Canopy and litter ant assemblages share similar climate-species density relationships

Michael D. Weiser, Nathan J. Sanders, Donat Agosti, Alan N. Andersen, Aaron M. Ellison, Brian L. Fisher, Heloise Gibb, Nicholas J. Gotelli, Aaron D. Gove, Kevin Gross, Benoit Guénard, Milan Janda, Michael Kaspari, Jean Philippe Lessard, John T. Longino, Jonathan D. Majer, Sean B. Menke, Terrence P. McGlynn, Catherine L. Parr, Stacy M. PhilpottJavier Retana, Andrew V. Suarez, Heraldo L. Vasconcelos, Stephen P. Yanoviak, Robert R. Dunn

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Tropical forest canopies house most of the globe's diversity, yet little is known about global patterns and drivers of canopy diversity. Here, we present models of ant species density, using climate, abundance and habitat (i.e. canopy versus litter) as predictors. Ant species density is positively associated with temperature and precipitation, and negatively (or non-significantly) associated with two metrics of seasonality, precipitation seasonality and temperature range. Ant species density was significantly higher in canopy samples, but this difference disappeared once abundance was considered. Thus, apparent differences in species density between canopy and litter samples are probably owing to differences in abundance-diversity relationships, and not differences in climate-diversity relationships. Thus, it appears that canopy and litter ant assemblages share a common abundance-diversity relationship influenced by similar but not identical climatic drivers.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)769-772
Number of pages4
JournalBiology Letters
Volume6
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 23 2010

Keywords

  • Formicidae
  • Global diversity gradients
  • Species richness

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Canopy and litter ant assemblages share similar climate-species density relationships'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this