Distribución del nicho ecológico actual y futuro de anfibios y reptiles invasores: Competencias en las Corporaciones Autónomas Regionales y de Desarrollo Sostenible en Colombia.

In book: La restauración ecológica en la práctica. Memorias del I Congreso Colombiano de Restauración Ecológica & II Simposio Colombiano de Experiencias en Restauración Ecológica, Edition: 1, Publisher: Grupo de Restauración Ecológica, Universidad Nacional de Colombia – GREUNAL, Editors: Grupo de Restauración Ecológica, Universidad Nacional de Colombia – GREUNAL, pp.180-188
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Species range maps based on extents of occurrence (EOO maps) have become the basis for many analyses in broad-scale ecology and conservation. Nevertheless, EOO maps are usually highly interpolated and overestimate small-scale occurrence, which may bias research outcomes. We evaluated geographical range overestimation and its potential ecological causes for 1158 bird species by quantifying EOO map occurrence across 4040 well-studied survey locations in Australia, North America, and southern Africa at the scale of 80-742 km2. Most species occurred in only 40-70% of the range indicated by their EOO maps. The observed proportional range overestimation affected the range-size frequency distribution, indicating that species are more range-restricted than suggested by EOO maps. The EOO maps most strongly overestimated the distribution of narrow-ranging species and ecological specialists with narrow diet and habitat breadth. These relationships support basic ecological predictions about the relationship between niche breadth and the fine-scale occurrence of species. Consequently, at-risk species were subject to particularly high proportional range overestimation, on average 62% compared with 37% of nonthreatened species. These trends affect broad-scale ecological analyses and species conservation assessments, which will benefit from a careful consideration of potential biases introduced by range overestimation.
    Conservation Biology 03/2008; 22(1):110-9. · 4.36 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Scientific and societal unknowns make it difficult to predict how global environmental changes such as climate change and biological invasions will affect ecological systems. In the long term, these changes may have interacting effects and compound the uncertainty associated with each individual driver. Nonetheless, invasive species are likely to respond in ways that should be qualitatively predictable, and some of these responses will be distinct from those of native counterparts. We used the stages of invasion known as the "invasion pathway" to identify 5 nonexclusive consequences of climate change for invasive species: (1) altered transport and introduction mechanisms, (2) establishment of new invasive species, (3) altered impact of existing invasive species, (4) altered distribution of existing invasive species, and (5) altered effectiveness of control strategies. We then used these consequences to identify testable hypotheses about the responses of invasive species to climate change and provide suggestions for invasive-species management plans. The 5 consequences also emphasize the need for enhanced environmental monitoring and expanded coordination among entities involved in invasive-species management.
    Conservation Biology 07/2008; 22(3):534-43. · 4.36 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aim. Invasion ecology includes many hypotheses. Empirical evidence suggests that most of these can explain the success of some invaders to some degree in some circumstances. If they all are correct, what does this tell us about invasion? We illustrate the major themes in invasion ecology, and provide an overarching framework that helps organize research and foster links among subfields of invasion ecology and ecology more generally. Location. Global. Methods. We review and synthesize 29 leading hypotheses in plant invasion ecology. Structured around propagule pressure (P), abiotic characteristics (A) and biotic characteristics (B), with the additional influence of humans (H) on P, A and B (hereon PAB), we show how these hypotheses fit into one paradigm. P is based on the size and frequency of introductions, A incorporates ecosystem invasibility based on physical conditions, and B includes the characteristics of invading species (invasiveness), the recipient community and their interactions. Having justified the PAB framework, we propose a way in which invasion research could progress. Results. By highlighting the common ground among hypotheses, we show that invasion ecology is encumbered by theoretical redundancy that can be removed through integration. Using both holistic and incremental approaches, we show how the PAB framework can guide research and quantify the relative importance of different invasion mechanisms. Main conclusions. If the prime aim is to identify the main cause of invasion success, we contend that a top-down approach that focuses on PAB maximizes research efficiency. This approach identifies the most influential factors first, and subsequently narrows the number of potential causal mechanisms. By viewing invasion as a multifaceted process that can be partitioned into major drivers and broken down into a series of sequential steps, invasion theory can be rigorously tested, understanding improved and effective weed management techniques identified.
    Diversity and Distributions 01/2009; 15:22-40. · 5.47 Impact Factor


Available from
May 29, 2014