Abstract
Bergmann’s rule is one of the most known biological rules and relates the body size variation to changes in latitude or temperature. Most recently, a “resource rule” had been presented, which explains several trends in body size, as a consequence of availability of resources. South American Conepatus chinga is one of the most widespread small carnivores in the Neotropics, being geographically distributed from Perú and Brazil to southern Argentina and Chile. This widely distributed species encounters a high environmental variability, which could affect body size and morphological variations. Here, I analyze geographical patterns of variation in body size and morphology estimated using a geometric morphometric approach from museum specimens. The associations between geographical patterns of variation in body size and morphometry and climatic and/or environmental variables were evaluated, using several databases and multiple regressions and redundancy analysis. Throughout the study, the presence of spatial autocorrelation was analyzed, and Spatial Eigenvector Mapping (SEVM) was used. The arid diagonal was identified as containing the smaller specimens of C. chinga, primarily related to net primary productivity (NPP). Bergmann’s rule seems not to be valid for this species. Instead, evidence seems to support the “resource rule” as the primarily explanation for body size variation. A lower amount of morphological variation was explained by NPP, mainly related to relative size variation of premolar and molars.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abraham, E., del Valle, H.F., Roig, F., Torres, L, Ares, J.O., Coronato, F., Godagnone, R., 2009. Overview of the geography of the Monte Desert biome (Argentina). J. Arid Environ. 73, 144–153.
Akaike, H., 1973. Information theory as an extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle. In: Petrov, B.N., Csaki, F. (Ed.), Second International Symposium on Information Theory. Akademiai Kiado, Budapest, pp. 267–281.
Ashton, K.G., 2002. Do amphibians follow Bergmann’s rule? Can. J. Zool. 80,708-716.
Ashton, K.G., Tracy, M.C., de Queiroz, A., 2000. Is Bergmann’s rule valid for mammals? Am. Nat. 156, 390–415.
Bergmann, C, 1847. Ueber die Verhältnisse der Wärmeökonomie derThiere zu ihrer Grösse. Gottinger Studien 3, 595–708.
Blackburn, T.M., Gaston, K.J., Loder, N., 1999. Geographic gradients in body size: a clarification of Bergmann’s rule. Divers. Distrib. 5, 165–174.
Blackburn, T.M., Hawkins, B.A., 2004. Bergmann’s rule and the mammal fauna of northern North America. Ecography 27, 715–724.
Bortolotto Peters, F., de Oliveira Roth, P.R., Christoff, A.U., 2011. Feeding habits of Molina’s hog-nosed skunk, Conepatus chinga (Carnivora: Mephitidae) in the extreme south of Brazil. Zoologia 28, 193–198.
Bruniard, E.D., 1982. La diagonal áridaargentina: un límiteclimático real. Rev. Geogr. 95, 5–20.
Burkart, R., Bárbaro, N.O., Sánchez, R.O., Gómez, D.A., 1999. Eco-Regiones de la Argentina. Presidencia de la Nación, Secretaría de Recursos Naturales y Desar-rollo Sustentable. Programa Desarrollo Institucional Ambiental. Componente Política Ambiental, 43.
Burnham, K.P., Anderson, D.R., 2002. Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information—Theoretical Approach, 2nd ed. Springer, New York.
Castillo, D.F., Lucherini, M., Luengos Vidal, E.M., Manfredi, C, Casanave, E.B., 2011. Spatial organization of Molina’s hog-nosed skunk (Conepatus chinga) in two landscapes of the Pampas grassland of Argentina. Can. J. Zool. 89, 229–238.
Chatterjee, S., Hadi, A.S., 2006. Analysis of Collinear Data, Regression Analysis by Example. John Wiley & Sons, pp. 221–258.
Cusens, J., Wright, S.D., McBride, P.D., Gillman, L.N., 2012. What is the form of the productivity-animal-species-richness relationship? A critical review and metaanalysis. Ecology 93, 2241–2252.
Díaz, M.M., Lucherini, M., 2006. Orden Carnivora. In: Barquez, R.M., Díaz, M.M., Ojeda, R.A. (Ed.), Mamíferos de Argentina, Sistemáticay Distribución. Sociedad Argentina para el Estudio de los Mamíferos, Tucumán, pp. 89–107.
Diniz-Filho,JAF., Bini, L.M., 2005. Modelling geographic patterns in species richness using eigenvector-based spatial filters. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 14, 177–185.
Diniz-Filho,JAF., Rangel,T.F.LV.B., Bini, L.M., 2008. Model selection and information theory in geographical ecology. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 17, 479–488.
Donadio, E., Di Martino, S., Aubone, M., Novaro, A.J., 2001. Activity patterns, home range, and habitat selection of the common hog-nosed skunk, Conepatus chinga (Mammalia, Mustelidae), in northwestern Patagonia. Mammalia 65, 49–54.
Donadio, E., Di Martino, S., Aubone, M., Novaro, A.J., 2004. Feeding ecology of the Andean hog-nosed skunk (Conepatus chinga) in areas under different land use in north-western Patagonia. J. Arid Environ. 56, 709–718.
Dormann, C.F., Elith, J., Bacher, S., Buchmann, C, Carl, G., Carré, G., García Mar-quéz, J.R., Gruber, B., Lafourcade, B., Leitão, P.J., Münkermüller, T., McClean, C, Osborne, P.E., Reineking, B., Schröder, B., Skidmore, A.K., Zurrell, D., Lautenbach, S., 2013. Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance. Ecography 36, 27–46.
Dragoo, J.W., 2009. Family Mephitidae (skunks). In: Wilson, D.E., Mittermeier, R.A. (Ed.), Handbook of the Mammals of the World, 1 Carnivores. Lynx editions in association with Conservation International and IUCN, Barcelona, pp. 532–563.
Eva, H.D., Belward, A.S., de Miranda, E.E., di Bella, CM., Gonds, V., Huber, O., Jones, S., Sgrenzaroli, M., Fritz, S., 2004. A land cover map of South America. Glob. Change Biol. 10, 731–744.
ESRI, 2002. Arcview Version3.3. Environmental System Research Institute, Redlands (CA).
Fernández, O.A., Busso, C.A., 1997. Arid and semi-arid rangelands: two thirds of Argentina. RALA Report 200, 41–60.
Foley, J.A., Prentice, C, Ramankutty, N., Levis, S., Pollard, D., Sitch, S., Haxeltine, A., 1996. An integrated biosphere model of land surface processes, terrestrial carbon balance, and vegetation dynamics. Glob. Biogeochem. Cy. 10, 603–628.
Fuller, T.K., Johnson, W.E., Franklin, W.L., Johnson, K.A., 1987. Notes on the patago-nian hog-nosed skunk (Conepatus humboldtii) in southern Chile. J. Mammal. 68, 864–867.
Gardezi, T., daSilva, J., 1999. Diversity in relation to body size in mammals: a comparative study. Am. Nat. 153, 110–123.
Garreaud, R.D., Vuille, M., Compagnucci, R., Marengo, J., 2009. Present-day South American climate. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 281, 180–195.
Gay, S.W., Best, T.L., 1996. Relationships between abiotic variables and geographic variation in skulls of pumas (Puma concolor: Mammalia, Felidae) in North and South America. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 117, 259–282.
Geist, V., 1987. Bergmann’s rule is invalid. Can. J. Zool. 65, 1035–1038.
Graham, M., 2003. Confronting multicollinearity in ecological multiple regression. Ecology 84, 2809–2815.
Goodall, C, 1991. Procrustes methods in the statistical analysis of shape. J. R. Stat. Soc. 52, 285–339.
Hijmans, R.J., Guarino, L., Mathur, P.Jarvis, A., Rojas, E., Cruz, M., Barrantes, I., 2005a. DIVA-GIS, Version 5., pp. 2.
Hijmans, R.J., Cameron, S.E., Parra, J.L., Jones, P.G., Jarvis, A., 2005b. Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Clim. 25, 1965–1978.
Huete, A., Didan, K., Miura, T., Rodríguez, E.P., Gao, X., Ferreira, L.G., 2002. Overview of the radiometric and biophysical performance of the MODIS vegetation indices. Remote Sens. Environ. 83, 195–213.
Johnson, A., 2006. Biogeographical parallels between plants and ants in North American deserts (Hymenoptera: Formicidae; Spermatophyta). Myrmecol. Nachrichten. 8, 209–218.
Johnson, J.B., Omland, K.S., 2004. Model selection in ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 101–108.
Kasper, C.B., Fontoura-Rodrigues, M.L., Cavalcanti, G.N., de Freitas, T.R.O., Rodrigues, F.H.G., de Oliveira, T.G., Eizirik, E., 2009. Recent advances in the knowledge of Molina’s Hog-nosed Skunk Conepatus chinga and Striped Hog-nosed Skunk C semistriatus in South America. Small Carnivore Conserv. 41, 25–28.
Kasper, C.B., Soares, J.B.G., Freitas, T.R.O., 2012. Differential patterns of home range, net displacement and resting sites use of Conepatus chinga in southern Brazil. Mamm. Biol. 77, 358–362.
Klingenberg, C.P., 2011. MorphoJ: An integrated software package for geometric morphometrics. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 11, 353–357.
Kucharik, C.J., Foley, J.A.,Delire,C, Fisher, V.A., Coe, M.T., Lenters, J.D., Young-Molling, C, Ramankutty, N., 2000. Testing the performance of a Dynamic Global Ecosystem Model: water balance, carbon balance, and vegetation structure. Glob. Biogeochem. Cy. 14, 795–825.
Kühn, I., Dormann, C.F., 2012. Less than eight (and a half) misconceptions of spatial analysis. J. Biogeogr. 39, 995–998.
Kullback, S., Leibler, R.A., 1951. On information and sufficiency. Ann. Math. Stat. 22, 79–86.
Lindstedt, S.L., Boyce, M.S., 1985. Seasonality, fasting endurance, and body size in mammals. Am. Nat. 125, 873–878.
Mancini, M.V., Paez, M.M., Prieto, A.R., Stutz, S., Tonello, M., Vilanova, I., 2005. Mid-Holocene climatic variability reconstruction from pollen records. Quat. Int. 132, 47–59.
McNab, B.K., 1971. On the ecological significance of Bergmann’s rule. Ecology 52, 845–854.
McNab, B.K., 1974. The energetic of endotherms. Ohio J. Sci. 74, 370–380.
McNab, B.K., 2010. Geographic and temporal correlations of mammalian size reconsidered: a resource rule. Oecología 164, 13–23.
Martínez, PA, Marti, DA, Molina, W.F., Bidau, C.J., 2013. Bergmann’s rule across the equator: a case study in Cerdocyon thous (Canidae). J. Anim. Ecol. 82, 997–1008.
Medina, A.I., Marti, DA, Bidau, J.C., 2007. Subterranean rodents of the genus Ctenomys (Caviomorpha, Ctenomyidae) follow the converse to Bergmann’s rule. J. Biogeogr. 34, 1439–1454.
Medina, C.E., Díaz, C.V., Delgado, FA., Ynga, G.A., Zela, H.F., 2009. Dieta de Conepatus chinga (Carnivora: Mephitidae) en un bosque de Polylepis del departamento de Arequipa. Perú. Rev. Peru. Biol. 16, 183–186.
Meiri, S., 2011. Bergmann’s rule - what’s in a name? Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 20, 203–207.
Meiri, S., Dayan,T., 2003. On the validity of Bergmann’s rule. J. Biogeogr. 30, 331–351.
Meiri, S., Dayan, T., Simberloff, D., 2004. Carnivores, biases and Bergmann’s rule. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 81, 579–588.
Meiri, S., Yom-Tov, Y., Geffen, E., 2007. What determines conformity to Bergmann’s rule? Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 16, 788–794.
Morales, M.M., Giannini, N.P., 2010. Morphofunctional patterns in Neotropical felids: species co-existence and historical assembly. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 100, 711–724.
Morello, JA, 1985. Grandes ecosistemas de Sudamérica, Textos para Discusión. Fun-dación Bariloche/3, Bariloche, pp. 116.
Naumann, M., Madariaga, M., 2003. Atlas Argentino/Argentinienatlas. Programa de Acción Nacional de Lucha contra la Desertificación, Secretaría de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sustentable. InstitutoNacionaldeTecnologíaAgropecuaria, Deutsche Gesekkschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Buenos Aires, pp. 94.
Noy-Meir, I., 1974. Desert ecosystems: highertropic levels. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 5, 195–214.
Ochocinska, D., Taylor, J.R.E., 2003. Bergmann’s rule in shrews: geographical variation of body size in Paleartic Sorex species. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 78, 365–381.
Olalla-Tárraga, M.A., Rodríguez, M.A., Hawkins, B.A., 2006. Broad-scale patterns of body size in squamate reptiles of Europe and North America. J. Biogeogr. 33, 781–793.
Olson, D.M., Dinerstein, E., Wikramanayake, E.D., Burgess, N.D., Powell, G.V.N., Underwood, E.C., D’Amico, JA, Itoua, I., Strand, H.E., Morrison, J.C., Loucks, C.J., Allnutt, T.F., Rikkets, H., Kura, Y., Lamoreux, J.F., Wettengel, W.W., Hedao, P., Kassem, K.R., 2001. Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on earth. BioScience 51, 933–938.
R Development Core Team, 2013. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
Rangel, T.F.L.V.B., Diniz-Filho,JAF., Bini, L.M., 2010. SAM: a comprehensive application for spatial analysis in macroecology. Ecography 33, 1–5.
Redford, K.H., Eisenberg, J.F., 1992. Mammals ofthe Neotropics. Volume 2, The Southern Cone, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 430.
Reynolds, J.F., Kemp, P.R., Ogle, K., Fernández, R.J., 2004. Modifying the “pulse-reserve” paradigm for deserts of North America: precipitation pulses, soil water, and plant responses. Oecologia 141, 194–210.
Rodríguez, MA, López-Sanudo, I.L., Hawkins, BA, 2006. The geographic distribution of mammal body size in Europe. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 15, 173–181.
Roig-Junent, S., Flores, G., Claver, S., Debandi, G., Marvaldi, A., 2001. Monte desert (Argentina): insect biodiversity and natural areas. J. Arid Environ. 47, 77–94.
Rohlf, J.F., 1999. Shape statistics: Procrustes superimpositions and tangent spaces. J. Classif. 16, 197–223.
Rohlf, J.F., 2008a. TPSUtil, Version 1.40. Ecology and Evolution. SUNY, Stony Brook.
Rohlf, J.F., 2008b. TPSDig2, Version 2.12. Ecology and Evolution. SUNY, Stony Brook.
Ruggiero, A., Kitzberger, T., 2004. Environmental correlates of mammal species richness in South America: effects of spatial structure, taxonomy and geographic range. Ecography 27, 401–416.
Schiaffini, M.I., Gabrielli, M., Prevosti, F.J., Cardoso, Y.P., Castillo, D., Bo, R., Casanave, E., Lizarralde, M., 2013. Taxonomic status of southern South American Conepatus (Carnivora: Mephitidae). Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 167, 327–344.
Sheets, H.D., 2002. IMP-Integrated Morphometrics Package. Department of Physics, Canisius College, Buffalo, NY.
Swihart, R.K., Slade, NA, Bergstrom, N.J., 1988. Relating body size to the rate of home range use in mammals. Ecology 69, 393–399.
ter Braak, C.J., Šmilauer, P., 2002. Canoco 4.5: Reference Manual and Canodraw for Windows, User’s Guide: Software from Canonical Community Ordination (version 4.5). Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, New York.
Travaini, A., Delibes, M., Ceballos, O., 1998. Summer foods of the Andean hog-nosed skunk (Conepatus chinga) in Patagonia. J. Zool. (Lond.) 246, 457–460.
Van Gelder, R.G., 1968. The genus Conepatus (Mammalia, Mustelidae): variation within a population. Am. Mus. Novit. 2322, 1–37.
VanValkenburgh, B., 1989. Carnivore dental adaptations and diet: a study of trophic diversity withinguilds. In: Gittleman,J.D. (Ed.), Carnivore Behavior, Ecology, and Evolution. Springer, USA, pp. 410–435.
Van Valkenburgh, B., 2007. Déjà vu: the evolution of feeding morphologies in the Carnivora. Integr. Comp. Biol. 47, 147–163.
Willmott, C.J., Matsuura, K., 2001. Terrestrial Water Budget Data Archive: Monthly Time Series (1959-1999). Center for Climate Research, University of Delaware, DE.
Wozencraft, W.C., 2005. Order Carnivora. In: Wilson, D.E., Reeder, D.M. (Ed.), Mammal Species of the World. A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference, Volume 1. , third ed. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, pp. 601–624.
Yom-Tov, Y., Geffen, E., 2006. Geographic variation in body size: the effect of ambient temperature and precipitation. Oecologia 148, 213–218.
Zapata, S.C., Travaini, A., Martínez-Peck, R., 2001. Seasonal feeding habits of the Patagonian hog-nosed skunk Conepatus humboldtii in southern Patagonia. Acta Theriol. 46, 97–102.
Zelditch, M.L., Swiderski, D.L., Sheets, H.D., Fink, W.L., 2004. Geometric Morphometrics for Biologist. A Primer. Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 443.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schiaffini, M.I. A test of the Resource’s and Bergmann’s rules in a widely distributed small carnivore from southern South America, Conepatus chinga (Molina, 1782) (Carnivora: Mephitidae). Mamm Biol 81, 73–81 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2014.11.007
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2014.11.007