Search

Aim Studies exploring the determinants of geographical gradients in the occurrence of species or their traits obtain data by: (1) overlaying species range maps; (2) mapping survey-based species counts; or (3) superimposing models of individual species’ distributions. These data types have different spatial characteristics. We investigated whether these differences influence conclusions regarding postulated determinants of species richness patterns. Location Our study examined terrestrial bird diversity patterns in 13 nations of southern and eastern Africa, spanning temperate to tropical climates. Methods Four species richness maps were compiled based on range maps, field-derived bird atlas data, logistic and autologistic distribution models. Ordinary and spatial regression models served to examine how well each of five hypotheses predicted patterns in each map. These hypotheses propose productivity, temperature, the heat–water balance, habitat heterogeneity and climatic stability as the predominant determinants of species richness. Results The four richness maps portrayed broadly similar geographical patterns but, due to the nature of underlying data types, exhibited marked differences in spatial autocorrelation structure. These differences in spatial structure emerged as important in determining which hypothesis appeared most capable of explaining each map's patterns. This was true even when regressions accounted for spurious effects of spatial autocorrelation. Each richness map, therefore, identified a different hypothesis as the most likely cause of broad-scale gradients in species diversity. Main conclusions Because the ‘true’ spatial structure of species richness patterns remains elusive, firm conclusions regarding their underlying environmental drivers remain difficult. More broadly, our findings suggest that care should be taken to interpret putative determinants of large-scale ecological gradients in light of the type and spatial characteristics of the underlying data. Indeed, closer scrutiny of these underlying data — here the distributions of individual species — and their environmental associations may offer important insights into the ultimate causes of observed broad-scale patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the face of accelerating biodiversity loss and limited data, species distribution models – which statistically capture and predict species’ occurrences based on environmental correlates – are increasingly used to inform conservation strategies. Additionally, distribution models and their fit provide insights on the broad-scale environmental niche of species. To investigate whether the performance of such models varies with species’ ecological characteristics, we examined distribution models for 1329 bird species in southern and eastern Africa. The models were constructed at two spatial resolutions with both logistic and autologistic regression. Satellite-derived environmental indices served as predictors, and model accuracy was assessed with three metrics: sensitivity, specificity and the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristics plots. We then determined the relationship between each measure of accuracy and ten ecological species characteristics using generalised linear models. Among the ecological traits tested, species’ range size, migratory status, affinity for wetlands and endemism proved most influential on the performance of distribution models. The number of habitat types frequented (habitat tolerance), trophic rank, body mass, preferred habitat structure and association with sub-resolution habitats also showed some effect. In contrast, conservation status made no significant impact. These findings did not differ from one spatial resolution to the next. Our analyses thus provide conservation scientists and resource managers with a rule of thumb that helps distinguish, on the basis of ecological traits, between species whose occurrence is reliably or less reliably predicted by distribution models. Reasonably accurate distribution models should, however, be attainable for most species, because the influence ecological traits bore on model performance was only limited. These results suggest that none of the ecological traits tested provides an obvious correlate for environmental niche breadth or intra-specific niche differentiation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]