Decoupling both local and global abundance from global range size, challenging the abundance-occupancy relationship in birds.

IF 6.4 1区 生物学 Q1 BIOLOGY
eLife Pub Date : 2025-05-28 DOI:10.7554/eLife.95857
Shinichi Nakagawa, William K Cornwell, Corey T Callaghan
{"title":"Decoupling both local and global abundance from global range size, challenging the abundance-occupancy relationship in birds.","authors":"Shinichi Nakagawa, William K Cornwell, Corey T Callaghan","doi":"10.7554/eLife.95857","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In macroecology, a classic empirical observation has been positive relationships between local abundance and species' range, known as the abundance-occupancy relationships (AORs). The existence of this empirical relationship has informed both theory development and applied questions. Notably, the spatial neutral model of biodiversity predicts AORs. Yet, based on the largest known meta-analysis of 16,562,995 correlations from ~3 billion bird observations, this relationship was indistinguishable from zero. Further, in a phylogenetic comparative analysis, species range had no predictive power over the global mean abundance of 7464 bird species. We suggest that publication and confirmation biases may have created AORs, an illusion of a 'universal' pattern. This nullification highlights the need for ecologists to instigate a credibility revolution like psychology, where many classic phenomena have been nullified.</p>","PeriodicalId":11640,"journal":{"name":"eLife","volume":"13 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12119083/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"eLife","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.95857","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In macroecology, a classic empirical observation has been positive relationships between local abundance and species' range, known as the abundance-occupancy relationships (AORs). The existence of this empirical relationship has informed both theory development and applied questions. Notably, the spatial neutral model of biodiversity predicts AORs. Yet, based on the largest known meta-analysis of 16,562,995 correlations from ~3 billion bird observations, this relationship was indistinguishable from zero. Further, in a phylogenetic comparative analysis, species range had no predictive power over the global mean abundance of 7464 bird species. We suggest that publication and confirmation biases may have created AORs, an illusion of a 'universal' pattern. This nullification highlights the need for ecologists to instigate a credibility revolution like psychology, where many classic phenomena have been nullified.

从全局范围大小解耦局部和全局丰度,挑战鸟类的丰度-占用关系。
在宏观生态学中,一个经典的经验观察表明,物种的局部丰度与物种的分布范围呈正相关,即丰度-占用关系(AORs)。这种经验关系的存在为理论发展和应用问题提供了信息。值得注意的是,生物多样性的空间中性模型预测了AORs。然而,根据对30亿鸟类观测数据中16,562,995个相关性的最大已知荟萃分析,这种关系与零几乎没有区别。此外,在系统发育比较分析中,物种范围对7464种鸟类的全球平均丰度没有预测能力。我们认为,发表和确认偏差可能造成了AORs,这是一种“普遍”模式的错觉。这种否定强调了生态学家需要发起一场像心理学一样的可信度革命,在心理学中,许多经典现象都被否定了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
eLife
eLife BIOLOGY-
CiteScore
12.90
自引率
3.90%
发文量
3122
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊介绍: eLife is a distinguished, not-for-profit, peer-reviewed open access scientific journal that specializes in the fields of biomedical and life sciences. eLife is known for its selective publication process, which includes a variety of article types such as: Research Articles: Detailed reports of original research findings. Short Reports: Concise presentations of significant findings that do not warrant a full-length research article. Tools and Resources: Descriptions of new tools, technologies, or resources that facilitate scientific research. Research Advances: Brief reports on significant scientific advancements that have immediate implications for the field. Scientific Correspondence: Short communications that comment on or provide additional information related to published articles. Review Articles: Comprehensive overviews of a specific topic or field within the life sciences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信