Tropical moist forests and savannas are iconic biomes. There is, however, a third principal biome in the lowland tropics that is less well known: tropical dry forest. Discussions on responses of vegetation in the tropics to climate and land-use change often focus on shifts between forests and savannas, but ignore dry forests. Tropical dry forests are distinct from moist forests in their seasonal drought stress and consequent deciduousness and differ from savannas in rarely experiencing fire. These factors lead tropical dry forests to have unique ecosystem function. Here, we discuss the underlying environmental drivers of transitions among tropical dry forests, moist forests and savannas, and demonstrate how incorporating tropical dry forests into our understanding of tropical biome transitions is critical to understanding the future of tropical vegetation under global environmental change.

35Aim: We aimed to assess the contribution of marginal habitats to the tree species 36 richness of the Mata Atlântica (Atlantic Forest) biodiversity hotspot. In addition, we 37 aimed to determine which environmental factors drive the occurrence and 38 distribution of these marginal habitats. Brazil where it largely occurs, stretches for over 3,500km across equatorial, tropical 73 and subtropical latitudes, and is renowned worldwide for being one of the 35 74 biodiversity hotspots for conservation prioritisation (Myers et al., 2000). Its 75 importance is also demonstrated by its designation as one of the five primary 76 vegetation 'Domains' of Brazil (IBGE, 1993; Ab'Sáber, 2003), the others being the The prevailing land cover of these bordering Domains are semi-arid thorn woodlands distribution of rain forest species in the Atlantic Domain, which at its harshest 88 extremes give rise to distinct habitats (one for each factor), referred to as marginal 89 habitats. Therefore, the rain forest is placed by Scarano (2009) (Galindo-Leal et al., 2003; Tabarelli et al., 2004; 2005; Joly et al., 2014 203The data were originally compiled from an extensive survey of published and 217It also excludes checklists with low species richness (< 20 species), because this is 218 often due to low sampling/collecting efforts, which results in poor descriptive power. 219This study used a subset of tree inventories from the NTT database, The distribution of the sites in the ordination space yielded by NMDS (Fig. 3a waterlogged soils at positive scores (tropical riverine forests). 377The floristic composition of marginal habitats is not simply a nested subset of 378 the more species rich rain forest. The turnover component accounts for most of the 379 floristic dissimilarity of each marginal habitat in relation to rain forests (Fig. 4). 380Nestedness is higher than the turnover component in very few cases (i.e., few The forward selection procedure retained 13 environmental variables in the 390 model to explain the variation in tree species composition (Table 1). In partitioning 391 the variation explained by the retained environmental and spatial predictors, we 392 found that the environmental fraction explained 27% of the variation, 5% of which 393 was independent of spatial autocorrelation (P < 0.01). The environmental predictors 394could not account for a spatially structured variation of 12% (P < 0.01), and 61% of 395 the variation remained unexplained (see discussion for more details). 396The harshest extremes of the retained environmental variables (Table 1) rock outcrops (including campos rupestres) from all others vegetation types (Fig. 3a). 404Within the rock outcrop habitat, the frequency of frost was associated with the forests and tropical riverine forests (Figs. 2b and 3b). At the harshest extreme of the 414 drought-stress gradient (Fig. 3b) Fig. S1). Because the overall floristic dissimilarity between cloud forests and rain 430forests was relatively low (Fig. 3), we assessed the rates of endemism con...

Aim To define and map the main biomes of lowland tropical South America (LTSA) using data from tree species inventories and to test the ability of climatic and edaphic variables to distinguish amongst them. Location Lowland Tropical South America (LTSA), including Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay. Time period Present. Major taxa studied Trees. Methods We compiled a database of 4,103 geo‐referenced tree species inventories distributed across LTSA. We used a priori vegetation classifications and cluster analyses of floristic composition to assign sites to biomes. We mapped these biomes geographically and assessed climatic overlaps amongst them. We implemented classification tree approaches to quantify how well climatic and edaphic data can assign inventories to biomes. Results Our analyses distinguish savanna and seasonally dry tropical forest (SDTF) as distinct biomes, with the Chaco woodlands potentially representing a third dry biome in LTSA. Amongst the wet forests, we find that the Amazon and Atlantic Forests might represent different biomes, because they are distinct in both climate and species composition. Our results show substantial environmental overlap amongst biomes, with error rates for classifying sites into biomes of 19–21 and 16–18% using only climatic data and with the inclusion of edaphic data, respectively. Main conclusions Tree species composition can be used to determine biome identity at continental scales. We find high biome heterogeneity at small spatial scales, probably attributable to variation in edaphic conditions and disturbance history. This points to the challenges of using climatic and/or interpolation‐based edaphic data or coarse‐resolution, remotely sensed imagery to map tropical biomes. From this perspective, we suggest that using floristic information in biome delimitation will allow for greater synergy between conservation efforts centred on species diversity and management efforts centred on ecosystem function.

of floristic identity in campos rupestres − a hyperdiverse mosaic of rocky montane savannas in South America.Flora http://dx.

Aim We used a phylogenetic approach to group assemblages of woody plant into major vegetation units in the Atlantic Forest, thus for the first time incorporating information on species evolutionary relationships into a bioregionalization of this critical hotspot. A phylogenetic regionalization will provide a spatially explicit framework for answering many basic and applied questions in biogeography, ecology and conservation. Location Atlantic Forest. Taxon Angiosperms Methods Our data set comprises 614 genera and 116 families, spread over 1,755 assemblages. To place assemblages in a multivariate evolutionary composition space, we used a phylogenetically informed ordination analysis, and to determine what the main phylogenetic groups of assemblages were, we used K‐means clustering based on phylogenetic dissimilarity of assemblages. To quantify how well environmental variables distinguish the phylogenetic groups found, we implemented classification tree approaches. Then, to explore the evolutionary turnover between the phylogenetic groups, we calculated phylogenetic beta diversity. Finally, we determined the lineages that are most strongly associated with individual phylogenetic groups using an indicator analysis for lineages. Results Our analyses suggest that there are seven principal groups, in terms of evolutionary lineage composition, in the Atlantic Forest. The greatest turnover of phylogenetic lineage composition separates tropical evergreen rain forest and semideciduous assemblages from subtropical and highland assemblages. The mixed subtropical forest showed the lowest phylogenetic compositional similarity values with other groups. Tropical rain forest had the highest number of significant indicator lineages, and the highest values of the indicator statistic for lineages. Main conclusions We found that the most pronounced evolutionary division separates southern and highland tree assemblages from those occurring under more tropical climates and at lower elevations. Our phylogenetic analyses point to an environmentally driven compositional division, likely based on the regular occurrence of freezing versus non‐freezing temperatures. Precipitation and edaphic regimes that assemblages experience had less definitive effects on their evolutionary lineage composition.