New approaches to the biogeography and areas of endemism of red oaks (Quercus L., Section Lobatae)

Systematic Biology

Volumn 62, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 555-573

  Torres Miranda, Andrés ^a,b   Luna Vega, Isolda ^b   Oyama, Ken ^a,c  

^a INSTITUTO DE INVESTIGACIONES EN ECOSISTEMAS Y SUSTENTABILIDAD   (Mexico)

^b UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO   (Mexico)

^c INSTITUTO DE MATEMÁTICAS   (Mexico)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIODIVERSITY; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CENTRAL AMERICA; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EVALUATION STUDY; GEOGRAPHY; METHODOLOGY; MEXICO; OAK; PHYSIOLOGY; PLANT DISPERSAL;

BIODIVERSITY; CENTRAL AMERICA; GEOGRAPHY; MEXICO; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PLANT DISPERSAL; QUERCUS;

EID: 84881643156     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: 1076836X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/sysbio/syt021     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Axelius B. 1991. Areas of the distribution and areas of endemism. Cladistics 7:197-199.
2. Axelrod D.L. 1983. Biogeography of oaks in the Arcto-Tertiary province. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 70:629-657.
3. Batagelj V., Mrvar A. 1999. Pajek, program for large network analysis, version 1.24. Slovene: University of Ljubljana, published by the authors. Available from: URL http://vlado.fmf.unilj. si/pub/networks/pajek/
4. Batagelj V., MrvarA. 2000. Some analysis of Erdös collaboration graph. Soc. Netw. 22:173-186.
5. Batagelj V., Zaversnik A. 2003. An O(m) algorithm for cores decomposition of networks. CoRR arXiv.org/cs.DS/0310049.
6. BrandesU. 2001.Afaster algorithm for betweenness centrality. J.Math. Sociol. 25:163-177.
7. Brooks D.R., Van Veller M.G.P. 2003. Critique of parsimony analysis of endemicity as a method of historical biogeography. J. Biogeogr. 30:819-825.
8. Burt R.S. 1992. Structural holes: the social structure of competition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
9. Casagranda M.D., Arias J.S., Goloboff P.A., Szumik C.A., Taher L.M., Escalante T., Morrone J.J. 2009. Proximity, interpenetration, and sympatry networks: a reply to dos Santos et al. Syst. Biol. 58: 271-276.
10. Contreras-Medina R., Luna I., Morrone J.J. 2001. Biogeographic methods identify gymnosperm biodiversity hotspots. Naturwissenschaften 88:427-430.
11. Contreras-Medina R., Luna I., Morrone J.J. 2007a. Application of parsimony analysis of endemicity to Mexican gymnosperm distributions: grid-cells, biogeographical provinces and track analysis. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 92:405-417.
12. Contreras-Medina R., Luna I., Morrone J.J. 2007b. Gymnosperms and cladistic biogeography of the Mexican Transition Zone. Taxon 56:905-915.
13. Croizat L.1958. Panbiogeography. Caracas, Venezuela: Published by the author.
14. dos Santos D.A., Fernández H.R., Cuezzo M.G., Domínguez E. 2008. Sympatry inference and network analysis in biogeography. Syst. Biol. 57:432-448.
15. dos Santos D.A., Cuezzo M.G., Reynaga M.C., Domínguez E. 2012. Towards a dynamic analysis ofweighted networks in biogeography. Syst. Biol. 61:240-252.
16. Escalante T., Rodríguez G., Morrone J.J. 2004. The diversification of the Nearctic mammals in the Mexican transition zone: a track analysis. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 83:327-339.
17. Escalante T., Szumik C., Morrone J.J. 2009. Areas of endemism of Mexican mammals: reanalysis applying the optimality criterion. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 98:468-478.
18. Espinosa D., Llorente J., Morrone J.J. 2006. Historical biogeographical patterns of the species of Bursera (Burseraceae) and their taxonomic implications. J. Biogeogr. 33:1945-1958.
19. ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute). 1999. ArcView GIS, version 3.2. Redlands: Environmental Systems Research Institute Inc.
20. Faust K., Wasserman S. 1992. Centrality and prestige: a review and synthesis. J. Quant. Anthropol. 4:23-78.
21. Ferrusquía-Villafranca I., González-Guzmán L. 2005. Northern Mexico's landscape, part II: the biotic setting across time. In: Cartron J.E., Ceballos G., Felger R.S., editors. Biodiversity, ecosystems, and conservation in Northern Mexico. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 39-51.
22. Freeman L.C. 1977. A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry 40:35-41.
23. Freeman L.C. 1979. Centrality in social networks: conceptual clarification. Soc. Net. 1:215-239.
24. Goloboff P. 1999. Nona, version 2.0 (for Windows). San Miguel de Tucumán: Published by the author.
25. Goloboff P. 2005. NDM/VNDM, programs for identification of areas of endemism. Program and documentation. Available from: URL www.zmuc.dk/public/ phylogeny/endemism
26. Halffter G. 1976. Distribución de los insectos en la Zona de Transición Mexicana: relaciones con la entomofauna de Norteamérica. Folia Entomol. Mex. 35:1-64.
27. Halffter G. 1978. Un nuevo patrón de dispersión en la Zona de Transición Mexicana: el Mesoamericano de Montaña. Folia Entomol. Mex. 39-40:219-222.
28. Halffter G. 1987. Biogeography of the montane entomofauna of Mexico and Central America. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 32:95-114.
29. Hammer Ø., Harper D.A.T., Ryan P.D. 2001. PAST: paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol. Electronica 4:1-9.
30. Harold A.S., Mooi R.D. 1994. Areas of endemism: definition and recognition criteria. Syst. Biol. 43:261-266.
31. Hausdorf B. 2002. Units in biogeography. Syst. Biol. 51:648-652.
32. Hausdorf B., Hennig C. 2003. Biotic element analysis in biogeography. Syst. Biol. 52:717-723.
33. Hennig C., Hausdorf B. 2004. Distance-based parametric bootstrap tests for clustering of species ranges. Comput. Statist. Data Anal. 45:875-895.
34. Hennig C., Hausdorf B. 2006. A robust distance coefficient between distribution areas incorporating geographic distances. Syst. Biol. 55:170-175.
35. Hooghiemstra H. 2006. Immigration of oaks into northern South America: a paleo-ecological document. In: Kappelle M., editor. Ecology and conservation of Neotropical montane oak forests, Ecological studies Vol. 185. Berlin: Springer. p. 17-28.
36. Liebherr J.K. 1994. Biogeographic patterns of montane Mexican and Central American Carabidae (Coleoptera). Can. Entomol. 126: 841-860.
37. Linder H.P. 2001. On areas of endemism, with an example from the African Restionaceae. Syst. Biol. 50:892-912.
38. Luna-Vega I., Alcántara O., Espinosa D., Morrone J.J. 1999. Historical relationships of theMexican cloud forests: a preliminary vicariance model applying parsimony analysis of endemicity to vascular plant taxa. J. Biogeogr. 26:1299-1305.
39. Luna-Vega I., Morrone J.J., Alcántara O., Espinosa D. 2001. Biogeographical affinities among Neotropical cloud forests. Plant Syst. Evol. 228:229-239.
40. Manos P.S., Stanford A.M. 2001. The historical biogeography of Fagaceae: tracking the Tertiary history of temperate and subtropical forests of the northern hemisphere. Intern. J. Plant Sci. 162(Suppl 6):577-593.
41. Marshall C.J., Liebherr J.K. 2000. Cladistic biogeography of theMexican Transition Zone. J. Biogeogr. 27:203-216.
42. Mast A., Nyffeler R. 2003. Using a null model to recognize significant co-occurrence prior to identifying candidate areas of endemism. Syst. Biol. 52:271-280.
43. Morrone J.J. 1994. On the identification of areas of endemism. Syst. Biol. 43:438-441.
44. Morrone J.J. 2009. Evolutionary biogeography. An integrative approach with case studies. New York: Columbia University Press.
45. Morrone J.J., Escalante T. 2002. Parsimony analysis of endemicity (PAE) of Mexican terrestrial mammals at different areas units: when sizes matters. J. Biogeogr. 25:947-955.
46. Morrone J.J., Espinosa D., Aguilar C., Llorente J. 1999. Preliminary classification of theMexican biogeographic provinces: a parsimony analysis of endemicity based on plant, insect, and bird taxa. Southwest. Nat. 44:507-514.
47. Nelson G., Platnick N. 1981. Systematics and biogeography. Cladistics and vicariance. New York: Columbia University Press.
48. Nihei S.S. 2006. Misconceptions about parsimony analysis of endemicity. J. Biogeogr. 33:2099-2106.
49. Nixon K.C. 1993. The genus Quercus in Mexico. In: Ramamoorthy T.P., Bye R., Lot A., Fa J., editors. Biological diversity of Mexico: origins and distribution. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 435-447.
50. Nixon K.C. 2002.WinClada, version 1.00.08. Ithaca (NY): Published by the author.
51. Nixon K.C. 2006. Global and Neotropical distribution and diversity of oak (genus Quercus) and oak forests. In: Kappelle M., editor. Ecology and conservation of Neotropical montane oak forests. Ecological studies, Vol. 185. Germany: Springer. p 3-13.
52. Opsahl T., Agneessens F., Skvoretz J. 2010.Node centrality inweighted networks. Generalizing degree and shortest paths. Soc. Netw. 32:245-251.
53. Platnick N.I. 1991. On areas of endemism. Aust. Syst. Bot. 4:xi-xii.
54. Rapoport E.H. 1975.Areografía: estrategias geográficas de las especies. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
55. Rohlf F.J. 2000. NTSYSpc, numerical taxonomy and multivariate analysis system, ver 2.11. Setauket (NY): Exeter Software.
56. Rzedowski J. 1978. La vegetación de México. Ed. Limusa México.
57. Rzedowski J. 1991. El endemismo en la flora fanerogámica mexicana: una apreciación analítica preliminar. Acta Bot. Mex. 15: 47-64.
58. Saitou N., Nei M. 1987. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 6: 514-525.
59. Santos C.M.D. 2005. Parsimony analysis of endemicity: time for an epitaph? J. Biogeogr. 32:1284-1286.
60. Seidman S.B. 1983.Network structure andminimumdegree. Soc.Netw. 5:269-287.
61. Szumik C., Goloboff P. 2004. Areas of endemism: an improved optimality criterion. Syst. Biol. 53:968-977.
62. Szumik C., Cuezzo F., Goloboff P., Chalup A. 2002. An optimality criterion to determine areas of endemism. Syst. Biol. 51: 806-816.
63. Torres-Miranda A., Luna-Vega I. 2007. Hacia una síntesis panbiogeográfica. In: Luna-Vega I., Morrone J.J., Espinosa D., editors. Biodiversidad de la Faja Volcánica Transmexicana. México: Las Prensas de Ciencias-FES Zaragoza-CONABIO, UNAM. p. 503-514.
64. Torres-Miranda A., Luna-Vega I., Oyama K. 2011. Conservation biogeography in red oaks (Quercus, section Lobatae) in Mexico and Central America. Am. J. Bot. 98:290-305.
65. Tovar-Sánchez E., Oyama K. 2004. Natural hybridization and hybrid zones between Quercus crassifolia and Quercus crassipes (Fagaceae) in Mexico: morphological and molecular evidence. Am. J. Bot. 91: 1352-1363.
66. Trejo-Torres J.C., Ackerman J.D. 2001. Biogeography of the Antilles based on parsimony analysis of orchid distributions. J. Biogeogr. 28:775-794.
67. Trejo-Torres J.C., Ackerman J.D. 2002. Composition patterns of Caribbean limestone forests: are parsimony, classification, and ordination analysis congruent? Biotropica 34:502-515.
68. Valencia S. 2004. La diversidad del género Quercus (Fagaceae) en México. Bol. Soc. Mex. Bot. 75:33-53.
69. Zavala F. 1998. Observaciones sobre la distribución de encinos en México. Polibotánica 8:47-64.