ArticleEcology and evolution2024
Does Clade Density Constrain Geographical Range Evolution?
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The role of biotic interactions, such as interspecific competition, in driving geographical range evolution is still poorly understood. For instance, lineages distributed across regions with a large number of potential competitors might experience some level of geographical packing of their range limits, so that changes in their geographical distributions are hampered. Conversely, a large number of competitors could instead lead to accelerated rates of geographical range evolution, with lineages shifting their ranges to avoid competition. We recently introduced the concept of clade density (CD; the sum of the areas of overlap between a species and other members of its higher taxon, weighted by their phylogenetic distance) as a proxy of the potential for interspecific competition across the geographical distribution of a given species. In this study, we used a large dataset with 5936 terrestrial vertebrate species to test whether CD is significantly associated with variation in the rate of geographical range evolution using two alternative approaches. First, we tested if there is a significant relationship between CD and the geographical distance between sister species. In addition, we estimated tip rates of geographical range evolution and tested if they were consistently associated with variation in CD. We found no evidence for an effect of CD on geographical range evolution in either of the tested approaches, even after accounting for phylogenetic uncertainty. These results are inconsistent with equilibrial models of species diversification and suggest that interspecific competition might not play a pervasive role in geographical range evolution of terrestrial vertebrates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.