The contribution of geographically common and rare species to the spatial distribution of biodiversity

Abstract

Motivation and aimMapping the spatial distribution of biodiversity is critical for understanding its fundamental drivers (e.g. speciation, environmental filtering) as well as for conservation assessment. An important dimension of this topic is how the distributions of subsets of species contribute to the overall distribution of biodiversity. Although studies have previously investigated the role of geographically common and rare species in determining these patterns, their respective contributions appear to vary between studies. Knowing which species contribute disproportionately to the spatial distribution of biodiversity enables the identification of key indicator species for biodiversity assessments across large areas and is important for prioritising areas for conservation actions. An extensive review of the literature was carried out to synthesise research on how geographic rarity contributes to spatial patterns of biodiversity. We identify potential explanations for the discrepancies in findings between studies and identify opportunities for further research.ResultsMany studies on the contribution of geographic commonness and rarity to the spatial distribution of biodiversity focus on species richness. A prevalent view is that common (widespread) species contribute disproportionately, although this is not ubiquitous across studies due to factors such as the geographic extent from which relative rarity is quantified. We identify research pathways that will further improve our knowledge of how geographically common and rare species shape the spatial distribution of biodiversity including the impact of spatial scale on species contributions and the incorporation of biodiversity components beyond taxonomic alpha diversity, that is functional and phylogenetic diversity.Main conclusionsFuture research should incorporate multiple biodiversity components and model scale dependency. This will further our knowledge on the underlying processes that shape the spatial variation of biodiversity across the planet and help inform biological surveys and conservation activities.

Diversity gradients of terrestrial vertebrates – substantial variations about a common theme

“…This is probably because bird species have the largest ranges (Li et al., 2016) and amphibians and reptiles the smallest, thus, since large‐ranged species influence more cells, endotherms more strongly influence tetrapod richness patterns (compare scales in Fig. 1; Jetz & Rahbek, 2002; Lennon et al., 2004; White et al., 2023). Consequently, the richness of birds, mammals, and tetrapods was similarly correlated with the environmental predictors, whereas amphibians and reptiles, often displayed different relationships (Figs 2–4; e.g.…”

Plant functional traits couple with range size and shape in European trees

“…Identifying putative drivers of species range attributes represents a persistent challenge in the fields of biogeography and macroecology (Brown et al, 1996;Gaston, 2003Gaston, , 2009Sheth et al, 2020;Willis, 1922). Numerous hypotheses have been put forth to explain the causes of range variation across species and, consequently, how these may affect the biodiversity of assemblages at different scales (Graves & Rahbek, 2005;White et al, 2023). These hypotheses include geographical constraints (Colwell & Hurtt, 1994;Hawkins & Diniz-Filho, 2006;Morueta-Holme et al, 2013), evolutionary history (Kirkpatrick & Barton, 1997;Willis, 1922), niche breadth (Cardillo et al, 2019;Slatyer et al, 2013) and biotic interactions (Paquette & Hargreaves, 2021).…”

Assessment of rarity and ecological preferences of the non-marine ostracods (Crustacea) in Çanakkale Province (Türkiye)

“…Biodiversity not only includes the number of species but also the phylogenetic and functional diversities. In this sense, the influence of a species on the spatial distribution of biodiversity can be shown in two ways, as follows: (i) the functional or phylogenetic distinctiveness of the species and (ii) the distribution of the species in geographic space (White et al 2023). Therefore, identifying the contributions of common and rare species to the spatial distribution of biodiversity allows us to estimate the groups of indicator species for local and national monitoring schemes.…”

“…Therefore, identifying the contributions of common and rare species to the spatial distribution of biodiversity allows us to estimate the groups of indicator species for local and national monitoring schemes. For example, common species with 100% occupancy add little or no variance to a spatial species richness pattern, whereas species with 50% occupancy will add a large amount of variance (White et al 2023). In addition, Lawler et al (2003) stated that "Indicators of biodiversity have been proposed as a potential tool for selecting areas for conservation when information about species distributions is scarce."…”