Habitat type as a determinant of species range sizes: the example of lotic–lentic differences in aquatic Coleoptera

By I. Ribera, A. Vogler. 2000

148 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Ecology, Genetics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d0714ba9a0018f5321063b759300f49dd09b04b2

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 Ecology

In Genetics

Citations in the corpus

Latitudinal variation of diversity in European freshwater animals is not concordant across habitat types (2008, unknown): “Hence, one would expect species living in lentic habitats to be characterized by a higher propensity for dispersal than species living in lotic or groundwater habitats (Dobson & Frid, 1998; Ribera & Vogler, 2000; Ribera et al ., 2003; Marten et al ., 2006; Ribera, 2008).”
Dispersal ability rather than ecological tolerance drives differences in range size between lentic and lotic water beetles (Coleoptera: Hydrophilidae) (2012, background): “…and more ecologically unstable lentic habitats have less population genetic structure and larger geographical ranges than their lotic relatives, a pattern observed across a range of taxa, regions and systems (e.g. Ribera & Vogler, 2000; Hof et al., 2006; Abellán et al., 2009; Damm et al., 2010).”
PAPER Recent range shifts of European dragonflies provide support for an inverse relationship between habitat predictability and dispersal (2013, background): “…some important © 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd DOI: 10.1111/geb.12004 http://wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/geb 403 predictions of the HSDH (e.g. Ribera & Vogler, 2000; Ribera et al., 2001, 2003; Hof et al., 2012), for instance that lentic species have on average larger range sizes than lotic…”
Does habitat use explain large scale species richness patterns of aquatic beetles in Europe (2003, background): “This explanation of observed species richness patterns is still lacking strong factual support, but it has wide implications (see above and Ribera and Vogler 2000) and it is straightforward to test.”
Lentic odonates have larger and more northern ranges than lotic species (2006, background): “High propensity for dispersal may lead to large range sizes (Ribera & Vogler, 2000; Gaston, 2003; Ribera et al., 2003; Vogler & Ribera, 2003) and low genetic variation between populations (Peterson & Denno, 1998; Bilton et al., 2001).”
Species distribution models that do not incorporate global data misrepresent potential distributions: a case study using Iberian diving beetles (2011, background): “…we evaluated whether UP values were associated with three general geographical characteristics of species (northern limit, southern limit and latitudinal range extent, in degrees) and one ecological trait (adaptation to lentic-standing or lotic-running habitats), following Ribera & Vogler (2000).”