Dietary characterization of terrestrial mammals

Pineda‐Munoz, Silvia; Alroy, John

doi:10.1098/rspb.2014.1173

Cited by 85 publications

(122 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

115

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Diniz‐Filho et al ., ; Fritz et al ., ; Jones et al ., ; Cardillo, ; Morales‐Castilla et al ., ). Despite efforts to develop characterization schemes for their dietary preferences (Pineda‐Munoz & Alroy, ), it is only very recently that comprehensive species‐level datasets on mammalian diets have become available for conducting global‐scale analyses (Kissling et al ., ; Wilman et al ., ). As noted by Kissling et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contrasting evidence of phylogenetic trophic niche conservatism in mammals worldwide

Olalla‐Tárraga

González‐Suárez

Bernardo‐Madrid

et al. 2016

Journal of Biogeography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim Phylogenetic niche conservatism (PNC), a pattern of closely related species retaining ancestral niche‐related traits over evolutionary time, is well documented for abiotic (Grinellian) dimensions of the ecological niche. However, it remains unclear whether biotic niche (Eltonian) axes are also phylogenetically conserved, even though knowledge of biotic niches is essential to an understanding of the spatiotemporal dynamics of ecological communities. We conduct the first analysis of biotic PNC by evaluating dietary specialization in a vertebrate class. Location Global. Methods We analysed two global compilations of diets of living mammals and a more detailed database for large carnivores together with a species‐level phylogeny to evaluate trophic PNC. We searched for evidence of PNC by estimating the phylogenetic signal in distinct descriptors of dietary niche. Results Trophic niches were generally similar among related species but not strongly conserved under a niche‐drift macroevolutionary model (Brownian motion). The degree of similarity in trophic niche varied among different taxonomic groups and was, importantly, even within the same group, contingent on the metric of dietary preferences used and the quality of information on the database. Main conclusions Overall, our results showed limited support for PNC in the trophic niche of mammals. However, different data sources and metrics of dietary preferences sometimes offered different conclusions, highlighting the importance of gathering high‐quality quantitative data and considering multiple metrics to describe dietary niche breadth and to assess PNC. The fully quantitative database for large carnivores provided some interesting evidence of PNC that could not be detected with semi‐quantitative or presence/absence descriptors. Subsequent assessments of phylogenetic imprints on dietary specialization would benefit from considering different metrics and using well‐resolved phylogenies jointly with detailed quantitative diet information. While Eltonian trophic niches did not show the same high levels of evolutionary conservatism often displayed by Grinnellian niches, both niche components should be considered to understand range limits of species and clades at biogeographic scales.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contrasting evidence of phylogenetic trophic niche conservatism in mammals worldwide

Olalla‐Tárraga

González‐Suárez

Bernardo‐Madrid

et al. 2016

Journal of Biogeography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, using a single, continuous dietary metric eases the computational complexity of regression and model‐fitting analyses. Further, it allows strict definitions of dietary categories that are based on specific proportions of consumed foods, and this is beneficial because a majority of mammalian species consume some amount of both plant and animal matter (Pineda‐Munoz and Alroy ), meaning that classification of species into an omnivorous category can be especially subjective. For phylogenetic one‐way analyses of variance (pANOVAs) in which dietary classification in necessary, I define faunivores (or carnivores/animalivores) as species with diets consisting of 0–15% plant material ( n = 58), omnivores as 15–85% plant material ( n = 56), and herbivores as 85–100% plant material ( n = 97).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeding ecology has a stronger evolutionary influence on functional morphology than on body mass in mammals

Grossnickle

2020

Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological specialization is a central driver of adaptive evolution. However, selective pressures may uniquely affect different ecomorphological traits (e.g., size and shape), complicating efforts to investigate the role of ecology in generating phenotypic diversity. Comparative studies can help remedy this issue by identifying specific relationships between ecologies and morphologies, thus elucidating functionally relevant traits. Jaw shape is a dietary correlate that offers considerable insight on mammalian evolution, but few studies have examined the influence of diet on jaw morphology across mammals. To this end, I apply phylogenetic comparative methods to mandibular measurements and dietary data for a diverse sample of mammals. Especially powerful predictors of diet are metrics that capture either the size of the angular process, which increases with greater herbivory, or the length of the posterior portion of the jaw, which decreases with greater herbivory. The size of the angular process likely reflects sizes of attached muscles that produce jaw movements needed to grind plant material. Further, I examine the impact of feeding ecology on body mass, an oft‐used ecological surrogate in macroevolutionary studies. Although body mass commonly increases with evolutionary shifts to herbivory, it is outperformed by functional jaw morphology as a predictor of diet. Body mass is influenced by numerous factors beyond diet, and it may be evolutionarily labile relative to functional morphologies. This suggests that ecological diversification events may initially facilitate body mass diversification at smaller taxonomic and temporal scales, but sustained selective pressures will subsequently drive greater trait partitioning in functional morphologies.

show abstract

“…Arthropods are an important food component of mammalian omnivores and the sole diet of shrews (84% of sampled mammal species and 83% of the sampled individuals consume arthropods; e.g., Armstrong et al., ; Pineda‐Munoz & Alroy, and references therein). We used the traditional method for assessing shrew and insectivorous mammal diets: arthropod pitfall traps (e.g., Denneman, ; Pernetta, ; Pineda‐Munoz & Alroy, ; Prevedello et al., ). The arthropod sampling was conducted using two pitfall traps in each plot at the 3 m east and west points.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Small mammal species richness is directly linked to regional productivity, but decoupled from food resources, abundance, or habitat complexity

McCain

King

Szewczyk

et al. 2018

Journal of Biogeography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim Species richness is often strongly correlated with climate. The most commonly invoked mechanism for this climate‐richness relationship is the more‐individuals‐hypothesis (MIH), which predicts a cascading positive influence of climate on plant productivity, food resources, total number of individuals, and species richness. We test for a climate‐richness relationship and an underlying MIH mechanism, as well as testing competing hypotheses including positive effects of habitat diversity and heterogeneity, and the species‐area effect. Location Colorado Rocky Mountains, USA: two elevational gradients in the Front Range and San Juan Mountains. Methods We conducted standardized small mammal surveys at 32 sites to assess diversity and population sizes. We estimated vegetative and arthropod food resources as well as various aspects of habitat structure by sampling 20 vegetation plots and 40 pitfall traps per site. Temperature, precipitation and net primary productivity (NPP) were assessed along each gradient. Regressions and structural equation modelling were used to test competing diversity hypotheses and mechanistic links predicted by the MIH. Results We detected 3,922 individuals of 37 small mammal species. Mammal species richness peaked at intermediate elevations, as did productivity, whereas temperature decreased and precipitation increased with elevation. We detected strong support for a productivity‐richness relationship, but no support for the MIH mechanism. Food and mammal population sizes were unrelated to NPP or mammal species richness. Furthermore, mammal richness was unrelated to habitat diversity, habitat heterogeneity, or elevational area. Main conclusions Sites with high productivity contain high mammal species richness, but a mechanism other than a contemporary MIH underlies the productivity–diversity relationship. Possibly a mechanism based on evolutionary climatic affiliations. Protection of productive localities and mid‐elevations are the most critical for preserving small mammal richness, but may be decoupled from trends in population sizes, food resources, or habitat structure.

show abstract

Dietary characterization of terrestrial mammals

Cited by 85 publications

References 29 publications

Contrasting evidence of phylogenetic trophic niche conservatism in mammals worldwide

Contrasting evidence of phylogenetic trophic niche conservatism in mammals worldwide

Feeding ecology has a stronger evolutionary influence on functional morphology than on body mass in mammals

Small mammal species richness is directly linked to regional productivity, but decoupled from food resources, abundance, or habitat complexity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About