Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T17:22:23.131Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Controls on niche stability in geologic time: congruent responses to biotic and abiotic environmental changes among Cincinnatian (Late Ordovician) marine invertebrates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2016

Hannah-Maria R. Brame  and
Alycia L. Stigall
Hannah-Maria R. Brame
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio 45701, U.S.A. E-mail: hmrbrame@gmail.com
Alycia L. Stigall*
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences and Ohio Center for Ecology and Evolutionary Studies, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio 45701, U.S.A. E-mail: stigall@ohio.edu
*
Corresponding author
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The set of environmental conditions under which a taxon can survive and maintain viable populations, known as the ecological niche, is a fundamental determinant of a taxon's distribution. Because of the central importance of ecological niches, they have been assumed to remain relatively stable during intervals of morphological stasis. However, the assumption of niche stability has rarely been tested directly with fossil data spanning multiple temporal intervals. Thus, the conditions under which this assumption is likely to be accurate are not well understood. In this study, we use ecological niche modeling (ENM) to reconstruct the ecological niche for 11 genera of marine benthos (crinoids, trilobites, molluscs, bryozoans, and corals) from the Type Cincinnatian Series (Late Ordovician, Katian Stage) across nine temporal intervals spanning approximately three million years. This interval includes both abiotic environmental change (gradual sea-level fall) and biotic change (rapid pulses of the Richmondian Invasion), thus allowing the relative effect of different environmental perturbations to be constrained. A previous symmetrical analysis of niche stability of brachiopod species recovered an increase in niche evolution following the Richmondian Invasion. Herein we test the generality of the brachiopod pattern within the community. Niche stability was evaluated in geographic space, ecological space, and niche parameter space. Niche stability varied through time; during the Pre-Invasion interval, taxa exhibited niche stability during gradual shallowing of sea level in the basin, whereas niche evolution became more common during the Richmondian Invasion. Taxa adjusted to the increased competition by altering aspects of their niche. Notably, surviving taxa contracted their niche into a subset of their previous niche parameters. This represents an adaptive response to increased competition for resources with the newly established invader taxa, and it was employed most successfully by generalist taxa. Patterns of niche evolution were congruent between clades, among feeding styles, and across taxonomic levels.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 40 , Issue 1 , Winter 2014 , pp. 70 - 90
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

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

Aguilée, R., Shaw, F. H., Rousset, F., Shaw, R. G., and Ronce, O. 2012. How does pollen versus seed dispersal affect niche evolution? Evolution 67:792–805.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. P., Lew, D., and Peterson, A. T. 2003. Evaluating predictive models of species' distributions: criteria for selecting optimal models. Ecological Modelling 162:211–232.Google Scholar
Banks, W. E., d'Errico, F., Peterson, A. T., Kageyama, M., and Columbeau, G. 2008. Reconstructing ecological niches and geographic distributions of caribou (Rangifer tarandus) and red deer (Cervus elaphus) during the Last Glacial Maximum. Quaternary Science Reviews 27:2568–2575.Google Scholar
Banta, J. A., Ehrenreich, I. M., Gerard, S., Chou, L., Wilczek, A., Schmitt, J., Kover, P. X., and Purugganan, M. D. 2012. Climate envelope modeling reveals intraspecific relationships among flowering phenology, niche breadth and potential range size in Arabidopsis thaliana. Ecology Letters 15:769–777.Google Scholar
Boardman, R. S., and Utgaard, J. 1964. Modifications of study methods for Paleozoic bryozoa. Journal of Paleontology 38:768–785.Google Scholar
Bray, J. R., and Curtis, J. T. 1957. An ordination of the upland forest communities of southern Wisconsin. Ecological Monographs 27:326–347.Google Scholar
Briggs, J. C. 2007. Marine biogeography and ecology: invasions and introductions. Journal of Biogeography 34:193–198.Google Scholar
Broennimann, O., and Guisan, A. 2008. Predicting current and future biological invasions: both native and invaded ranges matter. Biology Letters 4:585–589.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broennimann, O., Treier, U. A., Müller-Schärer, H., Thuiller, W., Peterson, A. T., and Guisan, A. 2007. Evidence of climatic niche shift during biological invasion. Ecology Letters 10:701–709.Google Scholar
Brown, J. H. 1984. On the relationship between abundance and distribution of species. American Naturalist 124:255–279.Google Scholar
Brown, J. H., Stevens, G. C., and Kaufman, D. M. 1996. The geographic range: size, shape, boundaries, and internal structure. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 27:597–623.Google Scholar
Bush, A. M., and Brame, R. I. 2010. Multiple paleoecological controls on the composition of marine fossil assemblages from the Frasnian (Late Devonian) of Virginia, with a comparison of ordination methods. Paleobiology 36:573–591.Google Scholar
Colles, A., Liow, L. H., and Prinzing, A. 2009. Are specialists at risk under environmental change? Neoecological, paleoecological and phylogenetic approaches. Ecology Letters 12:849–863.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dattilo, B. F., Brett, C. E., Tsujita, C. J., and Fairhurst, R. 2008. Sediment supply versus storm winnowing in the development of muddy and shelly interbeds from the Upper Ordovician of the Cincinnati region, USA. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 45:243–265.Google Scholar
Dattilo, B. F., Brett, C. E., and Schramm, T. J. 2012. Tempestites in a teapot? Condensation-generated shell beds in the Upper Ordovician, Cincinnati Arch, USA. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 367–368:44–62.Google Scholar
Deline, B., Ausich, W. I., and Brett, C. E. 2012. Comparing taxonomic and geographic scales in the morphologic disparity of Ordovician through Early Silurian Laurentian crinoids. Paleobiology 38:538–553.Google Scholar
Dudei, N. L., and Stigall, A. L. 2010. Using ecological niche modeling to assess biogeographic and niche response of brachiopod species to the Richmondian Invasion (Late Ordovician) in the Cincinnati Arch. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 296:28–43.Google Scholar
Ebeling, S. K., Welk, E., Auge, H., and Bruelheide, H. 2008. Predicting the spread of an invasive plant: combining experiments and ecological niche models. Ecography 31:709–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eldredge, N., and Gould, S. J. 1972. Punctuated equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism. Pp. 82–115inSchopf, T. J. M., ed.Models in paleobiology. Freeman, Cooper, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Eldredge, N., Thompson, J. N., Brakefield, P. M., Gavrilets, S., Jablonski, D., Jackson, J. B. C., Lenski, R. E., Lieberman, B. S., McPeek, M. A., and Miller, W. III. 2005. The dynamics of evolutionary stasis. Paleobiology 31:133–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elith, J., Graham, C. H., Anderson, R. P., Dudík, M., Ferrier, S., Guisan, A., Hijmans, R. J., Huettmann, F., Leathwick, J. R., Lehmann, A., Li, J., Lohmann, L. G., Loiselle, B. A., Manion, G., Moritz, C., Nakamura, M., Nakazawa, Y., McC, J.Overton, M., Peterson, A. T., Phillips, S. J., Richardson, K., Scachetti–Pereira, R., Schapire, R. E., Soberón, J., Williams, S., Wisz, M. S., and Zimmermann, N. E. 2006. Novel methods improve prediction of species' distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29:129–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elith, J., Phillips, S. J., Hastie, T., Dudík, M., En Chee, Y., and Yates, C. J. 2011. A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists. Diversity and Distributions 17:43–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ESRI. 2008. ArcGIS Desktop, Release 9.3. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, Calif.Google Scholar
Facon, B., Pointier, J. P., Jarne, P., Sarda, V., and David, P. 2008. High genetic variance in life-history strategies within invasive populations by way of multiple introductions. Current Biology 18:363–367.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, M. C., Weltzin, J. F., Sanders, N. J., and Dunn, R. R. 2007. The biogeography of prediction error: why does the introduced range of the fire ant over-predict its native range? Global Ecology and Biogeography 16:24–33.Google Scholar
Foote, M. 1999. Morphological diversity in the evolutionary radiation of Paleozoic and Post-Paleozoic crinoids. Paleobiology Memoir 1 (supplement to vol. 25, no. 2):1–116.Google Scholar
Gallien, L., Douzet, R., Pratte, S., Zimmermann, N. E., and Thuiller, W. 2012. Invasive species distribution models – how violating the equilibrium assumption can create new insights. Global Ecology and Biogeography 21:1126–1136.Google Scholar
Gaston, K. J., and Spicer, J. I. 2001. The relationship between range size and niche breadth: a test using five species of Gammarus (Amphipoda). Global Ecology and Biogeography 10:179–188.Google Scholar
Giovanelli, J. G. R., Ferreira de Sisqueria, M., Haddad, C. F. B., and Alexandrino, J. 2010. Modeling a spatially restricted distribution in the Neotropics: how the size calibration area affects the performance of five presence-only methods. Ecological Modelling 221:215–224.Google Scholar
Godown, M. E., and Peterson, A. T. 2000. Preliminary distributional analysis of US endangered bird species. Biodiversity and Conservation 9:1313–1322.Google Scholar
Google. 2012. Google Earth Pro. Google Inc., Mountain View, Calif.Google Scholar
Guisan, A., Graham, C. H., Elith, J., Huettmann, F., and the NCEAS Species Distribution Modelling Group. 2007. Sensitivity of predictive species distribution models to change in grain size. Diversity and Distributions 13:332–340.Google Scholar
Hammer, Ø., Harper, D. A. T., and Ryan, P. D. 2001. PAST: paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica 4 (1):9.Google Scholar
Holland, S. M. 1997. Using time/environment analysis to recognize faunal events in the Upper Ordovician of the Cincinnati Arch. Pp. 309–334inBrett, C. E. and Baird, G. C., eds. Paleontological events: stratigraphic, ecological, and evolutionary implications. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Holland, S. M. 2005. The signatures of patches and gradients in ecological ordinations. Palaios 20:573–580.Google Scholar
Holland, S. M. 2009. Paleogeography and paleoenvironment. Pp. 214–226inMeyer, D. L. and Davis, R.A.A sea without fish: life in the Ordovician sea of the Cincinnati region. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.Google Scholar
Holland, S. M., and Patzkowsky, M. E. 1996. Sequence stratigraphy and long-term oceanographic change in the Middle and Upper Ordovician of the eastern United States. Pp. InWitzke, B. J., Ludvigson, G. A., and Day, J. E., eds. Paleozoic sequence stratigraphy: views from the North American Craton. Geological Society of America Special Paper 306:117–130.Google Scholar
Holland, S. M., and Patzkowsky, M. E. 2007. Gradient ecology of a biotic invasion: biofacies of the type Cincinnatian Series (Upper Ordovician), Cincinnati, Ohio region, USA. Palaios 22:392–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchinson, G. E. 1957. Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harbor Symposium on Quaternary Biology 22:415–427.Google Scholar
Jablonski, D. 2008. Species selection: theory and data. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 39:501–524.Google Scholar
Jennette, D. C., and Pryor, W. A. 1993. Cyclic alteration of proximal and distal storm facies; Kope and Fairview Formations (Upper Ordovician), Ohio and Kentucky. Journal of Sedimentary Research 63:183–203.Google Scholar
Jezkova, T., Olah-Hemmings, V., and Riddle, B. R. 2011. Niche shifting in response to warming climate change after the last glacial maximum: inference from genetic data and niche assessments in the chisel-toothed kangaroo rat (Dipodomys microps). Global Change Biology 17:3486–3502.Google Scholar
Jin, J. 2001. Evolution and extinction of the North American Hiscobeccus brachiopod fauna during the Late Ordovician. Canadian Journal of Earth Science 38:143–151.Google Scholar
Kammer, T. W., Baumiller, T. K., and Ausich, W. I. 1997. Species longevity as a function of niche breadth: evidence from fossil crinoids. Geology 25:219–222.Google Scholar
Larson, E. R., and Olden, J. D. 2012. Using avatar species to model the potential distribution of emerging invaders. Global Ecology and Biogeography 21:1114–1125.Google Scholar
Lavergne, S., Evans, M. E. K., Burfield, I. J., Jiguet, F., and Thuiller, W. 2013. Are species' responses to global change predicted by past niche evolution? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 368:20120091.Google Scholar
Laube, I., Korntheuer, H., Schwager, M., Trautmann, S., Rahbek, C., and Böhning-Gaeses, K. 2013. Towards a more mechanistic understanding of traits and range sizes. Global Ecology and Biogeography 22:233–241.Google Scholar
Lieberman, B. S., Miller, W. I. III, and Eldredge, N. 2007. Paleontological patterns, macroecological dynamics and the evolutionary process. Evolutionary Biology 34:28–48.Google Scholar
Maguire, K. C., and Stigall, A. L. 2009. Distribution of fossil horses in the Great Plains during the Miocene and Pliocene: an ecological niche modeling approach. Paleobiology 35:597–611.Google Scholar
Malizia, R. W., and Stigall, A. L. 2011. Niche stability in Late Ordovician articulated brachiopod species before, during, and after the Richmondian Invasion. Palaeoecology, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeogeography 311:154–170.Google Scholar
Martínez-Meyer, E., Peterson, A. T., and Hargrove, W. W. 2004. Ecological niches as stable distributional constraints on mammal species, with implications for Pleistocene extinctions and climate change projections for biodiversity. Global Ecology and Biogeography 13:305–314.Google Scholar
Medley, K. A. 2010. Niche shifts during the global invasion of the Asian tiger mosquito, Aedes albopictus Skuse (Culicidae), revealed by reciprocal distribution models. Global Ecology and Biogeography 19:122–133.Google Scholar
Meyer, D. L., and Davis, R. A. 2009. A sea without fish: life in the Ordovician sea of the Cincinnati region. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.Google Scholar
Miller, A. I., Holland, S. M., Meyer, D. L., and Dattilo, B. F. 2001. The use of faunal gradient analysis for intraregional correlation and assessment of changes in sea-floor topography in the Type Cincinnatian. Journal of Geology 109:603–613.Google Scholar
Muñoz, M. E. S., Giovanni, R., Siqueira, M. F., Sutton, T., Brewer, P., Pereira, R. S., Canhos, D. A. L., and Canhos, V. P. 2009. OpenModeller: a generic approach to species' potential distribution modelling. GeoInformatica 15:111–135.Google Scholar
Nicholson, S. W., Dicken, C. L., Horton, J. D., Labay, K. A., Foose, M. P., and Mueller, J. A. L. 2005. Preliminary integrated geologic map databases for the United States: Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, and West Virginia. U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 205–1324.Google Scholar
Nogués-Bravo, D. 2009. Predicting the past distribution of species climatic niches. Global Ecology and Biogeography 18:521–531.Google Scholar
Nogués-Bravo, D., Rodríguez, J., Hortal, J., Batra, P., and Araújo, M. B. 2008. Climate change, humans, and the extinction of the woolly mammoth. PLoS Biology 6 (4):e79.Google Scholar
Orr, M. R., and Smith, T. B. 1998. Ecology and speciation. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13:502–506.Google Scholar
Pandolfi, J. M. 2001. Numerical and taxonomic scale of analysis in paleoecological data sets: examples from neo-tropical Pleistocene reef coral communities. Journal of Paleontology 75:546–563.Google Scholar
Papeş, M. G., and Gaubert, P. 2007. Modeling ecological niches from low numbers of occurrences: assessment of the conservative status of poorly known viverrids (mammalian, Carnivora) across two continents. Diversity and Distributions 13:890–902.Google Scholar
Patzkowsky, M. E., and Holland, S. M. 2007. Diversity partitioning of a Late Ordovician marine biotic invasion: controls on diversity in regional ecosystems. Paleobiology 33:295–309.Google Scholar
Pearman, P. B., Guisan, A., Broennimann, O., and Randin, C. F. 2008a. Niche dynamics in space and time. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 23:149–158.Google Scholar
Pearman, P. B., Randin, C. F., Broennimann, O., Vittoz, P., van der Knaap, W. O., Engler, R., Le Lay, G., Zimmermann, N.E., and Guisan, A. 2008b. Prediction of plant species distributions across six millennia. Ecology Letters 11:357–369.Google Scholar
Peterson, A. T. 2003. Predicting the geography of species' invasions via ecological niche modeling. Quarterly Review of Biology 78:419–433.Google Scholar
Peterson, A. T. 2011. Ecological niche conservatism: a time-structured review of evidence. Journal of Biogeography 38:817–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, A. T., and Cohoon, K. P. 1999. Sensitivity of distributional prediction algorithms to geographic completeness. Ecological Modelling 117:158–164.Google Scholar
Peterson, A. T., and Nakazawa, Y. 2008. Environmental datasets matter in ecological niche modeling: an example with Solenopsis invicta and Solenopsis richteri. Global Ecology and Biogeography 17:135–144.Google Scholar
Peterson, A. T., Soberón, J., Pearson, R. G., Anderson, R. P., Martínez-Meyer, E., Nakamura, M., and Araújo, M. B. 2011. Ecological niches and geographic distributions. Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
Petitpierre, B., Kueffer, C., Broennimann, O., Randin, C., Daehler, C., and Guisan, A. 2012. Climatic niche shifts are rare among terrestrial plant invaders. Science 335:1344–1348.Google Scholar
Phillips, S. J., Anderson, R. P., and Schapire, R. E. 2006. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecological Modeling 190:231–259.Google Scholar
Richardson, D. M., and Pyšek, P. 2008. Fifty years of invasion ecology—the legacy of Charles Elton. Diversity and Distributions 14:161–168.Google Scholar
Rode, A. L., and Lieberman, B. S. 2004. Using GIS to unlock the interactions between biogeography, environment, and evolution in Middle and Late Devonian brachiopods and bivalves. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 211:345–359.Google Scholar
Rodríguez-Sánchez, F., and Arroyo, J. 2008. Reconstructing the demise of Tethyan plants: climate-driven range dynamics of Laurus since the Pliocene. Global Ecology and Biogeography 17:685–695.Google Scholar
Rosenzweig, M. L. 1987. Habitat selection as a source for biological diversity. Evolutionary Ecology 1:315–330.Google Scholar
Soberón, J. 2007. Grinnellian and Eltonian niches and geographic distributions of species. Ecology Letters 10:1115–1123.Google Scholar
Stigall, A. L. 2010. Using GIS to assess the biogeographic impact of species invasions on native brachiopods during the Richmondian Invasion in the Type-Cincinnatian (Late Ordovician, Cincinnati region). Palaeontologia Electronica 13:5A.Google Scholar
Stigall, A. L. 2011. Application of niche modeling to analyze biogeographic patterns in Paleozoic brachiopods: evaluating niche stability in deep time. Memoirs of the Association of Australian Palaeontologists 41:229–255.Google Scholar
Stigall, A. L. 2012a. Using ecological niche modeling to evaluate niche stability in deep time. Journal of Biogeography 39:772–781.Google Scholar
Stigall, A. L. 2012b. Speciation and collapse and invasive species dynamics during the Late Devonian “Mass Extinction.” GSA Today 22:4–9.Google Scholar
Stigall, A. L., and Lieberman, B. S. 2006. Quantitative paleobiogeography: GIS, phylogenetic biogeographical analysis, and conservation insights. Journal of Biogeography 33:2051–2060.Google Scholar
Stigall Rode, A. L., and Lieberman, B. S. 2005. Using environmental niche modeling to study the Late Devonian biodiversity crisis. Pp. 93–180inOver, D. J., Morrow, J. R., and Wignall, P. B., eds. Understanding Late Devonian and Permian-Triassic biotic and climatic events: towards an integrated approach (Developments in Paleontology and Stratigraphy, Vol. 20). Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Stockwell, D. R. B., and Peters, D. 1999. The GARP modeling system: problems and solutions to automated spatial prediction. International Journal of Geographic Information Science 13:143–158.Google Scholar
Strayer, D. L., Eviner, V. T., Jeschke, J. M., and Pace, M. L. 2006. Understanding the long-term effects of species invasions. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 21:645–651.Google Scholar
Svenning, J., Fl⊘jgaard, C., Marske, K. A., Nógues-Bravo, D., and Normand, S. 2011. Applications of species distribution modeling to paleobiology. Quaternary Science Reviews 30:2930–2947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swets, J. A. 1988. Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 240:1285–1293.Google Scholar
Swisher, R. E. 2009. Paleobiogeographical and evolutionary analysis of Late Ordovician, C5 sequence brachiopod species, with special reference to rhynchonellid taxa. Master's thesis, Ohio University, Athens.Google Scholar
Terribile, L. C., Diniz-Filho, J. A., and De Marco, P. Jr. 2010. How many studies are necessary to compare niche-based models for geographic distributions? Inductive reasoning may fail at the end. Brazilian Journal of Biology 70:263–269.Google Scholar
Thuiller, W. S.Lavorel, , and Araujo, M. B. 2005. Niche properties and geographical extent as predictors of species sensitivity to climate change. Global Ecology and Biogeography 14:347–354.Google Scholar
Tyler, C. L., and Leighton, L. R. 2011. Detecting competition in the fossil record: support for character displacement among Ordovician brachiopods. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 307:205–217.Google Scholar
Varela, S., Lobo, J. M., and Hortal, L. 2011. Using species distribution models in paleobiogeography: a matter of data, predictors, and concepts. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 310:451–463.Google Scholar
Vrba, E. S. 1987. Ecology in relation to speciation rates: some case histories of Miocene-Recent mammal clades: Evolutionary Ecology 1:283–300.Google Scholar
Walls, B. J., and Stigall, A.L. 2011. Analyzing niche stability and biogeography of Late Ordovician brachiopod species using ecological niche modeling. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 299:15–29.Google Scholar
Walls, B. J., and Stigall, A.L. 2012. A field based analysis of the accuracy of niche models applied to the fossil record. Paleontological Contributions 6:1–12.Google Scholar
Warren, D. L. 2012. In defense of ‘niche modeling.' Trends in Ecology and Evolution 27:497–500.Google Scholar
Warren, D. L., and Seifert, S. N. 2011. Ecological modeling in Maxent: the importance of model complexity and the performance of model selection criteria. Ecological Applications 21:335–342.Google Scholar
Warren, D. L., Glor, R. E., and Turelli, M. 2008. Environmental niche equivalency verses conservatism: quantitative approaches to niche evolution. Evolution 62:2868–2883.Google Scholar
Warren, D. L., Glor, R. E., and Turelli, M. 2010. ENMTools: a toolbox for comparative studies of environmental niche models. Ecography 33:607–611.Google Scholar
Webber, A. J. 2005. The effects of spatial patchiness on the stratigraphic signal of biotic composition (Type Cincinnatian Series; Upper Ordovician). Palaios 20:37–50.Google Scholar
Wiens, J. J., and Graham, C. H. 2005. Niche conservatism: integrating evolution, ecology and conservation biology. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 36:519–539.Google Scholar
Weins, J. J., Ackerly, D. D., Allen, A. P., Anacker, B. L., Buckley, L. B., Cornell, H. V., Damschen, E. I., Davies, T. Jonathan, Grytnes, J. A., Harrison, S. P., Hawkins, B. A., Holt, R. D., McCain, C. M., and Stephens, P. R. 2010. Niche conservatism as an emerging principle in ecology and biology. Ecology Letters 13:1310–1324.Google Scholar
Wisz, M. S., Hijmans, R. J., Li, J., Peterson, A. T., Graham, C. H., Guisan, A., and NCEAS Predicting Species Distributions Working Group. 2008. Effects of sample size on the performance of species distribution models. Diversity and Distributions 14:763–773.Google Scholar
Wright, D. F., and Stigall, A. L. 2013. Geologic drivers of Late Ordovician faunal change in Laurentia: investigating links between tectonics, speciation, and biotic invasions. PLoS ONE 8 (7):e68353.Google Scholar