Interspecific abundance–occupancy relationships of British mammals and birds: is it possible to explain the residual variation?

Abstract

Aim The majority of studies concerning positive interspecific abundance–occupancy relationships have used broad‐scale and microcosm data to test the occurrence and correlates of the relationship to determine which of the proposed mechanisms give rise to it. It has been argued recently that studying the residual variation about abundance–occupancy relationships is a more logical analysis and may yield faster progress in identifying the relative roles of the mechanisms. However, to date this approach has been largely unsuccessful. Here we test if fundamental species traits such as the status (native and introduced), habitat and trophic group of mammal and bird species may explain any of the residual variation about their respective abundance–occupancy relationships. Location The study used British mammal and bird species. Methods We tested if species traits explained any of the variation about abundance–occupancy relationships using linear regression techniques both treating species as independent data points for analysis and controlling for phylogenetic association. Results None of the species traits could explain any residual variation about the positive interspecific abundance–occupancy relationships of British mammals and birds. This applied both when treating species as independent data points and after controlling for phylogenetic association. Conclusions Given the lack of explanatory power of the species traits here and in other studies using this approach it seems that the variation about positive interspecific abundance–occupancy relationships is not explicable in a simple fashion. Predicting the likely influence of traits that are independent of phylogeny is also problematic. Therefore, the general utility of this approach and its future role in understanding the mechanisms causing positive interspecific abundance–occupancy relationships is doubtful.

Extrapolating population size from the occupancy–abundance relationship and the scaling pattern of occupancy

“…This is in agreement with Warren et al (2003) and He and Reed (2006) from the NBD model set a lower bound for estimates (Conlisk et al 2007, He andGaston 2007). Interestingly, while the model greatly underestimated the total abundance of southern African birds, the abundanceoccupancy slope derived from the NBD model was not significantly different from that of the 183 British birds (Holt and Gaston 2003; Table 2). To increase the accuracy of the NBD model (and probably the other OAR models), He and Reed (2006) suggested that species distributions should be mapped at spatial scales that are relevant to the life history of the study species (i.e., maps with a resolution of 0.1 to 1 km).…”

“…* P , 0.05; ** P , 0.01; *** P , 0.001. The slope of each model is compared against the slope observed by Holt and Gaston (2003) for 183 species of British birds (slope ¼ 0.66), as well as the slope from the 130 southern African species with independent abundance estimates (slope ¼ 0.27). Table 1 for key to the model abbreviations; n is the number of species.…”

“…The resulting regression slopes were then compared to the slope observed for 183 British bird species (Holt and Gaston 2003), as well as the slope observed for the 130 southern African species for which independent abundances estimates were available (see Hockey et al 2005).…”

Estimating the relationship between abundance and distribution

“…Biased distribution indices have been used in studies in a wide number of ecological groups, including parasites (Poulin 1993), plants (Eycott et al 2006), invertebrates (Foggo et al 2003), fish (Blanchard et al 2005), birds (Zuckerberg et al 2009), and mammals (Holt and Gaston 2003), and it is likely that they have seriously affected the conclusions in a number of cases. For example, Winters and Wheeler (1985) and Saville and Bailey (1980) used the area fished by commercial fishermen as a measure of distribution, a measure that is likely to be equivalent to the area in which a catch rate higher than some minimum level can be obtained.…”

Relações entre distribuição e abundância de larvas de Trichoptera (Insecta), em córregos de Cerrado no entorno do Parque Estadual da Serra de Caldas (Caldas Novas, Estado de Goiás)

“…Biological Sciences Maringá, v. 27, no. 1, p. 51-55, Jan./March, 2005 metapopulacional e seleção de habitat (Holt et al, 2002). Nos períodos de maior estabilidade hidrológica (menor vazão), espera-se que os gradientes ambientais sejam os principais responsáveis pelos padrões de distribuição e de abundância nas comunidades de macroinvertebrados bentônicas em ambientes lóticos de pequeno porte (córregos e riachos), atuando, assim, de forma determinística.…”