Chapter

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
Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Nicolas Urbina-Cardona, Jul 05, 2015
2 Followers
 · 
602 Views
  • 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. DOI:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00847.x · 4.32 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. DOI:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00951.x · 4.32 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Invasion is essentially a function of propagule pressure (P), the abiotic characteristics of the invaded ecosystem (A) and the characteristics of the recipient community and invading species (biotic characteristics, B), and reflects positions in time and space (Pyšek & Richardson, 2006). Like the factors that affect community assembly (Belyea & Lancaster, 1999), P includes dispersal and geographical constraints, A incorporates environmental and habitat constraints and B includes internal dynamics and community interactions. For invasion to occur, all three factors must be accommodating, if not favourable (Fig. 1). The extent and intensity of invasion are determined by combination of the three factors, though their influence is unlikely to be equal, and is often mediated by humans (e.g. introduction and spread of propagules, alteration of environmental conditions and indigenous species abundance and diversity; Wilson et al., 2007). The onset of invasion is controlled by temporal and spatial factors and, as PAB fluctuate and change in time and space, the timing, distribution and rate of invasion is dynamic (Hastings, 1996). Consequently, the phase, extent and severity of invasion are determined by the combined strength of PAB, and by the position in time and space (for spatial scale issues see Wiens, 1989; Pauchard & Shea, 2006; Richardson & Pyšek, 2006; for temporal scale issues see Kowarik, 1995; Rejmánek, 2000; Pyšek & Jarošík, 2005; Richardson & Pyšek, 2006).
    Diversity and Distributions 01/2009; 15(1):22-40. DOI:10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00521.x · 5.47 Impact Factor