Climatic Suitability, Life‐History Traits, Introduction Effort, and the Establishment and Spread of Introduced Mammals in Australia
Identifieur interne : 001397 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001396; suivant : 001398Climatic Suitability, Life‐History Traits, Introduction Effort, and the Establishment and Spread of Introduced Mammals in Australia
Auteurs : David M. Forsyth ; Richard P. Duncan ; Mary Bomford ; Geoff MooreSource :
- Conservation Biology [ 0888-8892 ] ; 2004-04.
Abstract
Abstract: Major progress in understanding biological invasions has recently been made by quantitatively comparing successful and unsuccessful invasions. We used such an approach to test hypotheses about the role of climatic suitability, life history, and historical factors in the establishment and subsequent spread of 40 species of mammal that have been introduced to mainland Australia. Relative to failed species, the 23 species that became established had a greater area of climatically suitable habitat available in Australia, had previously become established elsewhere, had a larger overseas range, and were introduced more times. These relationships held after phylogeny was controlled for, but successful species were also significantly more likely to be nonmigratory. A forward‐selection model included only two of the nine variables for which we had data for all species: climatic suitability and introduction effort. When the model was adjusted for phylogeny, those same two variables were included, along with previous establishment success. Of the established species, those with a larger geographic range size in Australia had a greater area of climatically suitable habitat, had traits associated with a faster population growth rate (small body size, shorter life span, lower weaning age, more offspring per year), were nonherbivorous, and had a larger overseas range size. When the model was adjusted for phylogeny, the importance of climatic suitability and the life‐history traits remained significant, but overseas range size was no longer important and species with greater introduction effort had a larger geographic range size. Two variables explained variation in geographic range size in a forward‐selection model: species with smaller body mass and greater longevity tended to have larger range sizes in Australia. These results mirror those from a recent analysis of exotic‐bird introductions into Australia, suggesting that, at least among vertebrate taxa, similar factors predict establishment and spread. Our approach and results are being used to assess the risks of exotic vertebrates becoming established and spreading in Australia.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00423.x
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:D780EB21D683E0BDBC69BC46E6ECF214FAE66397Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Climatic Suitability, Life‐History Traits, Introduction Effort, and the Establishment and Spread of Introduced Mammals in Australia</title><author><name sortKey="Forsyth, David M" sort="Forsyth, David M" uniqKey="Forsyth D" first="David M." last="Forsyth">David M. Forsyth</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, P.O. Box 137, 123 Brown Street, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia, email dave.forsyth@nre.vic.gov.au</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Duncan, Richard P" sort="Duncan, Richard P" uniqKey="Duncan R" first="Richard P." last="Duncan">Richard P. Duncan</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Ecology and Entomology Group, Soil, Plant and Ecological Sciences Division, P.O. Box 84, Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Bomford, Mary" sort="Bomford, Mary" uniqKey="Bomford M" first="Mary" last="Bomford">Mary Bomford</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Bureau of Rural Sciences, P.O. Box E11, Kingston, ACT 2604, Australia</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Moore, Geoff" sort="Moore, Geoff" uniqKey="Moore G" first="Geoff" last="Moore">Geoff Moore</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Australian Deer Research Foundation, P.O. Box 454, Croydon, Victoria 3136, Australia</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:D780EB21D683E0BDBC69BC46E6ECF214FAE66397</idno><date when="2004" year="2004">2004</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00423.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/D780EB21D683E0BDBC69BC46E6ECF214FAE66397/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001397</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001397</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Climatic Suitability, Life‐History Traits, Introduction Effort, and the Establishment and Spread of Introduced Mammals in Australia</title><author><name sortKey="Forsyth, David M" sort="Forsyth, David M" uniqKey="Forsyth D" first="David M." last="Forsyth">David M. Forsyth</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, P.O. Box 137, 123 Brown Street, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia, email dave.forsyth@nre.vic.gov.au</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Duncan, Richard P" sort="Duncan, Richard P" uniqKey="Duncan R" first="Richard P." last="Duncan">Richard P. Duncan</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Ecology and Entomology Group, Soil, Plant and Ecological Sciences Division, P.O. Box 84, Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Bomford, Mary" sort="Bomford, Mary" uniqKey="Bomford M" first="Mary" last="Bomford">Mary Bomford</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Bureau of Rural Sciences, P.O. Box E11, Kingston, ACT 2604, Australia</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Moore, Geoff" sort="Moore, Geoff" uniqKey="Moore G" first="Geoff" last="Moore">Geoff Moore</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Australian Deer Research Foundation, P.O. Box 454, Croydon, Victoria 3136, Australia</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Conservation Biology</title><idno type="ISSN">0888-8892</idno><idno type="eISSN">1523-1739</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Science Inc</publisher><pubPlace>350 Main Street , Malden , MA 02148 , USA , and 9600 Garsington Road , Oxford OX4 2DQ , UK .</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2004-04">2004-04</date><biblScope unit="volume">18</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="557">557</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="569">569</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0888-8892</idno></series><idno type="istex">D780EB21D683E0BDBC69BC46E6ECF214FAE66397</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00423.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">COBI423</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0888-8892</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract">Abstract: Major progress in understanding biological invasions has recently been made by quantitatively comparing successful and unsuccessful invasions. We used such an approach to test hypotheses about the role of climatic suitability, life history, and historical factors in the establishment and subsequent spread of 40 species of mammal that have been introduced to mainland Australia. Relative to failed species, the 23 species that became established had a greater area of climatically suitable habitat available in Australia, had previously become established elsewhere, had a larger overseas range, and were introduced more times. These relationships held after phylogeny was controlled for, but successful species were also significantly more likely to be nonmigratory. A forward‐selection model included only two of the nine variables for which we had data for all species: climatic suitability and introduction effort. When the model was adjusted for phylogeny, those same two variables were included, along with previous establishment success. Of the established species, those with a larger geographic range size in Australia had a greater area of climatically suitable habitat, had traits associated with a faster population growth rate (small body size, shorter life span, lower weaning age, more offspring per year), were nonherbivorous, and had a larger overseas range size. When the model was adjusted for phylogeny, the importance of climatic suitability and the life‐history traits remained significant, but overseas range size was no longer important and species with greater introduction effort had a larger geographic range size. Two variables explained variation in geographic range size in a forward‐selection model: species with smaller body mass and greater longevity tended to have larger range sizes in Australia. These results mirror those from a recent analysis of exotic‐bird introductions into Australia, suggesting that, at least among vertebrate taxa, similar factors predict establishment and spread. Our approach and results are being used to assess the risks of exotic vertebrates becoming established and spreading in Australia.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><author><json:item><name>DAVID M. FORSYTH</name><affiliations><json:string>Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, P.O. Box 137, 123 Brown Street, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia, email dave.forsyth@nre.vic.gov.au</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>RICHARD P. DUNCAN</name><affiliations><json:string>Ecology and Entomology Group, Soil, Plant and Ecological Sciences Division, P.O. Box 84, Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>MARY BOMFORD</name><affiliations><json:string>Bureau of Rural Sciences, P.O. Box E11, Kingston, ACT 2604, Australia</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>GEOFF MOORE</name><affiliations><json:string>Australian Deer Research Foundation, P.O. Box 454, Croydon, Victoria 3136, Australia</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><articleId><json:string>COBI423</json:string></articleId><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string></originalGenre><qualityIndicators><score>8</score><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>594 x 783 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractCharCount>2168</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>8536</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>54794</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>13</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>315</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Climatic Suitability, Life‐History Traits, Introduction Effort, and the Establishment and Spread of Introduced Mammals in Australia</title><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><volume>18</volume><publisherId><json:string>COBI</json:string></publisherId><pages><total>13</total><last>569</last><first>557</first></pages><issn><json:string>0888-8892</json:string></issn><issue>2</issue><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><eissn><json:string>1523-1739</json:string></eissn><title>Conservation Biology</title><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1523-1739</json:string></doi></host><categories><wos><json:string>science</json:string><json:string>environmental sciences</json:string><json:string>ecology</json:string><json:string>biodiversity conservation</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>natural sciences</json:string><json:string>biology</json:string><json:string>ecology</json:string></scienceMetrix></categories><publicationDate>2004</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2004</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00423.x</json:string></doi><id>D780EB21D683E0BDBC69BC46E6ECF214FAE66397</id><score>0.11694117</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/D780EB21D683E0BDBC69BC46E6ECF214FAE66397/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/D780EB21D683E0BDBC69BC46E6ECF214FAE66397/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/D780EB21D683E0BDBC69BC46E6ECF214FAE66397/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Climatic Suitability, Life‐History Traits, Introduction Effort, and the Establishment and Spread of Introduced Mammals in Australia</title><title level="a" type="alt" xml:lang="es">Adaptabilidad Climática, Características de Historia de Vida, Esfuerzo de Introducción y el Establecimiento y Extensión de Mamíferos Introducidos en Australia</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Blackwell Science Inc</publisher><pubPlace>350 Main Street , Malden , MA 02148 , USA , and 9600 Garsington Road , Oxford OX4 2DQ , UK .</pubPlace><availability><p>WILEY</p></availability><date>2004</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Climatic Suitability, Life‐History Traits, Introduction Effort, and the Establishment and Spread of Introduced Mammals in Australia</title><title level="a" type="alt" xml:lang="es">Adaptabilidad Climática, Características de Historia de Vida, Esfuerzo de Introducción y el Establecimiento y Extensión de Mamíferos Introducidos en Australia</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">DAVID M.</forename><surname>FORSYTH</surname></persName><affiliation>Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, P.O. Box 137, 123 Brown Street, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia, email dave.forsyth@nre.vic.gov.au</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-2"><persName><forename type="first">RICHARD P.</forename><surname>DUNCAN</surname></persName><affiliation>Ecology and Entomology Group, Soil, Plant and Ecological Sciences Division, P.O. Box 84, Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-3"><persName><forename type="first">MARY</forename><surname>BOMFORD</surname></persName><affiliation>Bureau of Rural Sciences, P.O. Box E11, Kingston, ACT 2604, Australia</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-4"><persName><forename type="first">GEOFF</forename><surname>MOORE</surname></persName><affiliation>Australian Deer Research Foundation, P.O. Box 454, Croydon, Victoria 3136, Australia</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Conservation Biology</title><idno type="pISSN">0888-8892</idno><idno type="eISSN">1523-1739</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1523-1739</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Science Inc</publisher><pubPlace>350 Main Street , Malden , MA 02148 , USA , and 9600 Garsington Road , Oxford OX4 2DQ , UK .</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2004-04"></date><biblScope unit="volume">18</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="557">557</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="569">569</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">D780EB21D683E0BDBC69BC46E6ECF214FAE66397</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00423.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">COBI423</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2004</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract><p>Abstract: Major progress in understanding biological invasions has recently been made by quantitatively comparing successful and unsuccessful invasions. We used such an approach to test hypotheses about the role of climatic suitability, life history, and historical factors in the establishment and subsequent spread of 40 species of mammal that have been introduced to mainland Australia. Relative to failed species, the 23 species that became established had a greater area of climatically suitable habitat available in Australia, had previously become established elsewhere, had a larger overseas range, and were introduced more times. These relationships held after phylogeny was controlled for, but successful species were also significantly more likely to be nonmigratory. A forward‐selection model included only two of the nine variables for which we had data for all species: climatic suitability and introduction effort. When the model was adjusted for phylogeny, those same two variables were included, along with previous establishment success. Of the established species, those with a larger geographic range size in Australia had a greater area of climatically suitable habitat, had traits associated with a faster population growth rate (small body size, shorter life span, lower weaning age, more offspring per year), were nonherbivorous, and had a larger overseas range size. When the model was adjusted for phylogeny, the importance of climatic suitability and the life‐history traits remained significant, but overseas range size was no longer important and species with greater introduction effort had a larger geographic range size. Two variables explained variation in geographic range size in a forward‐selection model: species with smaller body mass and greater longevity tended to have larger range sizes in Australia. These results mirror those from a recent analysis of exotic‐bird introductions into Australia, suggesting that, at least among vertebrate taxa, similar factors predict establishment and spread. Our approach and results are being used to assess the risks of exotic vertebrates becoming established and spreading in Australia.</p></abstract><abstract xml:lang="es"><p>Resumen: Recientemente se ha logrado un progreso importante en el entendimiento de invasiones biológicas al comparar invasiones exitosas y no exitosas cuantitativamente. Utilizamos ese método para probar hipótesis acerca de la adaptabilidad climática, historia de vida y factores históricos en el establecimiento y extensión posterior de 40 especies de mamíferos que han sido introducidas en Australia. En relación con especies no exitosas, las 23 especies que se establecieron tenían una mayor área de hábitat adecuado climáticamente en Australia, se habían establecido en otras partes, tenían un mayor rango y fueron introducidas más veces. Después de controlar para filogenia, estas relaciones se mantuvieron, pero las especies exitosas también fueron significativamente no migratorias. Un modelo de selección anterior incluyó a sólo dos de las nueve variables para las que teníamos datos para todas las especies: adaptabilidad climática y esfuerzo de introducción. Los ajustes para filogenia incluyeron esas dos mismas variables además del éxito de establecimiento previo. De las especies establecidas, aquellas con un mayor rango geográfico en Australia tenían un mayor área de hábitat climáticamente adecuado, tenían características asociadas con una tasa de crecimiento poblacional más rápida (tamaño corporal pequeño, menor longevidad, menor edad de destete, más crías por año), fueron no herbívoras y tenían un mayor rango de distribución fuera de Australia. Los ajustes para filogenia la importancia de la adaptabilidad climática y las características de historia de vida permanecieron significativas, pero el rango fuera de Australia ya no fue importante y especies con mayor esfuerzo de introducción tenían un mayor rango geográfico. Dos variables explicaron la variación en tamaño de rango geográfico en un modelo de selección anterior: especies con menor masa corporal y mayor longevidad tendieron a tener rangos de mayor tamaño en Australia. Estos resultados son semejantes a los de análisis recientes de introducciones de aves exóticas a Australia, lo que sugiere que, por lo menos en taxones de vertebrados, factores similares predicen el establecimiento y extensión. Nuestro método y resultados están siendo utilizados para evaluar los riesgos del establecimiento y de la extensión de vertebrados exóticos en Australia.</p></abstract></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2004-04">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/D780EB21D683E0BDBC69BC46E6ECF214FAE66397/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Blackwell Science Inc</publisherName><publisherLoc> 350 Main Street , Malden , MA 02148 , USA , and 9600 Garsington Road , Oxford OX4 2DQ , UK . </publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1523-1739</doi><issn type="print">0888-8892</issn><issn type="electronic">1523-1739</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="COBI"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="CONSERVATION BIOLOGY">Conservation Biology</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="04002"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/cbi.2004.18.issue-2</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="18">18</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="2">2</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2004-04">April 2004</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="33" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00423.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="COBI423"></id><id type="supplier" value="cbi423"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="13"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1"><i>Contributed Papers</i></title></titleGroup><eventGroup><event type="firstOnline" date="2004-03-19"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2004-03-19"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.5 mode:FullText source:FullText result:FullText" date="2010-04-07"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-01-15"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-16"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="557">557</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="569">569</numbering></numberingGroup><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:COBI.COBI423.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><unparsedEditorialHistory>Paper submitted September 30, 2002; revised manuscript accepted June 19, 2003.</unparsedEditorialHistory><countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="1"></count><count type="tableTotal" number="4"></count><count type="formulaTotal" number="8"></count><count type="referenceTotal" number="110"></count><count type="linksCrossRef" number="197"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">Climatic Suitability, Life‐History Traits, Introduction Effort, and the Establishment and Spread of Introduced Mammals in Australia</title><title type="shortAuthors"><i>Forsyth et al.</i></title><title type="short"><i>Establishment and Spread of Exotic Mammals</i></title><title type="main" xml:lang="es"><!--xml:lang="es" added by WileyML 3Gv2 convertor-->Adaptabilidad Climática, Características de Historia de Vida, Esfuerzo de Introducción y el Establecimiento y Extensión de Mamíferos Introducidos en Australia</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>DAVID M.</givenNames><familyName>FORSYTH</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr2" affiliationRef="#a2"><personName><givenNames>RICHARD P.</givenNames><familyName>DUNCAN</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr3" affiliationRef="#a3"><personName><givenNames>MARY</givenNames><familyName>BOMFORD</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr4" affiliationRef="#a4"><personName><givenNames>GEOFF</givenNames><familyName>MOORE</familyName></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1" countryCode="AU"><unparsedAffiliation> Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, P.O. Box 137, 123 Brown Street, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia, email <email>dave.forsyth@nre.vic.gov.au</email></unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="a2" countryCode="NZ"><unparsedAffiliation>Ecology and Entomology Group, Soil, Plant and Ecological Sciences Division, P.O. Box 84, Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="a3" countryCode="AU"><unparsedAffiliation>Bureau of Rural Sciences, P.O. Box E11, Kingston, ACT 2604, Australia</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="a4" countryCode="AU"><unparsedAffiliation>Australian Deer Research Foundation, P.O. Box 454, Croydon, Victoria 3136, Australia</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><p><b>Abstract: </b> <i>Major progress in understanding biological invasions has recently been made by quantitatively comparing successful and unsuccessful invasions. We used such an approach to test hypotheses about the role of climatic suitability, life history, and historical factors in the establishment and subsequent spread of 40 species of mammal that have been introduced to mainland Australia. Relative to failed species, the 23 species that became established had a greater area of climatically suitable habitat available in Australia, had previously become established elsewhere, had a larger overseas range, and were introduced more times. These relationships held after phylogeny was controlled for, but successful species were also significantly more likely to be nonmigratory. A forward‐selection model included only two of the nine variables for which we had data for all species: climatic suitability and introduction effort. When the model was adjusted for phylogeny, those same two variables were included, along with previous establishment success. Of the established species, those with a larger geographic range size in Australia had a greater area of climatically suitable habitat, had traits associated with a faster population growth rate (small body size, shorter life span, lower weaning age, more offspring per year), were nonherbivorous, and had a larger overseas range size. When the model was adjusted for phylogeny, the importance of climatic suitability and the life‐history traits remained significant, but overseas range size was no longer important and species with greater introduction effort had a larger geographic range size. Two variables explained variation in geographic range size in a forward‐selection model: species with smaller body mass and greater longevity tended to have larger range sizes in Australia. These results mirror those from a recent analysis of exotic‐bird introductions into Australia, suggesting that, at least among vertebrate taxa, similar factors predict establishment and spread. Our approach and results are being used to assess the risks of exotic vertebrates becoming established and spreading in Australia.</i> </p></abstract><abstract type="main" xml:lang="es"><section xml:id="sec-sum-2"><p><b>Resumen: </b> <i>Recientemente se ha logrado un progreso importante en el entendimiento de invasiones biológicas al comparar invasiones exitosas y no exitosas cuantitativamente. Utilizamos ese método para probar hipótesis acerca de la adaptabilidad climática, historia de vida y factores históricos en el establecimiento y extensión posterior de 40 especies de mamíferos que han sido introducidas en Australia. En relación con especies no exitosas, las 23 especies que se establecieron tenían una mayor área de hábitat adecuado climáticamente en Australia, se habían establecido en otras partes, tenían un mayor rango y fueron introducidas más veces. Después de controlar para filogenia, estas relaciones se mantuvieron, pero las especies exitosas también fueron significativamente no migratorias. Un modelo de selección anterior incluyó a sólo dos de las nueve variables para las que teníamos datos para todas las especies: adaptabilidad climática y esfuerzo de introducción. Los ajustes para filogenia incluyeron esas dos mismas variables además del éxito de establecimiento previo. De las especies establecidas, aquellas con un mayor rango geográfico en Australia tenían un mayor área de hábitat climáticamente adecuado, tenían características asociadas con una tasa de crecimiento poblacional más rápida (tamaño corporal pequeño, menor longevidad, menor edad de destete, más crías por año), fueron no herbívoras y tenían un mayor rango de distribución fuera de Australia. Los ajustes para filogenia la importancia de la adaptabilidad climática y las características de historia de vida permanecieron significativas, pero el rango fuera de Australia ya no fue importante y especies con mayor esfuerzo de introducción tenían un mayor rango geográfico. Dos variables explicaron la variación en tamaño de rango geográfico en un modelo de selección anterior: especies con menor masa corporal y mayor longevidad tendieron a tener rangos de mayor tamaño en Australia. Estos resultados son semejantes a los de análisis recientes de introducciones de aves exóticas a Australia, lo que sugiere que, por lo menos en taxones de vertebrados, factores similares predicen el establecimiento y extensión. Nuestro método y resultados están siendo utilizados para evaluar los riesgos del establecimiento y de la extensión de vertebrados exóticos en Australia.</i> </p></section></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Climatic Suitability, Life‐History Traits, Introduction Effort, and the Establishment and Spread of Introduced Mammals in Australia</title></titleInfo><titleInfo lang="es"><title>Adaptabilidad Climática, Características de Historia de Vida, Esfuerzo de Introducción y el Establecimiento y Extensión de Mamíferos Introducidos en Australia</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated" lang="en"><title>Establishment and Spread of Exotic Mammals</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Climatic Suitability, Life‐History Traits, Introduction Effort, and the Establishment and Spread of Introduced Mammals in Australia</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="es"><title>Adaptabilidad Climática, Características de Historia de Vida, Esfuerzo de Introducción y el Establecimiento y Extensión de Mamíferos Introducidos en Australia</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">DAVID M.</namePart><namePart type="family">FORSYTH</namePart><affiliation>Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, P.O. Box 137, 123 Brown Street, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia, email dave.forsyth@nre.vic.gov.au</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">RICHARD P.</namePart><namePart type="family">DUNCAN</namePart><affiliation>Ecology and Entomology Group, Soil, Plant and Ecological Sciences Division, P.O. Box 84, Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">MARY</namePart><namePart type="family">BOMFORD</namePart><affiliation>Bureau of Rural Sciences, P.O. Box E11, Kingston, ACT 2604, Australia</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">GEOFF</namePart><namePart type="family">MOORE</namePart><affiliation>Australian Deer Research Foundation, P.O. Box 454, Croydon, Victoria 3136, Australia</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="article" displayLabel="article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Science Inc</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">350 Main Street , Malden , MA 02148 , USA , and 9600 Garsington Road , Oxford OX4 2DQ , UK .</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2004-04</dateIssued><edition>Paper submitted September 30, 2002; revised manuscript accepted June 19, 2003.</edition><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2004</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType><extent unit="figures">1</extent><extent unit="tables">4</extent><extent unit="formulas">8</extent><extent unit="references">110</extent></physicalDescription><abstract>Abstract: Major progress in understanding biological invasions has recently been made by quantitatively comparing successful and unsuccessful invasions. We used such an approach to test hypotheses about the role of climatic suitability, life history, and historical factors in the establishment and subsequent spread of 40 species of mammal that have been introduced to mainland Australia. Relative to failed species, the 23 species that became established had a greater area of climatically suitable habitat available in Australia, had previously become established elsewhere, had a larger overseas range, and were introduced more times. These relationships held after phylogeny was controlled for, but successful species were also significantly more likely to be nonmigratory. A forward‐selection model included only two of the nine variables for which we had data for all species: climatic suitability and introduction effort. When the model was adjusted for phylogeny, those same two variables were included, along with previous establishment success. Of the established species, those with a larger geographic range size in Australia had a greater area of climatically suitable habitat, had traits associated with a faster population growth rate (small body size, shorter life span, lower weaning age, more offspring per year), were nonherbivorous, and had a larger overseas range size. When the model was adjusted for phylogeny, the importance of climatic suitability and the life‐history traits remained significant, but overseas range size was no longer important and species with greater introduction effort had a larger geographic range size. Two variables explained variation in geographic range size in a forward‐selection model: species with smaller body mass and greater longevity tended to have larger range sizes in Australia. These results mirror those from a recent analysis of exotic‐bird introductions into Australia, suggesting that, at least among vertebrate taxa, similar factors predict establishment and spread. Our approach and results are being used to assess the risks of exotic vertebrates becoming established and spreading in Australia.</abstract><abstract lang="es">Resumen: Recientemente se ha logrado un progreso importante en el entendimiento de invasiones biológicas al comparar invasiones exitosas y no exitosas cuantitativamente. Utilizamos ese método para probar hipótesis acerca de la adaptabilidad climática, historia de vida y factores históricos en el establecimiento y extensión posterior de 40 especies de mamíferos que han sido introducidas en Australia. En relación con especies no exitosas, las 23 especies que se establecieron tenían una mayor área de hábitat adecuado climáticamente en Australia, se habían establecido en otras partes, tenían un mayor rango y fueron introducidas más veces. Después de controlar para filogenia, estas relaciones se mantuvieron, pero las especies exitosas también fueron significativamente no migratorias. Un modelo de selección anterior incluyó a sólo dos de las nueve variables para las que teníamos datos para todas las especies: adaptabilidad climática y esfuerzo de introducción. Los ajustes para filogenia incluyeron esas dos mismas variables además del éxito de establecimiento previo. De las especies establecidas, aquellas con un mayor rango geográfico en Australia tenían un mayor área de hábitat climáticamente adecuado, tenían características asociadas con una tasa de crecimiento poblacional más rápida (tamaño corporal pequeño, menor longevidad, menor edad de destete, más crías por año), fueron no herbívoras y tenían un mayor rango de distribución fuera de Australia. Los ajustes para filogenia la importancia de la adaptabilidad climática y las características de historia de vida permanecieron significativas, pero el rango fuera de Australia ya no fue importante y especies con mayor esfuerzo de introducción tenían un mayor rango geográfico. Dos variables explicaron la variación en tamaño de rango geográfico en un modelo de selección anterior: especies con menor masa corporal y mayor longevidad tendieron a tener rangos de mayor tamaño en Australia. Estos resultados son semejantes a los de análisis recientes de introducciones de aves exóticas a Australia, lo que sugiere que, por lo menos en taxones de vertebrados, factores similares predicen el establecimiento y extensión. Nuestro método y resultados están siendo utilizados para evaluar los riesgos del establecimiento y de la extensión de vertebrados exóticos en Australia.</abstract><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Conservation Biology</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">0888-8892</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1523-1739</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1523-1739</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">COBI</identifier><part><date>2004</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>18</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>2</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>557</start><end>569</end><total>13</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">D780EB21D683E0BDBC69BC46E6ECF214FAE66397</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00423.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">COBI423</identifier><recordInfo><recordContentSource>WILEY</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Blackwell Science Inc</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Bois/explor/RenardV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001397 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001397 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Bois
|area= RenardV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:D780EB21D683E0BDBC69BC46E6ECF214FAE66397
|texte= Climatic Suitability, Life‐History Traits, Introduction Effort, and the Establishment and Spread of Introduced Mammals in Australia
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.27. |  |