Free, publicly-accessible full text available July 1, 2024
Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher.
Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?
Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.
-
-
more » « less
Abstract Aim Tropical regions harbour over half of the world's mammals and birds, but how their communities have assembled over evolutionary timescales remains unclear. To compare eco‐evolutionary assembly processes between tropical mammals and birds, we tested how hypotheses concerning niche conservatism, environmental stability, environmental heterogeneity and time‐for‐speciation relate to tropical vertebrate community phylogenetic and functional structure.
Location Tropical rainforests worldwide.
Time period Present.
Major taxa studied Ground‐dwelling and ground‐visiting mammals and birds.
Methods We used in situ observations of species identified from systematic camera trap sampling as realized communities from 15 protected tropical rainforests in four tropical regions worldwide. We quantified standardized phylogenetic and functional structure for each community and estimated the multi‐trait phylogenetic signal (PS) in ecological strategies for the four regional species pools of mammals and birds. Using linear regression models, we test three non‐mutually exclusive hypotheses by comparing the relative importance of colonization time, palaeo‐environmental changes in temperature and land cover since 3.3 Mya, contemporary seasonality in temperature and productivity and environmental heterogeneity for predicting community phylogenetic and functional structure.
Results Phylogenetic and functional structure showed non‐significant yet varying tendencies towards clustering or dispersion in all communities. Mammals had stronger multi‐trait PS in ecological strategies than birds (mean PS: mammal = 0.62, bird = 0.43). Distinct dominant processes were identified for mammal and bird communities. For mammals, colonization time and elevation range significantly predicted phylogenetic clustering and functional dispersion tendencies respectively. For birds, elevation range and contemporary temperature seasonality significantly predicted phylogenetic and functional clustering tendencies, respectively, while habitat diversity significantly predicted functional dispersion tendencies.
Main conclusions Our results reveal different eco‐evolutionary assembly processes structuring contemporary tropical mammal and bird communities over evolutionary timescales that have shaped tropical diversity. Our study identified marked differences among taxonomic groups in the relative importance of historical colonization and sensitivity to environmental change.
-
more » « less
Abstract An animal’s daily use of time (their “diel activity”) reflects their adaptations, requirements, and interactions, yet we know little about the underlying processes governing diel activity within and among communities. Here we examine whether community-level activity patterns differ among biogeographic regions, and explore the roles of top-down versus bottom-up processes and thermoregulatory constraints. Using data from systematic camera-trap networks in 16 protected forests across the tropics, we examine the relationships of mammals’ diel activity to body mass and trophic guild. Also, we assess the activity relationships within and among guilds. Apart from Neotropical insectivores, guilds exhibited consistent cross-regional activity in relation to body mass. Results indicate that thermoregulation constrains herbivore and insectivore activity (e.g., larger Afrotropical herbivores are ~7 times more likely to be nocturnal than smaller herbivores), while bottom-up processes constrain the activity of carnivores in relation to herbivores, and top-down processes constrain the activity of small omnivores and insectivores in relation to large carnivores’ activity. Overall, diel activity of tropical mammal communities appears shaped by similar processes and constraints among regions reflecting body mass and trophic guilds.
-
more » « less
Abstract Camera traps deployed in grids or stratified random designs are a well‐established survey tool for wildlife but there has been little evaluation of study design parameters.
We used an empirical subsampling approach involving 2,225 camera deployments run at 41 study areas around the world to evaluate three aspects of camera trap study design (number of sites, duration and season of sampling) and their influence on the estimation of three ecological metrics (species richness, occupancy and detection rate) for mammals.
We found that 25–35 camera sites were needed for precise estimates of species richness, depending on scale of the study. The precision of species‐level estimates of occupancy (ψ) was highly sensitive to occupancy level, with <20 camera sites needed for precise estimates of common (ψ > 0.75) species, but more than 150 camera sites likely needed for rare (ψ < 0.25) species. Species detection rates were more difficult to estimate precisely at the grid level due to spatial heterogeneity, presumably driven by unaccounted habitat variability factors within the study area. Running a camera at a site for 2 weeks was most efficient for detecting new species, but 3–4 weeks were needed for precise estimates of local detection rate, with no gains in precision observed after 1 month. Metrics for all mammal communities were sensitive to seasonality, with 37%–50% of the species at the sites we examined fluctuating significantly in their occupancy or detection rates over the year. This effect was more pronounced in temperate sites, where seasonally sensitive species varied in relative abundance by an average factor of 4–5, and some species were completely absent in one season due to hibernation or migration.
We recommend the following guidelines to efficiently obtain precise estimates of species richness, occupancy and detection rates with camera trap arrays: run each camera for 3–5 weeks across 40–60 sites per array. We recommend comparisons of detection rates be model based and include local covariates to help account for small‐scale variation. Furthermore, comparisons across study areas or times must account for seasonality, which could have strong impacts on mammal communities in both tropical and temperate sites.
