Background The Mesoamerican dominion is a biogeographic area of great interest due to its complex topography and distinctive climatic history. This area has a large diversity of habitats, including tropical deciduous forests, which house a large number of endemic species. Here, we assess phylogeographic pattern, genetic and morphometric variation in the Cinnamon Hummingbird complex Amazilia rutila, which prefers habitats in this region. This resident species is distributed along the Pacific coast from Sinaloa—including the Tres Marías Islands in Mexico to Costa Rica, and from the coastal plain of the Yucatán Peninsula of Mexico south to Belize. Methods We obtained genetic data from 85 samples of A. rutila, using 4 different molecular markers (mtDNA: ND2, COI; nDNA: ODC, MUSK) on which we performed analyses of population structure (median-joining network, STRUCTURE, FST, AMOVA), Bayesian and Maximum Likelihood phylogenetic analyses, and divergence time estimates. In order to evaluate the historic suitability of environmental conditions, we constructed projection models using past scenarios (Pleistocene periods), and conducted Bayesian Skyline Plots (BSP) to visualize changes in population sizes over time. To analyze morphometric variation, we took measurements of 5 morphological traits from 210 study skins. We tested for differences between sexes, differences among geographic groups (defined based on genetic results), and used PCA to examine the variation in multivariate space. Results Using mtDNA, we recovered four main geographic groups: the Pacific coast, the Tres Marías Islands, the Chiapas region, and the Yucatán Peninsula together with Central America. These same groups were recovered by the phylogenetic results based on the multilocus dataset. Demography based on BSP results showed constant population size over time throughout the A. rutila complex and within each geographic group. Ecological niche model projections onto past scenarios revealed no drastic changes in suitable conditions, but revealed some possible refuges. Morphometric results showed minor sexual dimorphism in this species and statistically significant differences between geographic groups. The Tres Marías Islands population was the most differentiated, having larger body size than the remaining groups. Conclusions The best supported evolutionary hypothesis of diversification within this group corresponds to geographic isolation (limited gene flow), differences in current environmental conditions, and historical habitat fragmentation promoted by past events (Pleistocene refugia). Four well-defined clades comprise the A. rutila complex, and we assess the importance of a taxonomic reevaluation. Our data suggest that both of A. r. graysoni (Tres Marías Islands) and A. r. rutila (Pacific coast) should be considered full species. The other two strongly supported clades are: (a) the Chiapas group (southern Mexico), and (b) the populations from Yucatán Peninsula and Central America. These clades belong to the corallirostris taxon, which needs to be split and properly named.

Aim We review the works of three pre‐Darwinian authors—Alexander von Humboldt, Augustin de Candolle and Alphonse de Candolle. Contrary to what other historiographers have claimed, we think that their works were not merely descriptive, nor did they adhere strictly to the inductivist model. Furthermore, the patterns described by these authors are still being studied extensively in biogeography. Method We analyse the main concepts provided by these authors on the spatial patterns of biodiversity, and discuss how they served to construct the conceptual framework of contemporary biogeography. Results In the early 19th century, secular naturalists began postulating explanations supported by empirical evidence and based on physical causes. The studied authors were extremely cautious when proposing hypotheses, considering that any statement not based on empirical evidence was mere conjecture. When we analyse the way they developed explanations, it seems evident that they were rather closer to deductive thought than to the orthodox inductivist model. With the rise of Darwinian evolutionism, naturalists lost interest in the spatial patterns of life and began constructing dynamic models where dispersal of individual lineages from northern centres of origin was proposed to explain their current distribution. Paradoxically, even though the evolutionary paradigm soon proved its great explanatory power, it simultaneously promoted a large number of studies in which speculation prevailed. Main conclusions Even though the practices and methods of current biogeography have changed substantially, the studied patterns are still the same: (1) geographical gradients of richness and biotic replacement, (2) spatial gradients of functional groups, (3) geographical variation of the phenotype, (4) geographical patterns of expansion‐differentiation of single lineages and (5) biogeographical homology. The studied authors not only described rigorously biogeographical patterns, but also proposed explanations about them and even sometimes tested them based on empirical evidence, going beyond the prevalent inductivist canon.

No abstract

No abstract

We performed a critical review of the historiographical studies on biogeography. We began with the pioneering works of Augustin and Alphonse de Candolle. Then, we analyzed the historical accounts of biogeography developed by (1) Martin Fichman and his history on the extensionism-permanentism debate; (2) Gareth Nelson and his critique of the Neo-Darwinian historiography of biogeography; (3) Ernst Mayr, with his dispersalist viewpoint; (4) Alan Richardson, who wrote a microhistory on the biogeographic model constructed by Darwin; (5) Michael Paul Kinch and the ideas discussed in the 19th century about the geographical distribution of living beings; (6) Janet Browne, who highlighted the importance of the pre-Darwinian naturalists; (7) Peter Bowler, who focused mainly on the influence of paleontology on biogeography; (8) James Larson, who looked into the practices of the naturalists of Northern Europe in the late 18th century; and (9) Malte Ebach, who like Larson, was more interested in analysing the practices rather than the ideas of naturalists who studied the geographical distribution of organisms. Finally, these works are compared with each other. There has not been a dominant paradigm in the construction of historical narratives of biogeography; however, they provide a useful context for understanding problems of biogeography that continue to be debated to this day.