Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T06:10:17.566Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does the population density of primate species decline from centre to edge of their geographic ranges?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2009

H. L. Fuller ,
A. H. Harcourt  and
S. A. Parks
H. L. Fuller
Affiliation:
Graduate Group in Ecology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA
A. H. Harcourt*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of California, One Shields Ave., Davis, CA 95616, USA
S. A. Parks
Affiliation:
USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Missoula, MT 59808, USA
*
1Corresponding author. Email: ahharcourt@ucdavis.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

It has long been suggested that species might exhibit their highest densities at the centre of their geographic range and decline in density towards their range limits. If true, this pattern would have important implications for ecological theory and for conservation management. However, empirical support for this pattern remains equivocal. Furthermore, most research on this topic has emphasized temperate taxa, as is true of much of ecology. Therefore, we here test for a decline in population density from centre to edge of the geographic range of a tropical taxon, primates. In the literature we found data on 30 species and 27 genera from a total of 115 studies with duration of at least 3 mo. Mixed-effects linear models and Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank tests indicated no centre–edge gradient in primate densities. However, densities were significantly lower in more disturbed sites, independent of position in the geographic range.

Keywords

biogeographycentre–edge gradientdisturbanceprimatesspatial analysis
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 25 , Issue 4 , July 2009 , pp. 387 - 392
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

LITERATURE CITED

BROWN, J. H. 1984. On the relationship between abundance and distribution of species. American Naturalist 124:255–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BROWN, J. H., MEHLMAN, D. W. & STEVENS, G. C. 1995. Spatial variation in abundance. Ecology 76:2028–2043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CAMPBELL, C. J., FUENTES, A., MACKINNON, K. C., PANGER, M. & BEARDER, S. K. (eds.) 2007. Primates in perspective. Oxford University Press, New York. 720 pp.Google Scholar
CARDILLO, M. 2002. The life-history basis of latitudinal diversity gradients: how do species traits vary from the poles to the equator? Journal of Animal Ecology 71:79–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
COPPETO, S. A. & HARCOURT, A. H. 2005. Is a biology of rarity in primates yet possible? Biodiversity and Conservation 14:1017–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FILLOY, J. & BELLOCQ, M. I. 2006. Spatial variations in the abundance of Sporophila seedeaters in the southern Neotropics: contrasting the effects of agricultural development and geographical position. Biodiversity and Conservation 15:3329–3340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FIMBEL, C. 1994. Ecological correlates of species success in modified habitats may be disturbance- and site-specific: the primates of Tiwai Island. Conservation Biology 8:106–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FLEAGLE, J. G., JANSON, C. H. & REED, K. E. (eds.) 1999. Primate communities. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 329 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GASTON, K. J. & BLACKBURN, T. M. 1999. A critique for macroecology. Oikos 84:353–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GASTON, K. J., BLACKBURN, T. M. & LAWTON, J. H. 1997. Interspecific abundance-range size relationships: an appraisal of mechanisms. Journal of Animal Ecology 66:579–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GHALAMBOR, C. K. & MARTIN, T. E. 2001. Fecundity-survival trade-offs and parental risk-taking in birds. Science 292:494–497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
GROVES, C. P. 1993. Order Primates. Pp. 243–277 in Wilson, D. E. & Reeder, D. M. (eds.). Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington.Google Scholar
GROVES, C. P. 2001. Primate taxonomy. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. 350 pp.Google Scholar
GUO, Q., TAPER, M., SCHOENBERGER, M. & BRANDLE, J. 2005. Spatial-temporal population dynamics across species range: from centre to margin. Oikos 108:47–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HARCOURT, A. H. 1998. Ecological indicators of risk for primates, as judged by susceptibility to logging. Pp. 56–79 in Caro, T. M. (ed.). Behavioral ecology and conservation biology. Oxford University Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HARCOURT, A. H. 2000. Coincidence and mismatch in hotspots of primate biodiversity: a worldwide survey. Biological Conservation 93:163–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HARCOURT, A. H. 2006. Rarity in the tropics: biogeography and macroecology of the primates. Journal of Biogeography 33:2077–2087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HARCOURT, A. H., COPPETO, S. A. & PARKS, S. A. 2002. Rarity, specialization and extinction in primates. Journal of Biogeography 29:445–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HARCOURT, A. H., COPPETO, S. A. & PARKS, S. A. 2005. The distribution-abundance (i.e. density) relationship: its form and causes in a tropical mammal order, Primates. Journal of Biogeography 32:565–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HARVEY, P. H. & PAGEL, M. D. 1991. The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford. 248 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HENGEVELD, R. & HAECK, J. 1982. The distribution of abundance. I. Measurements. Journal of Biogeography 9:303–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ISAAC, N. J. B. & PURVIS, A. 2004. The ‘species problem’ and testing macroevolutionary hypotheses. Diversity and Distributions 10:275–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
JANZEN, D. H. 1986. The future of tropical biology. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 17:305–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
JOHNS, A. D. & SKORUPA, J. P. 1987. Responses of rain-forest primates to habitat disturbance: a review. International Journal of Primatology 8:157–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MARTINS, E. P. 1996. Conducting phylogenetic comparative studies when the phylogeny is not known. Evolution 50:12–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MAURER, B. A. & BROWN, J. H. 1989. Distributional consequences of spatial variation in local demographic processes. Annales Zoologici Fennici 26:121–131.Google Scholar
PERES, C. A. 1993. Structure and spatial organization of an Amazonian terra firme forest primate community. Journal of Tropical Ecology 9:259–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PERES, C. A. 1997. Primate community structure at twenty western Amazonian flooded and unflooded forests. Journal of Tropical Ecology 13:381–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PLUMPTRE, A. J. & REYNOLDS, V. 1994. The effect of selective logging on the primate populations in the Budongo Forest Reserve, Uganda. Journal of Applied Ecology 31:631–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PURVIS, A. & WEBSTER, A. J. 1999. Phylogenetically independent comparisons and primate phylogeny. Pp. 44–70 in Lee, P. C. (ed.). Comparative primate socioecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAGARIN, R. D. 2006. Moving beyond assumptions to understand abundance distributions across the ranges of species. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 21:524–530.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
SAGARIN, R. D. & GAINES, S. D. 2002. The ‘abundant centre’ distribution: to what extent is it a biogeographical rule? Ecology Letters 5:137–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAGARIN, R. D. & SOMERO, G. N. 2006. Complex patterns of expression of heat-shock protein 70 across the southern biogeographical ranges of the intertidal mussel Mytilus californianus and snail Nucella ostrina. Journal of Biogeography 33:622–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SIEGEL, S. 1956. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. McGraw-Hill Kogakusha, Tokyo. 312 pp.Google Scholar
SKORUPA, J. P. 1986. Responses of rainforest primates to selective logging in Kibale Forest, Uganda: a summary report. Pp. 57–70 in Benirschke, K. (ed.). Primates: the road to self-sustaining populations. Springer-Verlag, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
STEVENS, R. D., WILLIG, M. R. & GAMARRA DE FOX, I. 2004. Comparative community ecology of bats from eastern Paraguay: taxonomic, ecological, and biogeographic perspectives. Journal of Mammalogy 85:698–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TURNER, J. R. G. & HAWKINS, B. A. 2004. The global diversity gradient. Pp. 171–190 in Lomolino, M. V. & Heaney, L. R. (eds.). Frontiers of biogeography: new directions in the geography of nature. Sinauer Associates Inc., Sunderland.Google Scholar
VANDERMEER, J., PREFECTO, I. & PHILPOTT, S. M. 2008. Clusters of ant colonies and robust criticality in a tropical agroecosystem. Nature 451:457–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WILLIAMS, P. H. 1988. Habitat use by bumble bees (Bombus spp.). Ecological Entomology 13:223–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Fuller supplementary material 1

Fuller supplementary material 1

Download Fuller supplementary material 1(File)
File 207.9 KB
Supplementary material: File

Fuller supplementary material 2

Fuller supplementary material 2

Download Fuller supplementary material 2(File)
File 269.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Fuller supplementary material 3

Fuller supplementary material 3

Download Fuller supplementary material 3(File)
File 33.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Fuller supplementary material 4

Fuller supplementary material 4

Download Fuller supplementary material 4(File)
File 229.9 KB