取消生物多样性的“摇篮”和“博物馆”。

The American Naturalist Pub Date : 2022-02-01 Epub Date: 2021-12-15 DOI:10.1086/717412
Thais Vasconcelos, Brian C O'Meara, Jeremy M Beaulieu
{"title":"取消生物多样性的“摇篮”和“博物馆”。","authors":"Thais Vasconcelos,&nbsp;Brian C O'Meara,&nbsp;Jeremy M Beaulieu","doi":"10.1086/717412","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 1974, G. Ledyard Stebbins provided a metaphor illustrating how spatial gradients of biodiversity observed today are by-products of the way environment-population interactions drive species diversification through time. We revisit the narrative behind Stebbins's \"cradles\" and \"museums\" of biodiversity to debate two points. First, the usual high-speciation versus low-extinction and tropical versus temperate dichotomies are oversimplifications of the original metaphor and may obscure how gradients of diversity are formed. Second, the way in which we use modern gradients of biodiversity to interpret the potential historical processes that generated them are often still biased by the reasons that motivated Stebbins to propose his original metaphor. Specifically, the field has not yet abandoned the idea that species-rich areas and \"basal lineages\" indicate centers of origin, nor has it fully appreciated the role of traits as regulators of environment-population dynamics. We acknowledge that the terms \"cradles\" and \"museums\" are popular in the literature and that terminologies can evolve with the requirements of the field. However, we also argue that the concepts of cradles and museums have outlived their utility in studies of biogeography and macroevolution and should be replaced by discussions of actual processes at play.</p>","PeriodicalId":501264,"journal":{"name":"The American Naturalist","volume":" ","pages":"194-205"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retiring \\\"Cradles\\\" and \\\"Museums\\\" of Biodiversity.\",\"authors\":\"Thais Vasconcelos,&nbsp;Brian C O'Meara,&nbsp;Jeremy M Beaulieu\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/717412\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In 1974, G. Ledyard Stebbins provided a metaphor illustrating how spatial gradients of biodiversity observed today are by-products of the way environment-population interactions drive species diversification through time. We revisit the narrative behind Stebbins's \\\"cradles\\\" and \\\"museums\\\" of biodiversity to debate two points. First, the usual high-speciation versus low-extinction and tropical versus temperate dichotomies are oversimplifications of the original metaphor and may obscure how gradients of diversity are formed. Second, the way in which we use modern gradients of biodiversity to interpret the potential historical processes that generated them are often still biased by the reasons that motivated Stebbins to propose his original metaphor. Specifically, the field has not yet abandoned the idea that species-rich areas and \\\"basal lineages\\\" indicate centers of origin, nor has it fully appreciated the role of traits as regulators of environment-population dynamics. We acknowledge that the terms \\\"cradles\\\" and \\\"museums\\\" are popular in the literature and that terminologies can evolve with the requirements of the field. However, we also argue that the concepts of cradles and museums have outlived their utility in studies of biogeography and macroevolution and should be replaced by discussions of actual processes at play.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501264,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The American Naturalist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"194-205\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"20\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The American Naturalist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/717412\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/12/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Naturalist","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/717412","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/12/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

摘要

1974年,G. Ledyard Stebbins提供了一个比喻,说明今天观察到的生物多样性的空间梯度是环境-种群相互作用驱动物种多样化方式的副产品。我们重新审视斯特宾斯关于生物多样性的“摇篮”和“博物馆”背后的叙述,讨论两点。首先,通常的高物种形成与低灭绝以及热带与温带的二分法是对原始比喻的过度简化,可能会模糊多样性梯度是如何形成的。其次,我们用生物多样性的现代梯度来解释产生它们的潜在历史过程的方式,往往仍然受到促使斯特宾斯提出他最初比喻的原因的影响。具体来说,该领域尚未放弃物种丰富地区和“基础谱系”表明起源中心的观点,也没有充分认识到性状作为环境-种群动态调节者的作用。我们承认“摇篮”和“博物馆”这两个术语在文献中很流行,并且术语可以随着该领域的要求而发展。然而,我们也认为摇篮和博物馆的概念在生物地理学和宏观进化的研究中已经过时了,应该被讨论实际的过程所取代。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Retiring "Cradles" and "Museums" of Biodiversity.

In 1974, G. Ledyard Stebbins provided a metaphor illustrating how spatial gradients of biodiversity observed today are by-products of the way environment-population interactions drive species diversification through time. We revisit the narrative behind Stebbins's "cradles" and "museums" of biodiversity to debate two points. First, the usual high-speciation versus low-extinction and tropical versus temperate dichotomies are oversimplifications of the original metaphor and may obscure how gradients of diversity are formed. Second, the way in which we use modern gradients of biodiversity to interpret the potential historical processes that generated them are often still biased by the reasons that motivated Stebbins to propose his original metaphor. Specifically, the field has not yet abandoned the idea that species-rich areas and "basal lineages" indicate centers of origin, nor has it fully appreciated the role of traits as regulators of environment-population dynamics. We acknowledge that the terms "cradles" and "museums" are popular in the literature and that terminologies can evolve with the requirements of the field. However, we also argue that the concepts of cradles and museums have outlived their utility in studies of biogeography and macroevolution and should be replaced by discussions of actual processes at play.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信