Empirical perspectives on species borders: from traditional biogeography to global change

By C. Parmesan, S. Gaines, Laura Marina Boria González, Dawn M. Kaufman, Joel G. Kingsolver, A. Townsend Peterson, Rafe Sagarin. 2005

371 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Genetics, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4bb0ff6417a9637d6a731a52227237793915f0a8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecological Modeling

In Genetics

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Abiotic and biotic constraints across reptile and amphibian ranges (2016, background): “Although both abiotic and biotic factors have been identifi ed as range determinants, the relative strength of these factors across geographic space remains unclear (Parmesan et al. 2005, Gaston 2009, Sexton et al. 2009, Cahill et al. 2014).”
Influences of species, latitudes and methodologies on estimates of phenological response to global warming (2007, background): “…impacts include concerns about effects of publication bias, differences across studies in time periods analyzed, nonrandom sampling within a species and nonrandom selection of species (Ahmad et al., 2001; Parmesan & Yohe, 2003; Badeck et al., 2004; Parmesan, 2004, 2005; Parmesan et al., 2005).”
The push and pull of climate change causes heterogeneous shifts in avian elevational ranges (2012, background): “Nonmovement, or range stability, may result from adaptation of local populations to new climates (Rodrı́guez-Trelles & Rodrı́guez, 1998; Parmesan et al., 2005), an inability to disperse (Davis et al.”
Living on the Edge of Two Changing Worlds: Forecasting the Responses of Rocky Intertidal Ecosystems to Climate Change (2006, background): “…it is important to shift our emphasis away from the search for the impacts of climate change and toward a hypothesis-driven approach that recognizes the interactions between climatic and nonclimatic factors in determining patterns of species abundance and distribution (Parmesan et al. 2005).”
Expanding northward: influence of climate change, forest connectivity, and population processes on a threatened species' range shift (2011, background): “Range expansion and the processes that lead to it at large spatial scales are the types of phenomena that can usually be classified as beyond the reach of controlled experiments (but see Parmesan et al., 2005).”
Ontario freshwater fishes demonstrate differing range‐boundary shifts in a warming climate (2014, background): “…in species distributions are more likely performed at local than regional scales, tend to be terrestrially biased and often focus on the most mobile species including birds, mammals and flying insects (Parmesan & Yohe, 2003; Parmesan et al., 2005; Parmesan, 2006; Chen et al., 2011).”
A rapid altitudinal range expansion in the pine processionary moth produced by the 2003 climatic anomaly (2006, background): “A suite of biotic and abiotic factors, ranging from climatic variables and edaphic conditions, to competition, predation and resource distribution, have been invoked to explain the limits in species distributions (Spicer & Gaston, 1999; Gaston, 2003; Parmesan et al., 2005).”
Human impacts on environment–diversity relationships: evidence for biotic homogenization from butterfly species richness patterns (2007, background): “If species ranges are constrained by, for example, climate tolerance (Parmesan et al., 2005), then the elevation effects observed in this study could arise simply because elevation is a better surrogate for microclimates than broad-scale climate measurements used here (Hijmans et al.”
Long-term changes in the geographic distribution and population structures of Osilinus lineatus (Gastropoda: Trochidae) in Britain and Ireland (2007, background): “While correlational biogeographic studies can be used to obtain probabilistic maps of species occurrence, they cannot provide information on cause and effect (Parmesan & Yohe, 2003; Fortin et al., 2005; Helmuth et al., 2005; Parmesan et al., 2005).”
Detecting range shifts among Australian fishes in response to climate change (2011, methodology): “For example, Perry et al. (2005) used a commercial fishery dataset from theNorth Sea to show that two-thirds of exploited and nonexploited species have shifted in mean latitude or depth during 1977–2001.”
Phenological changes in intertidal con‐specific gastropods in response to climate warming (2011, background): “As in terrestrial systems (Walther et al., 2002; Parmesan et al., 2005; Parmesan, 2006), there is overwhelming evidence that climate warming is driving changes in the distribution and abundance of marine species (Beaugrand et al.”
Model‐based inference for estimating shifts in species distribution, area occupied and centre of gravity (2016, background): “Long time series regarding species distribution are rare (Parmesan et al. 2005), and much could be learned if shorter time series could be stitched together.”
SCALE AND HIERARCHY IN MACROEVOLUTION (2007, background): “…range size is determined by a complex interaction of factors whose strengths vary among clades (e.g. Brown et al. 1996; Case et al. 2005; Parmesan et al. 2005), and that these diverse factors underlying the variation in range size among species are screened off from (i.e. do not…”