Patterns of turtle species' geographic range size and a test of Rapoport's rule

Ecography

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 436-446

  Hecnar, Stephen J ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH   (Canada)

^b LAKEHEAD UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOGEOGRAPHY; LATITUDE; RANGE SIZE; RAPOPORT RULE; TURTLE;

EID: 0032819453     PISSN: 09067590     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.1999.tb00580.x     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Anderson, S. and Marcus, L. F. 1992. Aerography of Australian tetrapods. - Aust. J. Zool. 40: 627-651.
2. Anon. 1990. The Times atlas of the world. 8th comprehensive ed. - Random House.
3. Auffenberg, W. and Milstead, W. W. 1965. Reptiles in the Quarternary of North America. - In Wright, H. E. Jr. and Frey, D. G. (eds), The Quarternary of the United States. VII Congr. of the Int. Assoc. for Quarternary Res. Princeton Univ. Press, pp. 557-568.
4. Blackburn, T. M. and Gaston, K. J. 1996. Spatial patterns in the geographic range sizes of bird species in the New World. - Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B. Biol. Sci. 351: 897-912.
5. Bobyn, M. L. and Brooks, R. J. 1994. Incubation conditions as potential factors limiting the northern distribution of snapping turtles, Chelydra serpentina. - Can. J. Zool. 72: 28-37.
6. Brown, J. H. 1995. Macroecology. - Univ. of Chicago Press.
7. Brown, J. H. and Gibson, A. C. 1983. Biogeography. - C. V. Mosby.
8. Brown, J. H. and Maurer, B. A. 1989. Macroecology: the division of food and space among species on continents. -Science 243: 1145-1150.
9. Brown, J. H., Stevens, G. C. and Kaufman, D. M. 1996. The geographic range: size, shape, boundaries, and internal structure. - Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 27: 597-623.
10. Darlington, P. J. Jr 1957. Zoogeography: the geographical distribution of animals. - John Wiley.
11. Denton, G. H. and Hughes, T. J. (eds). 1981. The last great ice sheets. - Wiley Interscience.
12. Ernst, C. H. und Barbour, R. W. 1989. Turtles of the world. - Smithsonian Inst. Press.
13. France, R. 1992. The North American latitudinal gradient in species richness and geographical range of freshwater crayfish and amphipods. Am. Nat. 139: 342-354.
14. Fullard, H. (ed.) 1976. Philips' New World atlas. - George Philip and Son.
15. Gaston, K. J. 1996. Species-range-size distributions: patterns, mechanisms and implications. - Trends Ecol. Evol. 11: 197-201.
16. Gaston, K. J. 1998. Species-range size distributions: products of speciation, extinction and transformation. - Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. 353: 219-230.
17. Gaston, K. J. and Blackburn, T. M. 1996. Range size-body size relationships: evidence of scale dependence. - Oikos 75: 479-485.
18. Gaston, K. J. and Blackburn, T. M. 1997. Age, area and avian diversification. - Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 62: 239-253.
19. Gaston, K. J., Blackburn, T. M. and Spicer, J. I. 1998. Rapoport's rule: time for an epitaph? - Trends Ecol. Evol. 13: 70-74.
20. Goel, N. S. and Richter-Dyn, N. 1974. Stochastic models in biology. - Academic Press.
21. Goodman, D. 1987. The demography of chance extinction. - In: Soulé, M. E. (ed.), Viable populations for conservation. Cambridge Univ. Press, pp. 11-34.
22. Holman, J. A. 1995. Pleistocene amphibians and reptiles in north America. - Oxford Univ. Press.
23. Hughes, L., Cawsey, E. M. and Westoby, M. 1996. Geographic and climatic range sizes of Australian euculypts and a test of Rapoport's rule. - Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. Lett. 5: 128-142.
24. Iverson, J. B. 1986. Checklist with distribution maps of the turtles of the world. - Privately printed, Paust Printing, Richmond, IN.
25. Jandel. 1993. Mocha image analysis software, vers. 1.20. -Jandel Corp., San Rafael, CA.
26. Keast, A. 1981. Ecological biogeography of Australia. Monographiae Biologicae. Vol. 41. - W. Junk Publ.
27. Letcher, A. J. and Harvey, P. H. 1994. Variation in geographical range size among mammals of the palearctic. - Am. Nat. 144: 30-42.
28. Macpherson, E. and Duarte, C. M. 1994. Patterns in species richness, size, and latitudinal range of East Atlantic fishes. - Ecography 17: 242-248.
29. May, R. M. 1975. Patterns of species abundance and diversity. - In: Cody, M. L. and Diamond, J. M. (eds), Ecology and evolution of communities. Belknap Press, pp. 81-120.
30. Mourelle, C. and Ezcurra, E. 1997. Rapoport's rule: a comparative analysis between South and North American columnar cacti. - Am. Nat. 150: 131-142.
31. Pagel, M. D., May, R. M. and Collie, A. R. 1991. Ecological aspects of the geographical distribution and diversity of mammalian species. - Am. Nat. 137: 791-815.
32. Price, T. D., Helbig, A. J. and Richman, A. D. 1997. Evolution of breeding distributions in the Old World leaf warblers (genus Phylloscopus). - Evolution 51: 552-561.
33. Rapoport, E. H. 1975. Areografia: estrategias geográficas de las especies. - Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico City.
34. Rapoport, E. H. 1982. Areography: geographical strategies of species. 1st English ed. B. Drausal, transl. Publ. Fundación Bariloche. Vol. 1. - Pergamon.
35. Rohde, K. 1996. Rapoport's rule is a local phenomenon and cannot explain latitudinal gradients in species diversity. -Biodiv. Lett. 3: 10-13.
36. Rohde, K. and Heap, M. 1996. Latitudinal ranges of teleost fish in the Atlantic and Indo-Pacific oceans. - Am. Nat. 147: 659-665.
37. Rohde, K., Heap, M. and Heap, D. 1993. Rapoport's rule does not apply to marine teleosts and cannot explain latitudinal gradients in species richness. - Am. Nat. 142: 1-16.
38. Rosenzweig, M. L. 1975. On continental steady states of species diversity. - In: Cody, M. L. and Diamond, J. M. (eds), Ecology and evolution of communities. - Belknap Press, pp. 121-140.
39. Rosenzweig, M. L. 1992. Species diversity gradients: we know more and less than we thought. - J. Mammal. 73: 715-730.
40. Rosenzweig, M. L. 1995. Species diversity in space and time. -Cambridge Univ. Press.
41. Roy, K., Jablonski, D. and Valentine, J. W. 1994. Eastern Pacific molluscan provinces and latitudinal diversity gradient: no evidence for "Rapoport's rule". - Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91: 8871-8874.
42. Ruggiero, A. 1994. Latitudinal correlates of the sizes of mammalian geographical ranees in South America. - J. Biogeogr. 21: 545-559.
43. Smith, F. D. M., May, R. M. and Harvey, P. H. 1994. Geographical ranges of Australian mammals. - J. Anim. Ecol. 63: 441-450.
44. Sokal, R. R. and Rohlf, F. J. 1995. Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. - W. H. Freeman.
45. St. Clair, R. C. and Gregory, P. T. 1990. Factors affecting the northern range limit of painted turtles (Chrysemys picta): winter acidosis or freezing? - Copeia 1990: 1083-1089.
46. Stevens, G. C. 1989. The latitudinal gradient in geographical range: how so many species coexist in the tropics. - Am. Nat. 133: 240-256.
47. Stevens, G. C. 1996. Extending Rapoport's rule to Pacific marine fishes. J. Biogeogr. 23: 149-154.
48. Street, D. 1979. The reptiles of northern and central Europe. B.T. Batsford, London.
49. Taylor, C. M. and Gotelli, N. J. 1994. The macroecology of Cyprinella: correlates of phylogeny, body size, and geographical range. - Am. Nat. 144: 549-569.
50. Willis, J. C. 1922. Age and area. - Cambridge Univ. Press.