↓ Skip to main content

Ecological specialization and population size in a biodiversity hotspot: How rare species avoid extinction

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, November 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
88 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
460 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Ecological specialization and population size in a biodiversity hotspot: How rare species avoid extinction
Published in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, November 2009
DOI 10.1073/pnas.0901640106
Pubmed ID
Authors

S. E. Williams, Y. M. Williams, J. VanDerWal, J. L. Isaac, L. P. Shoo, C. N. Johnson

Abstract

Species with narrow environmental niches typically have small geographic ranges. Small range size is, in turn, often associated with low local abundance. Together, these factors should mean that ecological specialists have very small total populations, putting them at high risk of extinction. But some specialized and geographically restricted species are ancient, and some ecological communities have high proportions of rare and specialized endemics. We studied niche characteristics and patterns of distribution and abundance of terrestrial vertebrates in the rainforests of the Australian Wet Tropics (AWT) to identify mechanisms by which rare species might resist extinction. We show that species with narrow environmental niches and small geographic ranges tend to have high and uniform local abundances. The compensation of geographic rarity by local abundance is exact, such that total population size in the rainforest vertebrates of the AWT is independent of environmental specialization. This effect would tend to help equalize extinction risk for specialists and generalists. Phylogenetic analysis suggests that environmental specialists have been gradually accumulating in this fauna, indicating that small range size/environmental specialization can be a successful trait as long as it is compensated for by demographic commonness. These results provide an explanation of how range-restricted specialists can persist for long periods, so that they now form a major component of high-diversity assemblages such as the AWT.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 460 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 11 2%
Spain 6 1%
Brazil 6 1%
United Kingdom 5 1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
France 2 <1%
India 2 <1%
Bulgaria 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Other 17 4%
Unknown 407 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 110 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 91 20%
Student > Master 60 13%
Student > Bachelor 37 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 31 7%
Other 87 19%
Unknown 44 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 281 61%
Environmental Science 88 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 9 2%
Mathematics 3 <1%
Other 14 3%
Unknown 55 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 January 2010.
All research outputs
#16,741,542
of 24,625,114 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#91,769
of 101,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,022
of 175,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#759
of 853 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,625,114 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 101,438 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.8. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 175,461 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 853 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.