Published in

Wiley, Global Ecology and Biogeography, 9(32), p. 1535-1548, 2023

DOI: 10.1111/geb.13717

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Niche breadth explains the range size of European‐centred butterflies, but dispersal ability does not

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

AbstractAimThe breadth of ecological niches and dispersal abilities have long been discussed as important determinants of species' range sizes. However, studies directly comparing the relative effects of both factors are rare, taxonomically biased and revealed inconsistent results.LocationEurope.Time PeriodCenozoic.Major TaxaButterflies, Lepidoptera.MethodsWe relate climate, diet and habitat niche breadth and two indicators of dispersal ability, wingspan and a dispersal tendency index, to the global range size of 369 European‐centred butterfly species. The relative effects of these five predictors and their variation across the butterfly phylogeny were assessed by means of phylogenetic generalized least squares models and phylogenetically weighted regressions respectively.ResultsClimate niche breadth was the most important single predictor, followed by habitat and diet niche breadth, while dispersal tendency and wingspan showed no relation to species' range size. All predictors together explained 59% of the variation in butterfly range size. However, the effects of each predictor varied considerably across families and genera.Main ConclusionsRange sizes of European‐centred butterflies are strongly correlated with ecological niche breadth but apparently independent of dispersal ability. The magnitude of range size–niche breadth relationships is not stationary across the phylogeny and is often negatively correlated across the different dimensions of the ecological niche. This variation limits the generalizability of range size–trait relationships across broad taxonomic groups.