590 Tiere (Zoologie)
Refine
Year of publication
- 2019 (4) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (2)
- Part of Periodical (2)
Language
- English (4) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- biodiversity (4) (remove)
Aim: Predicting future changes in species richness in response to climate change is one of the key challenges in biogeography and conservation ecology. Stacked species distribution models (S‐SDMs) are a commonly used tool to predict current and future species richness. Macroecological models (MEMs), regression models with species richness as response variable, are a less computationally intensive alternative to S‐SDMs. Here, we aim to compare the results of two model types (S‐SDMS and MEMs), for the first time for more than 14,000 species across multiple taxa globally, and to trace the uncertainty in future predictions back to the input data and modelling approach used.
Location: Global land, excluding Antarctica.
Taxon: Amphibians, birds and mammals.
Methods: We fitted S‐SDMs and MEMs using a consistent set of bioclimatic variables and model algorithms and conducted species richness predictions under current and future conditions. For the latter, we used four general circulation models (GCMs) under two representative concentration pathways (RCP2.6 and RCP6.0). Predicted species richness was compared between S‐SDMs and MEMs and for current conditions also to extent‐of‐occurrence (EOO) species richness patterns. For future predictions, we quantified the variance in predicted species richness patterns explained by the choice of model type, model algorithm and GCM using hierarchical cluster analysis and variance partitioning.
Results: Under current conditions, species richness predictions from MEMs and S‐SDMs were strongly correlated with EOO‐based species richness. However, both model types over‐predicted areas with low and under‐predicted areas with high species richness. Outputs from MEMs and S‐SDMs were also highly correlated among each other under current and future conditions. The variance between future predictions was mostly explained by model type.
Main conclusions: Both model types were able to reproduce EOO‐based patterns in global terrestrial vertebrate richness, but produce less collinear predictions of future species richness. Model type by far contributes to most of the variation in the different future species richness predictions, indicating that the two model types should not be used interchangeably. Nevertheless, both model types have their justification, as MEMs can also include species with a restricted range, whereas S‐SDMs are useful for looking at potential species‐specific responses.
Genomic sequencing and analysis of worldwide skipper butterfly (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae) fauna points to imperfections in their current classification. Some tribes, subtribes and genera as they are circumscribed today are not monophyletic. Rationalizing genomic results from the perspective of phenotypic characters suggests two new tribes, two new subtribes and 50 new genera that are named here: Ceratrichiini Grishin, trib. n., Gretnini Grishin, trib. n., Falgina Grishin, subtr. n., Apaustina Grishin, subtr. n., Flattoides Grishin, gen. n., Aurivittia Grishin, gen. n., Viuria Grishin, gen. n., Clytius Grishin, gen. n., Incisus Grishin, gen. n., Perus Grishin, gen. n., Livida Grishin, gen. n., Festivia Grishin, gen. n., Hoodus Grishin, gen. n., Anaxas Grishin, gen. n., Chiothion Grishin, gen. n., Crenda Grishin, gen. n., Santa Grishin, gen. n., Canesia Grishin, gen. n., Bralus Grishin, gen. n., Ladda Grishin, gen. n., Willema Grishin, gen. n., Argemma Grishin, gen. n., Nervia Grishin, gen. n., Dotta Grishin, gen. n., Lissia Grishin, gen. n., Xanthonymus Grishin, gen. n., Cerba Grishin, gen. n., Avestia Grishin, gen. n., Zetka Grishin, gen. n., Turmosa Grishin, gen. n., Mielkeus Grishin, gen. n., Coolus Grishin, gen. n., Daron Grishin, gen. n., Barrolla Grishin, gen. n., Brownus Grishin, gen. n., Tava Grishin, gen. n., Rigga Grishin, gen. n., Haza Grishin, gen. n., Dubia Grishin, gen. n., Pares Grishin, gen. n., Chitta Grishin, gen. n., Artonia Grishin, gen. n., Lurida Grishin, gen. n., Corra Grishin, gen. n., Fidius Grishin, gen. n., Veadda Grishin, gen. n., Tricrista Grishin, gen. n., Viridina Grishin, gen. n., Alychna Grishin, gen. n., Ralis Grishin, gen. n., Testia Grishin, gen. n., Buzella Grishin, gen. n., Vernia Grishin, gen. n., and Lon Grishin, gen. n. In addition, the following taxonomic changes are suggested. Prada Evans is transferred from Hesperiinae to Trapezitinae. Echelatus Godman and Salvin, Systaspes Weeks, and Oenides Mabille are removed from synonymy and are treated as valid genera. The following genera are new junior subjective synonyms: Tosta Evans of Eantis Boisduval; Turmada Evans of Neoxeniades Hayward, Arita Evans of Tigasis Godman, and Alera Mabille of Perichares Scudder. Eantis pallida (R. Felder) (not Achlyodes Hübner), Gindanes kelso (Evans) (not Onenses Godman and Salvin), Isoteinon abjecta (Snellen) (not Astictopterus C. and R. Felder), Neoxeniades ethoda (Hewitson) (not Xeniades Godman), Moeris anna (Mabille) (not Vidius Evans), and Molo pelta Evans (not Lychnuchus Hübner) are new genus-species combinations. The following are species-level taxa: Livida assecla (Mabille) (not a subspecies of Livida grandis (Mabille), formerly Pythonides Hübner) and Alychna zenus (E. Bell) (not a junior subjective synonym of Alychna exclamationis (Mabille), formerly Psoralis Mabille); and Barrolla molla E. Bell (formerly Vacerra Godman) is a junior subjective synonym of Barrolla barroni Evans (formerly Paratrytone Godman). All these changes to taxonomic status of names are propagated to all names currently treated as subspecies (for species), subgenera (for genera) and synonyms of these taxa. Finally, taxa not mentioned in this work are considered to remain at the ranks and in taxonomic groups they have been previously assigned to.
We present an updated, subjective list of the extant, non-marine ostracod genera and species of the world, with their distributions in the major zoogeographical regions, as well as a list of the genera in their present hierarchical taxonomic positions. The list includes all taxa described and taxonomic alterations made up to 1 July 2018. Taxonomic changes include 17 new combinations, 5 new names, 1 emended specific name and 11 new synonymies (1 tribe, 4 genera, 6 species). Taking into account the recognized synonymies, there are presently 2330 subjective species of non-marine ostracods in 270 genera. The most diverse family in non-marine habitats is the Cyprididae, comprising 43.2% of all species, followed by the Candonidae (29.0%), Entocytheridae (9.1%) and the Limnocytheridae (7.0%). An additional 13 families comprise the remaining 11.8% of described species. The Palaearctic zoogeographical region has the greatest number of described species (799), followed by the Afrotropical region with 453 species and the Nearctic region with 439 species. The Australasian and Neotropical regions each have 328 and 333 recorded species, respectively, while the Oriental region has 271. The vast majority of non-marine ostracods (89.8%) are endemic to one zoogeographical region, while only six species are found in six or more regions. We also present an additional list with 'uncertain species', which have neither been redescribed nor re-assessed since 1912, and which are excluded from the main list; a list of taxonomic changes presented in the present paper; a table with the number of species and % per family; and a table with numbers of new species described in the 20-year period between 1998 and 2017 per zoogeographical region. Two figures visualize the total number of species and endemic species per zoogeographical region, and the numbers of new species descriptions per decade for all families and the three largest families since 1770, respectively.
Polysyncraton Nott, 1892 is the second largest genus of didemnid ascidians; it has a wide distribution ranging from temperate to tropical waters. Seventy-one specimens of Polysyncraton from eight museum collections and recently collected samples were analyzed. This resulted in the description of three new species (P. cabofriense Oliveira & Rocha sp. nov. from Brazil, P. globosum Oliveira & Rocha sp. nov. from Australia and P. snelliusi Oliveira & Rocha sp. nov. from Suriname) and emended descriptions of three further species (P. amethysteum (Van Name, 1902), P. magnilarvum (Millar, 1962) and P. purou C. Monniot & F. Monniot, 1987).