Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T05:16:16.118Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Biogeographic and fragmentation-related research biases on antbirds and non-flying small mammals in Brazil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 July 2021

Lana P. Candelária Open the ORCID record for Lana P. Candelária [Opens in a new window] ,
Mayara Zucchetto Open the ORCID record for Mayara Zucchetto [Opens in a new window] ,
Stela R.A. Gonçalves Open the ORCID record for Stela R.A. Gonçalves [Opens in a new window] ,
Gisele da S.F. Braga Open the ORCID record for Gisele da S.F. Braga [Opens in a new window] ,
Thiago J. Izzo  and
Alberto L. Teixido Open the ORCID record for Alberto L. Teixido [Opens in a new window]
Lana P. Candelária*
Affiliation:
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Conservação da Biodiversidade, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso, Av. Fernando Corrêa 2367, E-78060-900Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, Brazil
Mayara Zucchetto
Affiliation:
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Conservação da Biodiversidade, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso, Av. Fernando Corrêa 2367, E-78060-900Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, Brazil
Stela R.A. Gonçalves
Affiliation:
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Conservação da Biodiversidade, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso, Av. Fernando Corrêa 2367, E-78060-900Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, Brazil
Gisele da S.F. Braga
Affiliation:
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Conservação da Biodiversidade, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso, Av. Fernando Corrêa 2367, E-78060-900Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, Brazil
Thiago J. Izzo
Affiliation:
Departamento de Botânica e Ecologia, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso, Av. Fernando Corrêa 2367, E-78060-900Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, Brazil
Alberto L. Teixido
Affiliation:
Departamento de Botânica e Ecologia, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso, Av. Fernando Corrêa 2367, E-78060-900Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, Brazil
*
Author for correspondence:*Lana P. Candelária, Email: lanapavao@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Major biogeographic and taxonomic biases are recurrent in biological surveys, including fragmentation studies. Detecting biases and subsequent gaps is crucial to steer future research and suitable conservation policies. We evaluated biogeographic and fragmentation-related biases on antbirds and non-flying small mammals in Brazil, two oversampled and vulnerable taxonomic groups, by surveying papers in the Scielo and the Web of Science. We found 566 articles published from 1945 to 2018, including 55 and 43 fragmentation studies for antbirds and small mammals, respectively. Considering the species richness for each group across the Brazilian biomes, the number of publications for small mammals tended to disproportionately increase while increasing richness. The Atlantic Forest, the most degraded and densely populated biome, contained the highest number of publications. However, the Amazon included a disproportionately high number of papers considering its low population density. Conversely, non-forest biomes such as the Caatinga, Pampa and Pantanal were mostly overlooked. Our results show that research effort for small mammals and antbirds in Brazil is biogeographically biased. We call future research to consider more studies across non-forest biomes and vast unexplored areas within forest biomes to overcome major knowledge gaps on diversity, distribution and ecology of antbirds and small mammals in Brazil.

Keywords

AmazonAtlantic Forestbiomeskernel densityknowledge gapsThamnophilidae
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 37 , Issue 4 , July 2021 , pp. 175 - 184
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arruda, FV, Sousa, DG, Teresa, FB, Prado, VHM, Cunha, HF and Izzo, TJ (2018) Trends and gaps of the scientific literature about the effects of fire on Brazilian Cerrado. Biota Neotropica 18, e20170426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avenant, N (2011) The potential utility of rodents and other small mammals as indicators of ecosystem ‘integrity’ of South African grasslands. Wildlife Research 38, 626–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bovendorp, RS, Villar, N, Abreu-Junior, EF, Bello, C, Regolin, AL, Percequillo, AR and Galetti, M (2017) Atlantic small-mammal: a dataset of communities of rodents and marsupials of the Atlantic forests of South America. Ecology 98, 2226–2226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brewer, SW and Rejmánek, M (1999) Small rodents as significant dispersers of tree seeds in a Neotropical forest. Journal of Vegetation Science 10, 165–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapin, FS III, Zavaleta, ES, Eviner, VT, Naylor, RL, Vitousek, PM, Reynolds, HL, Hooper, DU, Lavorel, S, Sala, OE, Hobbie, SE, Mack, MC and Díaz, S (2000) Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature 405, 234–242.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, JA and May, RM (2002) Taxonomic bias in taxonomic research. Science 297, 191–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deikumah, JP, Mcalpine, CA and Maron, M (2014) Biogeographical and taxonomic biases in tropical forest fragmentation research. Conservation Biology 28, 1522–1531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Delciellos, AC, Vieira, MV, Grelle, CEV, Cobra, P and Cerqueira, R (2016) Habitat quality versus spatial variables as determinants of small mammal assemblages in Atlantic Forest fragments. Journal of Mammalogy 97, 253–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Didham, RK, Kapos, V and Ewers, RM (2012) Rethinking the conceptual foundations of habitat fragmentation research. Oikos 121, 161–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenberg, JF and Redford, KH (1999) Mammals of the Neotropics – The central neotropics: Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Brazil. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fahrig, L (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 34, 487–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahrig, L (2017) Ecological responses to habitat fragmentation per se. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 48, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahrig, L, Arroyo-Rodríguez, V, Bennett, JR, Boucher-Lalonde, V, Cazetta, E, Currie, DJ, Eigenbrod, F, Ford, AT, Harrison, SP, Jaeger, JAG, Koper, N, Martin, AE, Martin, JL, Metzger, JP, Morrison, P, Rhodes, JR, Saunders, DA, Simberloff, D, Smith, AC, Tischendorf, L, Vellend, M and Watling, JI (2019) Is habitat fragmentation bad for biodiversity? Biological Conservation 230, 179–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, RJ, Didham, RK, Banks-Leite, C, Barlow, J, Ewers, RM, Rosindell, J, Holt, RD, Gonzalez, A, Pardini, R, Damschen, EI, Melo, FPL, Ries, L, Prevedello, JA, Tscharntke, T, Laurance, WF, Lovejoy, TE and Haddad, NM (2018) Is habitat fragmentation good for biodiversity? Biological Conservation 226, 9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galetti, M, Guevara, R, Galbiati, LA, Neves, CL, Rodarte, RR and Mendes, CP (2015) Seed predation by rodents and implications for plant recruitment in defaunated Atlantic Forests. Biotropica 47, 521–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grenha, V, Macedo, MV, Pires, AS and Monteiro, RF (2010) The role of Cerradomys subflavus (Rodentia, Cricetidae) as seed predator and disperser of the palm Allagoptera arenaria . Mastozoologia Neotropical 17, 61–68.Google Scholar
Hanski, I (2015) Habitat fragmentation and species richness. Journal of Biogeography 42, 989–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IBGE (1992) Manual técnico da vegetação brasileira. Rio de Janeiro: Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Available in https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/visualizacao/monografias/GEBIS%20-%20RJ/ManuaisdeGeociencias/Manual%20Tecnico%20da%20Vegetacao%20Brasileira%20n.1.pdf (accessed on 11 May 2021).Google Scholar
IBGE (2010a) Biomas do Brasil 1:5.000.000. Rio de Janeiro: Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Available in http://portaldemapas.ibge.gov.br/portal.php#mapa778 (accessed on 10 April 2020).Google Scholar
IBGE (2010b) Censo demográfico 2010. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Available in https://censo2010.ibge.gov.br/resultados.html (accessed on 12 January 2021).Google Scholar
IBGE (2018a) Síntese descrição biomas. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Available in https://geoftp.ibge.gov.br/informacoes_ambientais/estudos_ambientais/biomas/documentos/Sintese_Descricao_Biomas.pdf (accessed on 11 May 2021).Google Scholar
IBGE (2018b) Monitoramento da cobertura e uso da terra do Brasil. Brasília: Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Available in https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/visualizacao/livros/liv101703_folder.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2020).Google Scholar
Kruess, A and Tscharntke, T (1994) Habitat Fragmentation, Species Loss, and Biological Control. Science 264, 1581–1584.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lapola, DM, Martinelli, LA, Peres, CA, Ometto, JPHB, Ferreira, ME, Nobre, CA, Aguiar, APD, Bustamante, MMC, Cardoso, MF, Costa, MH, Joly, CA, Leite, CC, Moutinho, P, Sampaio, G, Strassburg, BBN and Vieira, ICG (2014) Pervasive transition of the Brazilian land-use system. Nature Climate Change 4, 27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurance, WF, Camargo, J, Luizão, R, Laurance, SG, Pimm, SL, Bruna, E, Stouffer, PC, Williamson, GB, Benitez-Malvido, J, Vasconcelos, H, Van Houtan, K, Zartman, CE, Boyle, S, Didham, RK, Andrade, A and Lovejoy, TE (2011) The fate of Amazonian forest fragments: a 32-year investigation. Biological Conservation 144, 56–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lepage, D (2018) AviBase: the world bird database. AviBase. http://avibase.bsc-eoc.org/.Google Scholar
Lopes, M, Mendes-Oliveira, AC (2015) A Amazônia brasileira e os pequenos mamíferos não voadores. In Mendes-Oliveira, AC and Miranda, CL (eds), Os Pequenos Mamíferos Não Voadores da Amazônia Brasileira. Rio de Janeiro: Sociedade Brasileira de Mastozoologia, pp. 15–20.Google Scholar
MapBiomas (2017) Project MapBiomas. Collection of Brazilian Land Cover and Use Map Series. MapBiomas. http://mapbiomas.org.Google Scholar
Mason, NWH, Mouillot, D, Lee, WG and Wilson, JB (2005) Functional richness, functional evenness and functional divergence: The primary components of functional diversity. Oikos 111, 112–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendes-Oliveira, AC, Bobrowiec, PED, Silva, CR, Pinto, LC and Trevelin, LC (2015) Estudos sobre pequenos mamíferos não-voadores da Amazônia brasileira: amostragens e lacunas de conhecimento. In Mendes-Oliveira, AC and Miranda, CL (eds), Os Pequenos Mamíferos Não Voadores da Amazônia Brasileira. Rio de Janeiro: Sociedade Brasileira de Mastozoologia, pp. 21–49.Google Scholar
Mendonça, A, Percequillo, AR, Camargo, NF, Ribeiro, JF, Palma, AR, Oliveira, LC, Câmara, EM and Vieira, EM (2018) Cerrado small mammals: abundance and distribution of marsupials, lagomorphs, and rodents in a Neotropical savanna. Ecology 99, 1900–1900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moerman, DE and Estabrook, GF (2006) The botanist effect: counties with maximal species richness tend to be home to universities and botanists. Journal Biogeography 33, 1969–1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mokany, K and Ferrier, S (2011) Predicting impacts of climate change on biodiversity: a role for semi-mechanistic community-level modelling. Diversity and Distributions 17, 374–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, N, Mittermeier, RA, Mittermeier, CG, Fonseca, GAB and Kent, J (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403, 853–858.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nemésio, A, Seixas, DP and Vasconcelos, HL (2013) The public perception of animal diversity: what do postage stamps tell us? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 11, 9–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliveira, U, Brescovit, AD and Santos, AJ (2015) Delimiting areas of endemism through kernel interpolation. PLoS ONE 10, e0116673.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oliveira, U, Paglia, AP, Brescovit, AD, Carvalho, CJ, Silva, DP, Rezende, DT, Leite, FS, Batista, JA, Barbosa, JP, Stehmann, JR, Ascher, JS, Vasconcelos, MF, De Marco, P, Löwenberg-Neto, P, Dias, PG, Ferro, VG and Santos, AJ (2016) The strong influence of collection bias on biodiversity knowledge shortfalls of Brazilian terrestrial biodiversity. Diversity and Distributions 22, 1232–1244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, DM, Dinerstein, E, Wikramanayake, ED, Burgess, ND, Powell, GV, Underwood, EC, D’amico, JA., Itoua, I, Strand, HE, Morrison, JC, Loucks, CJ, Allnutt, TF, Ricketts, TH, Kura, Y, Lamoreux, JF, Wettengel, WW, Hedao, P, Kassem, KR (2001) Terrestrial ecoregions of the World: A new map of life on Earth. BioScience 51, 933–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overbeck, GE, Müller, SC, Fidelis, AT, Pfadenhauer, J, Pillar, VD, Blanco, C, Boldrini, II, Both, R and Forneck, ED (2007) Brazil’s neglected biome: the South Brazilian Campos. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 9, 101–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overbeck, GE, Vélez-Martin, E, Scarano, FR, Lewinsohn, TM, Fonseca, CR, Meyer, ST, Müller, SC, Ceotto, P, Dadalt, L, Durigan, G, Ganade, G, Gossner, MM, Guadagnin, DL, Lorenzen, K, Jacobi, CM, Weisser, WW and Pillar, VD (2015) Conservation in Brazil needs to include non-forest ecosystems. Diversity and Distributions 21, 1455–1460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paglia, AP, Fonseca, GAB, Rylands, AB, Herrmann, G, Aguiar, LMS, Chiarello, AG, Leite, YLR, Costa, LP, Siciliano, S, Kierulff, MCM, Mende, SL, Tavares, VC, Mittermeier, RA and Patton, JL (2012) Lista Anotada dos Mamíferos do Brasil /Annotated Checklist of Brazilian Mammals. 2. Belo Horizonte: Conservação Internacional.Google Scholar
Pardini, R, Bueno, AA, Gardner, TA, Prado, PI and Metzger, JP (2010) Beyond the Fragmentation Threshold Hypothesis: Regime Shifts in Biodiversity Across Fragmented Landscapes. Plos ONE 5, e13666.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pautasso, M and McKinney, ML (2007) The Botanist Effect Revisited: Plant Species Richness, County Area, and Human Population Size in the United States. Conservation Biology 21, 1333–1340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Piacentini, VQ, Aleixo, ALP, Agne, CEQ, Maurício, GN, Pacheco, JF, Bravo, G, Brito, GRR, Naka, LN, Olmos, F, Posso, S, Silveira, LF, Betini, G, Carrano, E, Franz, I, Lees, A, Lima, L, Pioli, D, Schunck, F, Amaral, FR, Bencke, GA, Cohn-Haft, M, Figueiredo, LF, Straube, F and Césari, E (2019) Thamnophilidae in Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil. PNUD. http://fauna.jbrj.gov.br/fauna/faunadobrasil/138244 (acessed on 12 January 2020).Google Scholar
Piratelli, A, Sousa, SD, Corrêa, JS, Andrade, VA, Ribeiro, RY, Avelar, LH and Oliveira, EF (2008) Searching for bioindicators of forest fragmentation: passerine birds in the Atlantic forest of southeastern Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Biology 68, 259–268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prugh, LR, Hodges, KE, Sinclair, ARE and Brashares, JS (2008) Effect of habitat area and isolation on fragmented animal populations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105, 20770–20775.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Core Development Team (2018) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/.Google Scholar
Reis, NR, Peracchi, AL, Pedro, WA and Lima, IP (2011) Mamíferos do Brasil. 2nd ed. Londrina: N.R.Reis Publishing. 439p.Google Scholar
Ribeiro, GV, Teixido, AL, Barbosa, NP and Silveira, FA (2016) Assessing bias and knowledge gaps on seed ecology research: implications for conservation agenda and policy. Ecological Applications 26, 2033–2043.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Santos, JC, Leal, IR, Almeida-Cortez, JS, Fernandes, GW and Tabarelli, M (2011) Caatinga: The Scientific Negligence Experienced by a Dry Tropical Forest. Tropical Conservation Science 4, 276–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santos-Filho, M, Peres, CA, Da Silva, DJ and Sanaiotti, TM (2012) Habitat patch and matrix effects on small-mammal persistence in Amazonian forest fragments. Biodiversity and Conservation 21, 1127–1147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sekercioglu, CH (2006) Increasing awareness of avian ecological function. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 21, 464–471.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shine, R and Bonnet, X (2000) Snakes: a new ‘model organism’ in ecological research? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 15, 221–222.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sick, H (1997) Ornitologia brasileira. Rio de Janeiro: Nova Fronteira.Google Scholar
Silverman, BW (1986) Density estimation for statistics and data analysis. London: Chapman and Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strassburg, BB, Brooks, T, Feltran-Barbieri, R, Iribarrem, A, Crouzeilles, R, Loyola, R, Latawiec, A, Oliveira Filho, FJ, Scaramuzza, CM, Scarano, F, Filho, B and Balmford, A (2017) Moment of truth for the Cerrado hotspot. Nature Ecology & Evolution 1, 1–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teixido, AL, Gonçalves, SRA, Fernández-Arellano, GJ, Dáttilo, W, Izzo, TJ, Layme, VMG, Moreira, LFB and Quintanilla, LG (2020) Major biases and knowledge gaps on fragmentation research in Brazil: implications for conservation. Biological Conservation 251, 108749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108749 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trimble, MJ and Van Aarde, RJ (2010) Species inequality in scientific study. Conservation Biology 24, 886–890.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Troudet, J, Grandcolas, P, Blin, A, Vignes-Lebbe, R and Legendre, F (2017) Taxonomic bias in biodiversity data and societal preferences. Scientific Reports 7, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Bael, SA, Brawn, JD and Robinson, SK (2003) Birds defend trees from herbivores in a Neotropical forest canopy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100, 8304–8307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whelan, CJ, Şekercioğlu, ÇH and Wenny, DG (2015) Why birds matter: from economic ornithology to ecosystem services. Journal of Ornithology 156, 227–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wintle, BA, Kujala, H, Whitehead, A, Cameron, A, Veloz, S, Kukkala, A, Moilanen, A, Gordon, A, Lentini, PE, Cadenhead, NCR and Bekessy, SA (2019) Global synthesis of conservation studies reveals the importance of small habitat patches for biodiversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 116, 909–914.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, W, Ma, K and Kreft, H (2013) Geographical sampling bias in a large distributional database and its effects on species richness–environment models. Journal of Biogeography 40, 1415–1426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zar, JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Zimmer, K and Isler, ML (2018) Family Thamnophilidae (Typical Antbirds). In: Del Hoyo, J, Elliot, A and Christie, D (eds), Handbook of the Birds of the World, v. 8: Broadbills to Tapaculos (pp. 448–681). Lynx Edicions.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Candelária et al. supplementary material

Table S1

Download Candelária et al. supplementary material(File)
File 16.5 KB