Locating Pleistocene Refugia: Comparing Phylogeographic and Ecological Niche Model Predictions
2007

Locating Pleistocene Refugia: Comparing Predictions from Phylogeography and Ecological Niche Models

Sample size: 20 publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Waltari Eric, Hijmans Robert J., Peterson A. Townsend, Nyári Árpád S., Perkins Susan L., Guralnick Robert P.

Primary Institution: American Museum of Natural History

Hypothesis

Do ecological niche models (ENM) and phylogeographic techniques lead to concordant reconstructions of Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) biogeography of species?

Conclusion

The study found that predictions from ecological niche models and phylogeographic studies were significantly spatially correlated for 14 out of 20 North American terrestrial vertebrate species.

Supporting Evidence

  • In 14 of the 20 species, the predictions from ENM and predictions based on phylogeographic studies were significantly spatially correlated.
  • The average overlap between ENM and phylogeographic predictions was 52%.
  • Two species showed no overlap between ENM- and phylogeographic-predicted refugia.

Takeaway

Scientists used two different methods to find where animals lived during the last ice age, and they found that both methods often agreed on the locations.

Methodology

The study compared ecological niche models (ENMs) with phylogeographic predictions for 20 North American terrestrial vertebrate species to assess spatial overlap and areal extent of predicted refugia.

Potential Biases

Potential biases include over-prediction of suitable habitats in ENMs and subjective interpretations in phylogeographic studies.

Limitations

The study's predictions may be affected by biases in both ENM and phylogeographic methods, including the resolution of climate data and the subjective nature of phylogeographic reconstructions.

Participant Demographics

The study focused on 20 North American terrestrial vertebrate species, including mammals, amphibians, reptiles, and birds.

Statistical Information

P-Value

<0.001

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1371/journal.pone.0000563

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication