Landscape Ecology

, Volume 33, Issue 10, pp 1711–1724 | Cite as

Abundance–occupancy and abundance–body mass relationships of small mammals in a mountainous landscape

  • Zhixin Wen
  • Jilong Cheng
  • Deyan Ge
  • Lin Xia
  • Xue Lv
  • Qisen YangEmail author
Research Article



Mountainous landscapes are characterized by strong spatial heterogeneity, leading to increasing geographical isolation and decreasing area with elevation. Consequently, the colonization rate decreases from the low to high elevation zone, while the extinction rate shows the opposite.


Due to such changes, we test whether (1) species occur at a declining number of sites (mountains) and have a less positive abundance–occupancy relationship (AOR) in a higher elevation zone; (2) a lower proportion of rare large-bodied species (less resistant to extinction) and a more positive abundance–body mass relationship (ABR) emerge in a higher elevation zone.


Using the data of small mammals from 20 elevational gradients in the Mountainous Region of Southwest China, we compared the AORs and ABRs among the low, middle and high elevation zones. The AOR and ABR were fitted with linear and polynomial regression models. We compared endemic ratios among the different elevation zones.


The AOR was best characterized by a linear model and positive in all elevation zones. Its slope decreased from the low to high elevation zone. The quadratic model performed the best in fitting the ABR in each zone. When fitted with linear models, both the R2 and slope of the ABR increased towards the high elevation zone. The endemic ratios were significantly higher in the middle and high elevation zones.


Both the AOR and ABR in mountainous landscapes are strongly elevation-dependent. The increasing geographical isolation and decreasing area with elevation can have a high impact on macroecological patterns and processes.


Abundance–body mass relationship Abundance–occupancy relationship Extinction Isolation Mountainous landscape Small mammal 



The authors wish to thank all the pioneers who collected the small mammal data used in this study. We thank the Sichuan Luoji Mountain Nature Reserve, Sichuan Gongga Mountain Nature Reserve, Sichuan Tangjiahe Nature Reserve, Sichuan Wolong Nature Reserve, Yunnan Baima Snow Mountain Nature Reserve and Tibet Sejila Mountain National Forest Park for allowing our group to conduct the small mammal sampling. Qian Zhang provided valuable suggestions for establishing the hypothesis tested. Our study is funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31372177) and National Special Fund on Basic Research of Science and Technology of China (2014FY110100 and 2014FY210200). Deyan Ge is supported by the Newton Advanced Fellowship of the Royal Society, UK (Ref. NA150142).

Supplementary material

10980_2018_695_MOESM1_ESM.docx (38 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 37 kb)
10980_2018_695_MOESM2_ESM.xls (99 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (XLS 99 kb)


  1. Andrew NR, Hughes L (2008) Abundance–body mass relationships among insects along a latitudinal gradient. Austral Ecol 33:253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bartoń K (2015) MuMIn: multi-model inference. R package version 1.15.1.
  3. Blackburn TM, Gaston KJ (1997) A critical assessment of the form of the interspecific relationship between abundance and body size in animals. J Anim Ecol 66:233–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blackburn TM, Gaston KJ (1999) The relationship between animal abundance and body size: a review of the mechanisms. Adv Ecol Res 28:181–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blackburn TM, Brown VK, Doube BM, Greenwood JJD, Lawton JH, Stork NE (1993) The relationship between abundance and body–size in natural animal assemblages. J Anim Ecol 62:519–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blackburn TM, Cassey P, Gaston KJ (2006) Variations on a theme: sources of heterogeneity in the form of the interspecific relationship between abundance and distribution. J Anim Ecol 75:1426–1439CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Borregaard MK, Rahbek C (2010) Causality of the relationship between geographic distribution and species abundance. Q Rev Biol 85:3–25CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Brooks ME, Kristensen K, van Benthem KJ, Magnusson A, Berg CW, Nielsen A, Skaug HJ, Maechler M, Bolker BM (2017) Modeling zero-inflated count data with glmmTMB. bioRxiv. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown JH (1984) On the relationship between abundance and distribution of species. Am Nat 124:255–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown JH (2001) Mammals on mountainsides: elevational patterns of diversity. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 10:101–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Buckley HL, Freckleton RP (2010) Understanding the role of species dynamics in abundance–occupancy relationships. J Ecol 98:645–658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Cisneros LM, Burgio KR, Dreiss LM, Klingbeil BT, Patterson BD, Presley SJ, Willig MR (2014) Multiple dimensions of bat biodiversity along an extensive tropical elevational gradient. J Anim Ecol 83:1124–1136CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Clare JDJ, Anderson EM, MacFarland DM (2015) Predicting Bobcat abundance at a landscape scale and evaluating occupancy as a density index in central Wisconsin. J Wildlife Manage 79:469–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cowley MJR, Thomas CD, Roy DB, Wilson RJ, León‐Cortés JL, Gutiérrez D, Bulman CR, Quinn RM, Moss D, Gaston KJ (2001) Density–distribution relationships in British butterflies. I. The effect of mobility and spatial scale. J Anim Ecol 70:410–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Damuth J (1981) Population-density and body size in mammals. Nature 290:699–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Elsen PR, Tingley MW (2015) Global mountain topography and the fate of montane species under climate change. Nat Clim Change 5:772–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fa JE, Purvis A (1997) Body size, diet and population density in afrotropical forest mammals: a comparison with neotropical species. J Anim Ecol 66:98–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ferenc M, Fjeldså J, Sedláček O, Motombi FN, Nana ED, Mudrová K, Hořák D (2016) Abundance-area relationships in bird assemblages along an Afrotropical elevational gradient: space limitation in montane forest selects for higher population densities. Oecologia 181:225–233CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Fleishman E, Austin GT, Weiss AD (1998) An empirical test of Rapoport’s rule: elevational gradients in montane butterfly communities. Ecology 79:2482–2493Google Scholar
  21. Foggo A, Bilton DT, Rundle SD (2007) Do developmental mode and dispersal shape abundance–occupancy relationships in marine macroinvertebrates? J Anim Ecol 76:695–702CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Gaston KJ (1994) Rarity. Chapman and Hall, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gaston KJ (1996) The multiple forms of the interspecific abundance–distribution relationship. Oikos 76:211–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gaston KJ, Blackburn TM (1995) Birds, body-size and the threat of extinction. Philos T R Soc B 347:205–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gaston KJ, Blackburn TM (2000) Pattern and process in macroecology. Blackwell Science, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gaston KJ, Blackburn TM (2003) Dispersal and the interspecific abundance–occupancy relationship in British birds. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 12:373–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Graf RF, Kramer-Schadt S, Fernández N, Grimm V (2007) What you see is where you go? Modeling dispersal in mountainous landscapes. Landscape Ecol 22:853–866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hammer Ø, Harper DAT, Ryan PD (2001) PAST: paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol Electron 4:1–9Google Scholar
  29. Hanski I, Kouki J, Halkka A (1993) Three explanations of the positive relationship between distribution and abundance of species. In: Ricklefs RE, Schluter D (eds) Species diversity in ecological communities: historical and geographical perspectives. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 108–116Google Scholar
  30. Heaney LR (2001) Small mammal diversity along elevational gradients in the Philippines: an assessment of patterns and hypotheses. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 10:15–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hodkinson ID (2005) Terrestrial insects along elevation gradients: species and community responses to altitude. Biol Rev 80:489–513CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. IUCN (2017) The IUCN red list of threatened species. Version 2017-3.
  33. Jeschke JM, Strayer DL (2006) Determinants of vertebrate invasion success in Europe and North America. Glob Change Biol 12:1608–1619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jiang Z-G, Ma Y, Wu Y, Wang Y-X, Zhou K-Y, Liu S-Y, Feng Z-J (2015) China’s mammal diversity and geographic distribution. Science Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  35. Jin L, Yang S-N, Liao W-B, Lüpold S (2016) Altitude underlies variation in the mating system, somatic condition, and investment in reproductive traits in male Asian grass frogs (Fejervarya limnocharis). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 70:1197–1208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jones KE, Bielby J, Cardillo M, Fritz SA, O'Dell J, Orme CDL, Safi K, Sechrest W, Boakes EH, Carbone C, Connolly C (2009) PanTHERIA: a species-level database of life history, ecology, and geography of extant and recently extinct mammals. Ecology 90:2648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Komonen A, Henttonen H, Huitu O, Nissinen K (2013) Curvilinear interspecific density-range size relationship in small mammals in Finland. J Biogeogr 40:1194–1201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Körner C, Jetz W, Paulsen J, Payne D, Rudmann-Maurer K, Spehn EM (2017) A global inventory of mountains for bio-geographical applications. Alpine Bot 127:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Li J-S, Song Y-L, Zeng Z-G (2003) Elevational gradients of small mammal diversity on the northern slopes of Mt. Qilian, China. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 12:449–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Linden DW, Fuller AK, Royle JA, Hare MP (2017) Examining the occupancy–density relationship for a low-density carnivore. J Appl Ecol 54:2043–2052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lomolino MV (2001) Elevation gradients of species-density: historical and prospective views. Glob Change Biol 10:3–13Google Scholar
  42. Ma J, Wu Y-J, Xia L, Zhang Q, Ma Y, Yang Q-S (2010) Elevational diversity of small mammals in Luoji Mt. Nature Reserve, Sichuan Province. Acta Theriol Sin 30:400–410Google Scholar
  43. McCain CM (2005) Elevational gradients in diversity of small mammals. Ecology 86:366–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Michel N, Burel F, Legendre P, Butet A (2007) Role of habitat and landscape in structuring small mammal assemblages in hedgerow netwoks of contrasted farming landscapes in Brittany, France. Landscape Ecol 22:1241–1253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Morris RJ, Sinclair FH, Burwell CJ (2015) Food web structure changes with elevation but not rainforest stratum. Ecography 38:792–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pedersen RØ, Faurby S, Svenning J-C (2017) Shallow size–density relations within mammal clades suggest greater intra-guild ecological impact of large-bodied species. J Anim Ecol 86:1205–1213CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Peters RH, Raelson JV (1984) Relations between individual size and mammalian population-density. Am Nat 124:498–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Poulin R (1999) Body size versus abundance among parasite species: positive relationships? Ecography 22:246–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Silva M, Downing JA (1995) The allometric scaling of density and body mass—a nonlinear relationship for terrestrial mammals. Am Nat 145:704–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Steinbauer M, Field R, Grytnes JA, Trigas P, Ah‐Peng C, Attorre F, Birks HJB, Borges PA, Cardoso P, Chou CH, De Sanctis M (2016) Topography driven isolation, speciation and a global increase of endemism with elevation. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 25:1097–1107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Stevens GC (1992) The elevational gradient in altitudinal range—an extension of Rapoport latitudinal rule to altitude. Am Nat 140:893–911CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Wang Y-Z, Hu J-C (1999) The imitatively-colored pictorial handbook of the mammals of Sichuan. China Forestry Publishing House, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  53. Webb TJ, Barry JP, McClain CR (2017) Abundance–occupancy relationships in deep sea wood fall communities. Ecography 40:1339–1347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wen Z-X, Wu Y-J, Du Y-B, Xia L, Ge D-Y, Yang Q-S, Chen L-M (2014) Seasonal change of species diversity patterns of non-volant small mammals along three subtropical elevational gradients. Biotropica 46:479–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wen Z-X, Quan Q, Du Y-B, Xia L, Ge D-Y, Yang Q-S (2016a) Dispersal, niche, and isolation processes jointly explain species turnover patterns of nonvolant small mammals in a large mountainous region of China. Ecol Evol 6:946–960CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. Wen Z-X, Yang Q-S, Quan Q, Xia L, Ge D-Y, Lv X (2016b) Multiscale partitioning of small mammal β-diversity provides novel insights into the Quaternary faunal history of Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau and Hengduan Mountains. J Biogeogr 43:1412–1424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wen Z-X, Wu Y, Ge D-Y, Cheng J-L, Chang Y-B, Yang Z-S, Xia L, Yang Q-S (2017) Heterogeneous distributional responses to climate warming: evidence from rodents along a subtropical elevational gradient. BMC Ecol 17:17CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  58. White EP, Ernest SKM, Kerkhoff AJ, Enquist BJ (2007) Relationships between body size and abundance in ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 22:323–330CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Wu Y-J, Yang Q-S, Wen Z-X, Xia L, Zhang Q, Zhou H-M (2013) What drives the species richness patterns of non-volant small mammals along a subtropical elevational gradient? Ecography 36:185–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Zoological Systematics and EvolutionInstitute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Graduate University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.State Key Laboratory for Conservation and Utilization of Bio-Resources in YunnanYunnan UniversityKunmingPeople’s Republic of China
  4. 4.School of Life SciencesYunnan UniversityKunmingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations