Aim: The island rule has been widely applied to a range of taxonomic groups, with some studies reporting supporting evidence but others questioning this hypothesis.To bring more clarity to this debate, we conducted a comparative analysis of the available literature, focussing on potential biases.
Location: Worldwide.Methods: We performed a systematic review to identify studies testing the island rule and translated these studies' outcomes, so that they follow a consistent approach.The studies were assessed for differences in their analysis of the island rule. We created an authorship network showing who published studies with whom on the topic and weighted the data based on co-authorship and number of publications.Results: We identified 143 relevant studies, finding a significantly lower frequency of supporting studies according to our consistent approach (50%) than the authors' own statements (59%). Two core-author groups could be identified with a strong publication record on the island rule. The first group has predominately published studies supporting the rule, whereas the other group has mainly published studies questioning it. According to a subsequent analysis excluding studies with a high risk of HARKing (hypothesizing after the results are known), the frequency of studies supporting the rule further dropped to 42%.Main conclusions: Empirical support for the island rule is low, especially for nonmammalian taxa and when using a consistent evaluation approach. Differences among studies in supporting versus questioning this hypothesis seem to be partly due to author-related biases. Methods to address potential biases in studying ecological hypotheses are urgently needed. We offer such a method here.
K E Y W O R D Sauthor biases, author groups, hierarchy of hypotheses, island biogeography, island dwarfism, island gigantism, island rule
| INTRODUCTIONThe observation that species on islands are smaller or larger than their mainland counterparts has led to the formulation of the island rule which describes "the tendency for a graded series of changes in the size of island vertebrate species in relation to mainland congeners, such that small-bodied species tend to get larger, and vice versa"-definition from a standard textbook on Island Biogeography (Whittaker & Fern andez-Palacios, 2007, p. 346). The island rule was first formulated by Leigh van Valen (1973) who stated that "the regular evolution of mammalian body size on islands is an extraordinary phenomenon which seems to have fewer exceptions than any other ecotypic rule in animals" (p. 35). These findings were based on a study by Foster (1964), who had described the tendency of several mammalian orders to be either larger (Rodentia) or smaller (Carnivora, Artiodactyla, Lagomorpha) when isolated on marine islandsThe dataset underlying this analysis will be included in the expanded online edition. compared to related mainland populations. The island rule was fundamentally reshaped by Lomolino (1985) (see also Heaney, 1978), who had reviewed a simil...