Skip to main content
Log in

Geographic variation in body size: the effects of ambient temperature and precipitation

  • Ecophysiology
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Latitudinal trends in body size have been explained as a response to temperature- or water-related factors, which are predictors of primary production. We used the first principal component calculated from three body parameters (weight, body length and the greatest length of the skull) of a sample of mammals from Israel and Sinai to determine those species that vary in size geographically, and whether such variation is related to annual rainfall, average minimum January temperature and average maximum August temperature. We used a conservative approach to discern the effects of precipitation and temperature by applying sequential regression. Variable priorities were assigned according to their bivariate correlation with body size, except for rainfall and its interactions that entered into the model last. Eleven species (Acomys cahirinus, Apodemus mystacinus, Canis lupus, Crocidura suaveolens, Gerbillus dasyurus, Hyaena hyaena, Lepus capensis, Meles meles, Meriones tristrami, Rousettus aegyptius and Vulpes vulpes) of the 17 species examined varied in size geographically. In five of them, rainfall was positively related to body size, while in one species it was negatively related to it. Contrary to the prediction of Bergmann’s rule, mean minimum January temperature was positively related to body size in five species and negatively related to body size in two species (C. suaveolens and G. dasyurus). As predicted by Bergmann’s rule, maximum June temperature was negatively related to body size in three species, and positively so in one (L. capensis). Primary production, particularly in desert and semi-desert areas, is determined mainly by precipitation. The above results indicate that, in our sample, primary production has an important effect on body size of several species of mammals. This is evident from the considerable proportion of the variability in body size explained by rain. However, low ambient temperatures may slow down and even inhibit photosynthesis. Hence, the observed positive relationships between average minimum January temperature and body size in four of the six species influenced by rain further support this conclusion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ashton KG (2002a) Patterns of within species body size variation of birds: strong evidence for Bergmann’s rule. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 11:505–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashton KG (2002b) Do amphibians follow Bergmann’s rule? Can J Zool 80:708–716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashton KG (2004) Sensitivity of intraspecific latitudinal clines for tetrapods to sampling, latitude and body size. Integ Comp Biol 44:403–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashton KG, Tracy MC, de Queiroz A (2000) Is Bergmann’s rule valid for mammals? Am Nat 156:390–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn TM, Gaston KJ, Loder N (1999) Geographic gradients in body size: a clarification of Bergmann’s rule. Divers Dist 5:165–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnett CD (1983) Geographic and climate correlates on morphological variation in Eptesicus fuscus. J Mammal 64:437–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calder WA (1984) Size, function and life history. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Chetboun R, Tchernov E (1983) Temporal and spatial morphological variation in Meriones tristrami (Rodentia: Gerbillidae) from Israel. J Biogeogr 30:331–351

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbet GB (1978) The mammals of the Palearctic region: a taxonomic review. British Museum, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Dayan T, Tchernov E, Yom-Tov Y, Simberloff D (1989) Ecological character displacement in Saharo-Arabian Vulpes: outfoxing Bergmann’s rule. Oikos 55:263–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freckelton RP, Harvey PH, Pagel M (2003) Bergmann rule and body size in mammals. Am Nat 161:821–825

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Geist V (1987) Bergmann’s rule is invalid. Can J Zool 65:1035–1038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham MH (2003) Confronting multicollinearity in ecological multiple regression. Ecology 84:2809–2815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henry CJK, Ulijaszek SJ (eds) (1996) Long-term consequences of early environment. Cambridge University press, Cambridge

  • Jaffe S (1988) Climate of Israel. In: Yom-Tov Y, Tchernov E (eds) The zoogeography of Israel. Junk, Dordrecht, pp 79–92

    Google Scholar 

  • James FC (1970) Geographic size variation in birds and its relationship with climate. Ecology 51:365–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolb HH (1978) Variation in size of foxes in Scotland. Biol J Linn Soc 10:291–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindstrom J (1999) Early development and fitness in birds and mammals. Trend Ecol Evol 14:343–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr E (1963) Animal species and evolution. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • McNab BK (1971) On the ecological significance of Bergmann’s rule. Ecology 52:845–854

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meiri S, Dayan T (2003) On the validity of Bergmann’s rule. J Biogeogr 30:331–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendelssohn H (1982) Wolves in Israel. In: Harrington FH, Paquet PC (eds) Wolves of the world. Noyes, New Jersey, pp 173–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendelssohn H, Yom-Tov Y (1999) Mammalia of Israel. Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Jerusalem

    Google Scholar 

  • Nevo E (1989) Natural selection of body size differentiation in Spiny mice, Acomys. Z Saugertierkund 54:81–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Nevo E, Beiles A, Heth G, Simson S (1986) Adaptive differentiation of body size in speciating mole rats. Oecologia 69:327–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig ML (1968) The strategy of body size in mammalian carnivores. Am Midl Nat 80:299–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt-Nielsen K (1984) Scaling: why is animal size so important? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholander PF (1955) Evolution of climatic adaptation in homoeotherms. Evolution 9:15–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigginton JD, Dobson FS (1999) Environmental influences on geographic variation in body size of western bobcats. Can J Zool 77:802–813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson FD (1975) Sociobiology: the new synthesis. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Yom-Tov Y (1967) On the taxonomic status of the hares (Genus Lepus) in Israel. Mammalia 31:246–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yom-Tov Y (1988) The zoogeography of birds and mammals in Israel. In: Yom-Tov Y, Tchernov E (eds) The zoogeography of Israel. Junk, Dordrecht, pp 389–410

    Google Scholar 

  • Yom-Tov Y, Nix H (1986) Climatological correlates for body size of five species of Australian mammals. Biol J Linn Soc 29:245-262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yom-Tov Y, Tchernov E (1988) The zoogeography of Israel. Junk, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank Arieh Landsman for his help in measuring the skulls, Tsila Shariv for her help at the Tel Aviv University Museum, Ronen Kadmon for providing climate data Naomi Paz for editing the article, Shai Meiri for discussion and comments on the manuscript, and Jörg Ganzhorn and two anonymous referees for very useful comments. This work was partly financed by the Israel Cohen Chair for Environmental Zoology to Y.-Y.T.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yoram Yom-Tov.

Additional information

Communicated by Jörg Ganzhorn

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yom-Tov, Y., Geffen, E. Geographic variation in body size: the effects of ambient temperature and precipitation. Oecologia 148, 213–218 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-006-0364-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-006-0364-9

Keywords

Navigation