Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41792895›Full record

ArticleCladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society2026

Rethinking areas of endemism and barriers: perspectives for a causal historical biogeography and a critique of Schultz and Cracraft (2024).

Augusto Ferrari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Augusto FerrariLaboratório de Entomologia, Sistemática e Biogeografia-LESB, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande-FURG, Rio Grande, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6037-0324

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Historical biogeography faces a persistent conceptual and methodological dilemma concerning the nature of its central analytical units. Using the recent proposal by Schultz and Cracraft (Cladistics 40, 653) as a catalyst, this article critiques the argument that causal inference necessitates the replacement of areas of endemism with barriers, contending that such a forced dichotomy is both artificial and reductionist. It is postulated that modern methodological advances allow areas of endemism to be rigorously treated as dynamic and quantitatively testable hypotheses, thereby overcoming long-standing objections that classify them as mere descriptive constructs. Conversely, an exclusive focus on barriers fundamentally underestimates the multifactorial nature of diversification, neglecting the structural role of dispersal and the complex spatiotemporal dynamism of isolating forces. Effective inference in historical biogeography demands an explicitly pluralistic and process-agnostic perspective, recognizing areas and barriers as complementary, intersecting elements. This integrative approach is essential for accurately capturing the emergent complexity of biogeographic patterns, moving the discipline beyond the limitations of unifocal causal models.

Indexed as

BiodiversityPhylogeography

Identifiers

PMID41792895
PMCPMC13398256

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.