1 - The International Biogeography Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

news and updatediscipline and its leading society, and we areexcited to provide a new venue for Frontiers thatreflects the long-standing values of science and isin the vanguard of publishing.Michael N Dawson 1 , Richard Field 2 andJoaquín Hortal 31 Deputy Editor‐in‐Chief, Frontiers of Biogeography andIBS Vice‐President for Public Affairs and Communications2 Deputy Editor‐in‐Chief, Frontiers of Biogeography andIBS Secretary3 Editor‐in‐Chief, Frontiers of BiogeographyReferencesBeckage, B., Gross, L., Platt, W., Godsoe, W. &Simberloff, D. (2012) Individual variation andweak neutrality as determinants of forestdiversity. Frontiers of Biogeography, 4, 145-155.Dawson, M.N (2012) Parallel phylogeographic structurein ecologically similar sympatric sister taxa.Molecular Ecology, 21, 987-1004.Dawson, M.N, Field, R. & Hortal, J. (2011) AdvancingFrontiers, with a retrospective. Frontiers ofBiogeography, 3, 1–2.Fagin, T. & Hoagland, B. (2011) Patterns from the past:Modeling Public Land Survey witness treedistributions with weights-of-evidence. PlantEcology, 212, 207-217.Gibbons, R.E., Barrio, J., Bravo, G.A. & Alza, L. (2011)Assessing the geographic range of Black-frontedGround-Tyrants (Muscisaxicola frontalis) usingextralimital and winter range occurrencerecords and ecological niche modeling. Journalof Field Ornithology, 82, 355-365.Hortal, J. & Dawson, M.N (2009) Frontiers ofBiogeography, a new frontier for the IBS.Frontiers of Biogeography, 1, 1.Ladle, R.J., Jepson, P., Malhado, A.C.M., Jennings, S. &Barua, M. (2011) The causes andbiogeographical significance of species’rediscovery. Frontiers of Biogeography, 3, 111-118.Lomolino, L.R. & Heaney, M.V. (2009) From thefoundations to the frontiers of biogeography.Frontiers of Biogeography, 1, 3–4.Peterson, A. & Lieberman, B. (2012) Species’geographic distributions through time: Playingcatch-up with changing climates. Evolution:Education and Outreach, doi:10.1007/s12052-012-0385-2.Scheiner, S.M. (2011) Musings on the Acropolis:Terminology for biogeography. Frontiers ofBiogeography, 3, 62-70.Smith, T.W. & Lundholm, J.T. (2012) Environmentalgeometry and heterogeneity–diversityrelationships in spatially explicit simulatedcommunities. Journal of Vegetation Science,doi:10.1111/j.1654-1103.2011.01380.x.2 © 2012 the authors; journal compilation © 2012 The International Biogeography Society — frontiers of biogeography 4.1, 2012
news and update ISSN 1948-6596updateA cure for seeing double? Convergence and unification inbiogeography and ecologyMore perspectives are presented by Biogeographyand ecology: two views of one world (Jenkins andRicklefs 2011a) 1 than are enumerated in the title.This collection of ten papers targets, and revealsmuch about, the “converge[nce of biogeographyand ecology] at intermediate spatial and temporalscales”; yet “lingering differences” hint at thechallenges facing these disciplines during “the currenttrend towards their unification” (Ricklefs andJenkins 2011).Approximately twenty years ago, after decadesof separation, the disciplines of biogeographyand ecology found common ground spanningintermediate spatial and temporal scales, frommetapopulations to regional communities (Jenkinsand Ricklefs 2011b) or perhaps from assemblagesto species’ ranges (Guisan and Rahbek 2011, Hortal2011, Figure 1). Macroecology (Brown 1995)played a pivotal role, providing the raison d’êtreand methodology for assembling details on individualspecies into broad generalizable pictures ofcontinental diversity (Brown and Maurer 1989). Asecology reached out spatially and back in time toexplain, for example, patterns of mammal bodysize on four major continents (Smith and Lyons2011), so phylogenetic analyses began organizingspecies’ traits and then intra-specific ecologicalvariation in an evolutionary framework(Felsenstein 1985, Poulin et al. 2011). So too, thetools for distinguishing species genetically andphenotypically increased, permitting new questionsabout the relationships between taxonomic,phylogenetic, and functional diversity: how do themany forms of biodiversity vary spatially and temporally,how do different aspects of diversity relateacross scales, and what does this tell us aboutcommunity assembly and ecosystem function(Cavender-Bares et al. 2009, Davies and Buckley2011, Emerson et al. 2011, Weiher et al. 2011.Hortal et al. 2012)? The increasing rate of publicationon such issues (Cianciaruso 2011, Jenkins andRicklefs 2011b, Smith and Lyons 2011) suggestsinterdisciplinary understanding of the organizationof biodiversity at intermediate spatial andtemporal scales is a common goal of ecologistsand biogeographers helping to resolve, for example,the meaning and consequences of the niche(Chase and Myers 2011, Wiens 2011) and of diversity(Chiarucci et al. 2011).The image of biogeography and ecologyconjured up by this collection is one of manythreads at the beginnings of a braid. Each paper islightly intertwined with another on one of fourtopics—niche, macroecology and comparativeecology, community assembly, diversity—thenwound loosely around each other within thetheme (Ricklefs and Jenkins 2011). The strands areheld together by only a few connections, encouragedin advance of the symposium: on average, afew cross-citations and acknowledgement of commentson earlier manuscripts. Thus, at present,the natural convergence of biogeography andecology at intermediate spatial and temporalscales looks more like interdigitation than mutualassimilation of ideas and techniques. The challengeis, in part, overcoming the practical limitationsof measuring biodiversity across multiplelevels of organization and spatial scales of interest,and turning the perceptual biases dependenton grain size, spatial extent, and phylogeny intoopportunities for developing scale-free formulationsof biodiversity (Chiarucci et al. 2011) or scalingconcepts that help merge community ecologywith biogeography (Weiher et al. 2011). Overcomingthis challenge may require taking the organizationalmodel applied in this symposium one ortwo steps further, attracting individuals frommany backgrounds to engage as interdisciplinaryteams on common projects.Whether the “trend towards … unification”1 This August 2011 theme issue of Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B reports the proceedings of theInternational Biogeography Society symposium “Biogeography and Ecology: Two Lenses in One Telescope” – seehttp://www.biogeography.org/html/Meetings/2011/program.htmlfrontiers of biogeography 4.1, 2012 — © 2012 the authors; journal compilation © 2012 The International Biogeography Society3
Page 1 and 2: frontiers of biogeographyvol. 4, n
Page 3: editorial ISSN 1948-6596editorialAd
Page 8 and 9: news and updateEvans, M.R., Norris,
Page 10 and 11: news and updateby, for instance, th
Page 12 and 13: news and updateJiménez-Valverde, A
Page 14 and 15: news and updateconservation and new
Page 16 and 17: news and update ISSN 1948-6596has b
Page 18 and 19: news and update ISSN 1948-6596conse
Page 20 and 21: news and update ISSN 1948-6596reten
Page 22 and 23: news and update ISSN 1948-6596thesi
Page 24 and 25: island parasitoid community structu
Page 26 and 27: island parasitoid community structu
Page 28 and 29: opinion and perspectivesperspective
Page 30 and 31: losing time?Ecological examplesBody
Page 32 and 33: losing time?2009) and avian (Boyer
Page 34 and 35: losing time?before the 20 th centur
Page 37 and 38: Felisa A. Smith and Alison G. Boyer
Page 43 and 44: membership cornerfrom the societyUp
Page 45 and 46: membership cornerJob announcementsT
Page 47: table of contentsfrontiers of bioge

1 - The International Biogeography Society

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?