Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, Washington DC, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2011;6(6):e21710. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0021710. Epub 2011 Jun 29.
The objectives of this work are: (1) to define spider guilds for all extant families worldwide; (2) test if guilds defined at family level are good surrogates of species guilds; (3) compare the taxonomic and guild composition of spider assemblages from different parts of the world; (4) compare the taxonomic and functional diversity of spider assemblages and; (5) relate functional diversity with habitat structure. Data on foraging strategy, prey range, vertical stratification and circadian activity was collected for 108 families. Spider guilds were defined by hierarchical clustering. We searched for inconsistencies between family guild placement and the known guild of each species. Richness and abundance per guild before and after correcting guild placement were compared, as were the proportions of each guild and family between all possible pairs of sites. Functional diversity per site was calculated based on hierarchical clustering. Eight guilds were discriminated: (1) sensing, (2) sheet, (3) space, and (4) orb web weavers; (5) specialists; (6) ambush, (7) ground, and (8) other hunters. Sixteen percent of the species richness corresponding to 11% of all captured individuals was incorrectly attributed to a guild by family surrogacy; however, the correlation of uncorrected vs. corrected guilds was invariably high. The correlation of guild richness or abundances was generally higher than the correlation of family richness or abundances. Functional diversity was not always higher in the tropics than in temperate regions. Families may potentially serve as ecological surrogates for species. Different families may present similar roles in the ecosystems, with replacement of some taxa by other within the same guild. Spiders in tropical regions seem to have higher redundancy of functional roles and/or finer resource partitioning than in temperate regions. Although species and family diversity were higher in the tropics, functional diversity seems to be also influenced by altitude and habitat structure.
(1)为全球所有现存科定义蜘蛛类群;(2)检验科水平上定义的类群是否可以作为物种类群的良好替代;(3)比较来自世界不同地区的蜘蛛类群的分类和类群组成;(4)比较蜘蛛类群的分类和功能多样性;(5)将功能多样性与生境结构联系起来。收集了 108 个科的觅食策略、猎物范围、垂直分层和昼夜活动的数据。通过层次聚类定义了蜘蛛类群。我们搜索了科类群放置与已知物种类群之间的不一致性。比较了在修正类群放置前后每个类群的丰富度和丰度,以及在所有可能的站点对之间的每个类群和科的比例。基于层次聚类计算了每个站点的功能多样性。区分出 8 个类群:(1)感应,(2)片,(3)空间,和(4)圆网蜘蛛;(5)专家;(6)伏击,(7)地面,和(8)其他猎人。16%的物种丰富度对应于 11%的所有捕获个体被科代理错误地归因于一个类群;然而,未修正的类群与修正后的类群之间的相关性始终很高。类群丰富度或丰度的相关性通常高于科丰富度或丰度的相关性。功能多样性并不总是在热带地区高于温带地区。家庭可能是物种的生态替代物。同一类群内的一些类群可能会被其他类群取代,从而具有相似的生态系统作用。与温带地区相比,热带地区的蜘蛛在功能角色上的冗余度更高或资源分配更精细。尽管热带地区的物种和科多样性更高,但功能多样性似乎也受到海拔和生境结构的影响。