dc.contributor.author | Procheş, Ş. | |
dc.contributor.author | Wilson, J.R.U. | |
dc.contributor.author | Richardson, D.M. | |
dc.contributor.author | Rejmánek, M. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2013-03-01T08:17:52Z | |
dc.date.available | 2013-03-01T08:17:52Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2012 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Procheş, Ş., Wilson, J.R.U., Richardson, D.M. and Rejmánek, M. (2012). Native and naturalized range size in Pinus: Relative importance of biogeography, introduction effort and species traits. Global Ecology and Biogeography 21, 513-523 | en |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/1259 | |
dc.description.abstract | Aim Pine trees (genus Pinus) represent an ancient lineage, naturally occurring
almost exclusively in the Northern Hemisphere, but introduced and widely naturalized
in both hemispheres. As large trees of interest to forestry, they attract much
attention and their distribution is well documented in both indigenous and naturalized
ranges. This creates an opportunity to analyse the relationship between
indigenous and naturalized range sizes in the context of different levels of human
usage, biological traits and the characteristics of the environments of origin.
Location Global.
Methods We combined and expanded pre-existing data sets for pine species
distributions and pine species traits, and used a variety of regression techniques
(including generalized additive models and zero-inflated Poisson models) to assess
which variables explained naturalized and indigenous range sizes.
Results Indigenous and naturalized range sizes are positively correlated but there
are many notable exceptions. Some species have large indigenous ranges but small
or no naturalized ranges, whereas others have small indigenous ranges, but have
naturalized in many regions. Indigenous range is correlated to factors such as seed
size (-), age at first reproduction (-), and latitude (+, supporting Rapoport’s rule),
but also to the extent of coverage of species in the forestry literature (+). Naturalized
range size is strongly influenced by the extent of coverage of species in the
forestry literature (+), a proxy for propagule pressure. Naturalization was also
influenced by average elevation in the indigenous range (-) and age at first reproduction
(-).
Main conclusions The macroecological and evolutionary pressures facing plant
groups are not directly transferable between indigenous and naturalized ranges. In
particular, there are strong biases in species naturalization and expansion in invasive
ranges that are unrelated to factors determining indigenous range size. At least
for Pinus, a new set of macroecological patterns are emerging which are profoundly
influenced by humans. | en |
dc.format.extent | 753017 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.publisher | Blackwell Publishing | en |
dc.subject | Biological invasions | en |
dc.subject | exotic species | en |
dc.subject | global patterns | en |
dc.subject | indigenous range | en |
dc.subject | invasive species | en |
dc.subject | naturalization | en |
dc.subject | naturalized range | en |
dc.subject | pine trees | en |
dc.subject | propagule pressure | en |
dc.subject | tree invasions | en |
dc.title | Native and naturalized range size in Pinus: Relative importance of biogeography, introduction effort and species traits | en |
dc.type | JournalArticles | en |
dc.cibjournal | Global Ecology and Biogeography | en |
dc.cibproject | NA | en |