured in large, biodiversity‐rich regions, but specialists might show lower capacity for colonisation, with lower representation on smaller, isolated reefs. These results contribute to our understanding of the dynamics shaping fish biogeography on coral reefs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".