Oecologia

, Volume 140, Issue 3, pp 407–413 | Cite as

Energy gradients and the geographic distribution of local ant diversity

Community Ecology

Abstract

Geographical diversity gradients, even among local communities, can ultimately arise from geographical differences in speciation and extinction rates. We evaluated three models—energy-speciation, energy-abundance, and area—that predict how geographic trends in net diversification rates generate trends in diversity. We sampled 96 litter ant communities from four provinces: Australia, Madagascar, North America, and South America. The energy-speciation hypothesis best predicted ant species richness by accurately predicting the slope of the temperature diversity curve, and accounting for most of the variation in diversity. The communities showed a strong latitudinal gradient in species richness as well as inter-province differences in diversity. The former vanished in the temperature-diversity residuals, suggesting that the latitudinal gradient arises primarily from higher diversification rates in the tropics. However, inter-province differences in diversity persisted in those residuals—South American communities remained more diverse than those in North America and Australia even after the effects of temperature were removed.

Keywords

Species richness Temperature Area Latitude Biogeography 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Donat Agosti for providing the impetus to get this data analyzed. Field collection of data by P. S. W. was subsidized by NSF and the University of California at Davis. Data analysis by M. E. K. was supported by the National Science Foundation DEB-0212386. GIS analysis by M. Y. was in part supported by the National Science Foundation SES-0074620. Thanks to Nick Gotelli, Ian Billick, Dan Simberloff and Craig Osenberg for many useful comments on the manuscript.

References

  1. Allen AP, Brown JH, Gillooly JF (2002) Global biodiversity, biochemical kinetics, and the energetic-equivalence rule. Science 297:1545–1548CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. ArcView (1999) ArcGIS. 8.1. Environmental Systems and Research Institute, RedlandsGoogle Scholar
  3. Barraclough TG, Savolainen V (2001) Evolutionary rates and species diversity in flowering plants. Evolution 65:677–683Google Scholar
  4. Beattie AJ (1985) The evolutionary ecology of ant-plant mutualisms. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Besuchet C, Burckhardt D, Lobl I (1987) The “Winkler/Mocsarski” eclector as an efficient extractor for fungus and litter coleoptera. Coleopt Bull 41:392–394Google Scholar
  6. Bromham L, Cardillo M (2003) Testing the link between the latitudinal gradient in species richness and rates of molecular evolution. J Evol Biol 16:200–207CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown JH, Lomolino MV (1998) Biogeography, 2 edn. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass.Google Scholar
  8. Buzas MA, Collins LS, CulverSJ (2002) Latitudinal difference in biodiversity caused by higher tropical rate of increase. In: Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:7841–7843Google Scholar
  9. Cardillo M (1999) Latitude and rates of diversification in birds and butterflies. Proc R Soc Lond B 266:1221–1225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chase JM, Liebold MA (2002) Spatial scale dictates the productivity-biodiversity relationship. Nature 416:427–430CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Chazdon RL, Colwell RK, Denslow JS, Guariguata MR (1998) Statistical methods for estimating species richness of woody regeneration in primary and secondary rain forests of NE Costa Rica. In: Dallmeier F, Comiskey JA (eds) Forest biodiversity research, monitoring and modeling: conceptual background and Old World case studies. Parthenon, Paris, pp 285–309Google Scholar
  12. Chown S, Gaston K (2000) Areas, cradles and museums: the latitudinal gradient in species richness. Trend Ecol Evol 15:311–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clements F (1936) Nature and structure of the climax. J Ecol 24:252–284Google Scholar
  14. Colwell R (1997) Estimate S: statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 5. User’s guide and application http://viceroy.eeb.uconn.edu/estimates.
  15. Colwell R, Coddington J (1994) Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 345:101–118Google Scholar
  16. Colwell RK, Lees DC (2000) The mid-domain effect: geometric constraints on the geography of species richness. Trends Ecol Evol 15:70–76CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Currie DJ (1991) Energy and large-scale patterns of animal- and plant-species richness. Am Nat 137:27–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cushman JH, Whitham TG (1991) Competition mediating the outcome of a mutualism: protective services of ants as a limiting resource for membracids. Am Nat 138:851–865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cushman JH, Lawton JH, Manly BFJ (1993) Latitudinal patterns in European ant assemblages variation in species richness and body size. Oecologia 95:30–37Google Scholar
  20. Damuth J (1981) Interspecific allometry of population density in mammals and other animals: the independence of body mass and population energy use. Biol J Linn Soc 31:193–246Google Scholar
  21. Davis MB (1976) Pleistocene biogeography of temperate deciduous forests. Geosci Man 13:13–26Google Scholar
  22. Draper NR, Smith H (1981) Applied regression analysis. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Elton C (1927) Animal ecology. MacMillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Elton C (1958) The ecology of invasions by animals and plants. Methuen, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Field CB, Randerson JT, Malmström CM (1995) Global net primary production: combining ecology and remote sensing. Remote Sensing Environ 51:74–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Franks NR (1982) Social insects in the aftermath of swarm raids of the army ant Eciton burchelli. In: Breed MD, Michener CD, Evans HE (eds) The biology of social insects. Proceedings of the 9th Congress of the International Union for the Study of Social Insects, Boulder, Colorado, August 1982. Westview, Boulder, Colo., pp 275–279Google Scholar
  27. Gaston KJ (2000) Global patterns in biodiversity. Nature 405:220–227PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Gillooly JF, Charnov EL, West GB, Savage VM, Brown JH (2002) Effect of size and temperature on developmental time. Nature 417:70–73CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Gleason H (1926) The individualistic concept of the plant association. Bull Torrey Bot Club 53:7–26Google Scholar
  30. Gotelli NJ, Arnett AE (2000) Biogeographic effects of red fire ant invasion. Ecol Lett 3:257–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Holldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The ants. Belknap, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  32. Holway DA (1998) Effect of Argentine ant invasions on ground-dwelling arthropods in northern California riparian woodlands. Oecologia 116:252–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hubbell S (2001) The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
  34. Hubbell SP, Foster RB (1986) Biology, chance, and history and the structure or tropical rain forest tree communities. In: Diamond J, Case T (eds) Community ecology. Harper and Row, New York, pp 314–329Google Scholar
  35. Human K, Gordon D (1997) Effects of Argentine ants on invertebrate biodiversity in northern California. Conserv Biol 11:1242–1248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. IPPC (1988) Observed climate datasets, vol 2002. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, World Meterological AssociationGoogle Scholar
  37. Jeanne RL (1979) A latitudinal gradient in rates of ant predation. Ecology 60:1211–1224Google Scholar
  38. Kaspari M (2000a) Arboreal pitfall traps show impact of imported fire ants (Solenopsis wagneri) on a Texas arboreal ant assemblage. Southwest Nat 45:118–122Google Scholar
  39. Kaspari M (2000b) A primer of ant ecology. In: Agosti D, Alonso L (eds) Measuring and monitoring biological diversity: standard methods for ground-living ants. Smithsonian Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  40. Kaspari M, O’Donnell S (2003) High rates of army ant raids in the Neotropics and implications for ant colony and community structure. Evol Ecol Res 5:933–939Google Scholar
  41. Kaspari M, Vargo E (1995) Colony size as a buffer against seasonality: Bergmann’s rule in social insects. Am Nat 145:610–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kaspari M, Alonso L, O’Donnell S (2000a) Three energy variables predict ant abundance at a geographic scale. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:485–490CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Kaspari M, O’Donnell S, Kercher J (2000b) Energy, density, and constraints to species richness: ant assemblages along a productivity gradient. Am Nat 155:280–293CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Kaspari M, Pickering J, Longino J, Windsor D (2001) The phenology of a Neotropical ant assemblage: evidence for continuous and overlapping reproduction. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 50:382–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kaspari M, Yuan M, Alonso L (2003) Spatial grain and the causes of regional diversity gradients in ants. Am Nat 161:459–477CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Lees DC, Kremen C, Andriamampianina L (1999) A null model for species richness gradients: bounded range overlap of butterflies and other rainforest endemics of Madagascar. Biol J Linn Soc 67:529–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Leigh EGJ (1981) The average lifetime of a population in a varying environment. J Theor Biol 90:212–239Google Scholar
  48. Levey D, Byrne M (1993) Complex ant-plant interactions: rainforest ants as secondary dispersers and post-dispersal seed predators of rain forest plants. Ecology 74:1802–1812Google Scholar
  49. Levinton J (1979) A theory of diversity equilibrium and morphological evolution. Science 204:335–336Google Scholar
  50. Longino JT, Colwell RK (1997) Biodiversity assessment using structured inventory: capturing the ant fauna of a tropical rain forest. Ecol Appl 7:1263–1277Google Scholar
  51. McPeek MA, Brown JM (2000) Building a regional species pool: diversification of the Enallagma damselflies in eastern North America. Ecology 81:904–920Google Scholar
  52. Merriam C (1898) Life zones and crop zones of the United States. US Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  53. Orians G, Pearson R (1983) Convergent evolution at the community level. In: Futuyma D, Slatkin M (eds) Coevolution. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass. pp 431–458Google Scholar
  54. Otte D, Endler JA (1989) Speciation and its consequences. Sinauer, Sunderland. Mass.Google Scholar
  55. Pianka E (1966) Latitudinal gradients in species diversity: a review of the concepts. Am Nat 100:33–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pianka ER (1986) Ecology and natural history of desert lizards. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
  57. Pimm SL, Jones HL, Diamond J (1988) On the risk of extinction. Am Nat 132:757–785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Porter SD (1988) Impact of temperature on colony growth and developmental rates of the ant, Solenopsis invicta. J Insect Physiol 34:1127–1133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rahbek C, Graves GR (2002) Multiscale assessment of patterns of avian species richness. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:4534–4539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Richards J (1993) Remote sensing digital image analysis: an introduction. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  61. Ricklefs RE (1987) Community diversity: relative roles of local and regional processes. Science 235:167–171Google Scholar
  62. Ricklefs RE, Schluter D (1993) Species diversity in ecological communities: historical and geographical perspectives. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill.,Google Scholar
  63. Rohde K (1992) Latitudinal gradients in species diversity: the search for the primary cause. Oikos 65:514–527Google Scholar
  64. Rosenzweig M (1968) Net primary productivity of terrestrial environments: predictions from climatological data. Am Nat 102:67–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Rosenzweig ML (1995) Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  66. Roy K, Jablonski D, Valentine J, Rosenberg G (1998) Marine latitudinal diversity gradients: tests of causal hypotheses. Proc Natl Acad Sci 95:3699–3702PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Russo SE, Robinson SK, Terborgh JT (2003) Size-abundance relationships in an amazonian bird community: implications for the energetic equivalence rule. Am Nat 161:267–283CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Schluter D (1986) Tests for similarity and convergence of finch communities. Ecology 67:1073–1085Google Scholar
  69. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1981) Biometry. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  70. Srivastava DS, Lawton JH (1998) Why more productive sites have more species: an experimental test of theory using tree-hole communities. Am Nat 152:510–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Terborgh J (1973) On the notion of favorableness in plant ecology. Am Nat 107:481–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tilman D (1978) Cherries, ants and tent caterpillars: timing of nectar production in relation to susceptibility of caterpillars to ant predation. Ecology 59:686–692Google Scholar
  73. Tilman D, Pacala S (1993) The maintenance of species richness in plant communities. In: Ricklefs RE, Schluter D (eds) Species diversity in ecological communities: historical and geographical perspectives. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill., pp 13–25Google Scholar
  74. Ward PS (1987) Distribution of the introduced Argentine ant (Iridomyrmex humilis) in natural habitats of the Lower Sacramento Valley and its effects on the indigenous ant fauna. Hilgardia 55(2):1–16Google Scholar
  75. Ward PS (2000) Broad-scale patterns of diversity in leaf litter ant communities. In: Agost D, Majer JD, Alonso LE, Schultz TR (eds) Ants: standard methods for measuring and monitoring biodiversity. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., pp 99–121Google Scholar
  76. Wright DH, Currie DJ, Maurer BA (1993) Energy supply and patterns of species richness on local and regional scales. In: Ricklefs RE, Schluter D (eds) Species diversity in ecological communities: historical and geographical perspectives. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill., pp 66–74Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of OklahomaNormanUSA
  2. 2.Department of EntomologyUniversity of California at DavisDavisUSA
  3. 3.Department of GeographyUniversity of OklahomaNormanUSA

Personalised recommendations