Rapoport's rule: A comparative analysis between south and north American columnar cacti

American Naturalist

Volumn 150, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 131-142

  Mourelle, Cristina ^a   Ezcurra, Exequiel ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO   (Mexico)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0012910977     PISSN: 00030147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/286060     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Aldrich, J. W. 1963. Geographic orientation of American Tetraonidae. Journal of Wildlife Management 27:528-545.
2. Anderson, S., and K. F. Koopman. 1981. Does interspecific competition limit the sizes of ranges of species? Novitates American Museum 2716:1-10.
3. Cabrera, A. L., and A. Willink. 1980. Biogeografía de América Latina. Serie de biología, monografía no. 13. Organization of American States, Washington, D.C.
4. Colwell, R. K., and G. C. Hurtt. 1994. Nonbiological gradients in species richness and a spurious Rapoport effect. American Naturalist 144:570-595.
5. Crawley, M. 1993. GLIM for ecologists. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford.
6. France, R. 1992. The North American latitudinal gradient in species richness and geographical range of freshwater crayfish and amphipods. American Naturalist 139:342-354.
7. Harvey, P. H., and M. Pagel. 1991. The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
8. Loftas, T., ed. 1972. Climate-vegetation maps of Central America. Page 151 in The atlas of the earth. Beazley, Mitchell, London.
9. Markgraf, V. 1989. Paleoclimates in Central and South America since 18,000 BP based on pollen and lake-level records. Quaternary Science Reviews 8:1-24.
10. Mourelle, C., and E. Ezcurra. 1996. Species richness patterns of Argentine cacti: a test of some biogeographic hypotheses. Journal of Vegetation Science 7:667-680.
11. Pagel, M. D., R. M. May, and A. R. Collie 1991. Ecological aspects of the geographical distribution and diversity of mammalian species. American Naturalist 137:791-815.
12. Pielou, E. C. 1979. Biogeography. Wiley, New York.
13. Rapoport, E. H. 1975. Areografía: estrategias geográficas de las especies. Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico.
14. _. 1982. Areography: geographical strategies of species. Trans. B. Drausal. Pergamon, New York.
15. Rohde, K. 1992. Latitudinal gradients in species diversity: the search for the primary cause. Oikos 65: 514-527.
16. _. 1996. Rapoport's rule is a local phenomenon and cannot explain latitudinal gradients in species diversity. Biodiversity Letters 3:10-13.
17. Rohde, K., and M. Heap. 1996. Latitudinal ranges of teleost fish in the Atlantic and Indo-Pacific Oceans. American Naturalist 147:659-665.
18. Rohde, K., M. Heap, and D. Heap. 1993. Rapoport's rule does not apply to marine teleosts and cannot explain latitudinal gradients in species richness. American Naturalist 142:1-16.
19. Rosenzweig, M. L. 1975. On continental steady states of species diversity. Pages 121-140 in M. L. Cody and J. M. Diamond, eds. Ecology and evolution of communities. Belknap, Cambridge, Mass.
20. Roy, K., D. Jablonski, and J. W. Valentine. 1994. Eastern Pacific molluscan provinces and latitudinal diversity gradient: no evidence for "Rapoport's rule." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 91:8871-8874.
21. Ruggiero, A. 1994. Latitudinal correlates of the sizes of mammalian geographical ranges in South America. Journal of Biogeography 21:545-559.
22. Rzedowski, J. 1990. Vegetación potencial. Map no. IV.8.2 in Atlas nacional de México. Instituto de Geografía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
23. Smith, F. D. M., R. M. May, and P. H. Harvey. 1994. Geographical ranges of Australian mammals. Journal of Animal Ecology 63:441-450.
24. Stevens, G. C. 1989. The latitudinal gradient in geographical range: how so many species coexist in the Tropics. American Naturalist 133:240-256.
25. _. 1992. The elevational gradient in altitudinal range: an extension of Rapoport's latitudinal rule to altitude. American Naturalist 140:893-911.