Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38548741›Full record

ArticleNature communications2024

Deep biogeographic barriers explain divergent global vertebrate communities.

Peter J Williams, Elise F Zipkin, Jedediah F Brodie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Peter J WilliamsEcology, Evolution, and Behavior Program, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA. peter.j.williams.110@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-4806-2214
Elise F ZipkinEcology, Evolution, and Behavior Program, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4155-6139
Jedediah F BrodieDivision of Biological Sciences, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, 59812, USA.

Funding

NSF | BIO | Division of Biological Infrastructure (DBI) 1954406
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biogeographic history can lead to variation in biodiversity across regions, but it remains unclear how the degree of biogeographic isolation among communities may lead to differences in biodiversity. Biogeographic analyses generally treat regions as discrete units, but species assemblages differ in how much biogeographic history they share, just as species differ in how much evolutionary history they share. Here, we use a continuous measure of biogeographic distance, phylobetadiversity, to analyze the influence of biogeographic isolation on the taxonomic and functional diversity of global mammal and bird assemblages. On average, biodiversity is better predicted by environment than by isolation, especially for birds. However, mammals in deeply isolated regions are strongly influenced by isolation; mammal assemblages in Australia and Madagascar, for example, are much less diverse than predicted by environment alone and contain unique combinations of functional traits compared to other regions. Neotropical bat assemblages are far more functionally diverse than Paleotropical assemblages, reflecting the different trajectories of bat communities that have developed in isolation over tens of millions of years. Our results elucidate how long-lasting biogeographic barriers can lead to divergent diversity patterns, against the backdrop of environmental determinism that predominantly structures diversity across most of the world.

Indexed as

ChiropteraAnimalsBiodiversityBiological EvolutionBirdsMammals

Identifiers

PMID38548741
PMCPMC10978928

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.