QUANITIFYING CHANGES IN GEOGRAPHIC RANGE
As with complex traits such as shape, comparative analyses of geographic range changes are often discretized. This has several drawbacks.
|
Paleoclimate modeling in the Polemonium caeruleum species complex.
|
One solution is to consider quantitative approaches, but these have been poorly developed, perhaps because they are not straightforward to implement. In addition, it is difficult to explicitly model dispersal. Ideally, we want to consider within-species variation in our models. We can broadly think of quantitative ranges in three ways: centroids (1-dimensional), polygons (2-dimensional), or a polygon × environment interaction (3+-dimensional). Ideally, discrete and continuous approaches will return similar answers, but this may not always be the case. I am currently implementing a combination of ancestral state reconstruction and paleoclimatic niche modeling to address historical changes in geographic range.
Contact Me
Jeff Rose
Department of Botany, University of Wisconsin-Madison
430 Lincoln Dr.
Madison, WI, 53706
jeffrey.p.rose.3[at]gmail[dot]com
Jeff Rose
Department of Botany, University of Wisconsin-Madison
430 Lincoln Dr.
Madison, WI, 53706
jeffrey.p.rose.3[at]gmail[dot]com