Hughes J B
Center for Conservation Biology, Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-5020, USA e-mail:
Oecologia. 2000 May;123(3):375-383. doi: 10.1007/s004420051024.
Numerous hypotheses have been proposed for the commonly observed, positive relationship between local abundance and geographic distribution in groups of closely related species. Here I consider how hostplant specialization and abundance affect the relative abundance and distribution of lycaenid butterflies (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). I first discuss three components of specialization: local specialization, turnover of specialization across a species' range, and the minimum number of resources (or habitats) required by a species. Within this framework, I then consider one dimension of a lycaenid species' niche, larval hostplant specialization. In a subalpine region of Colorado, I surveyed 11 lycaenid species and their hostplants at 17 sites. I compare this local information to continental hostplant use and large-scale distributions of the lycaenids and their hostplants. Local abundance of a lycaenid species is positively correlated with its local distribution (the number of sites occupied), but not with its regional or continental distribution. Neither local specialization (the number of hostplants used within one habitat) nor continental specialization (the number of hostplants used across many habitats) is correlated with local lycaenid abundance. Continental specialization is positively correlated with a species' continental distribution, however. Finally, while generalist butterflies tend to have more hostplant available to them, differences in resource availability do not explain the differences in butterfly abundance. Although local abundance is correlated only with local distribution, I suggest that abundance-distribution relationships might emerge at regional and continental scales if local abundance were averaged across many habitat types. Consideration of the scale of a species' resource specialization (within or among habitats) appears to be key to understanding the relationships between resource specialization, resource availability, and a species' abundance and distribution.
针对密切相关物种群体中普遍观察到的局部丰度与地理分布之间的正相关关系,人们提出了许多假设。在此,我探讨寄主植物专一性和丰度如何影响灰蝶(鳞翅目:灰蝶科)的相对丰度和分布。我首先讨论专一性的三个组成部分:局部专一性、物种分布范围内专一性的变化,以及物种所需的资源(或栖息地)的最小数量。在此框架内,我接着考虑灰蝶物种生态位的一个维度,即幼虫寄主植物专一性。在科罗拉多州的一个亚高山地区,我在17个地点调查了11种灰蝶及其寄主植物。我将这些局部信息与大陆范围的寄主植物利用情况以及灰蝶及其寄主植物的大规模分布进行比较。一种灰蝶的局部丰度与其局部分布(占据的地点数量)呈正相关,但与它的区域或大陆分布无关。局部专一性(一个栖息地内使用的寄主植物数量)和大陆专一性(多个栖息地内使用的寄主植物数量)均与灰蝶的局部丰度无关。然而,大陆专一性与物种的大陆分布呈正相关。最后,虽然广食性蝴蝶往往有更多的寄主植物可供选择,但资源可利用性的差异并不能解释蝴蝶丰度的差异。尽管局部丰度仅与局部分布相关,但我认为,如果在多种栖息地类型中对局部丰度进行平均,那么丰度 - 分布关系可能会在区域和大陆尺度上显现出来。考虑物种资源专一性的尺度(在栖息地内或栖息地间)似乎是理解资源专一性、资源可利用性与物种丰度和分布之间关系的关键。