Proximity, interpenetration, and sympatry networks: A reply to Dos Santos et al.

CASAGRANDA D., J. S. ARIAS, P. GOLOBOFF, C. SZUMIK, L.M. TAHER, T. ESCALANTE, J.J. MORRONE

SYSTEMATIC BIOLOGY

Oxford University Press

Lugar: London; Año: 2009 vol. 58 p. 271 - 276

1063-5157

<!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;} ins {mso-style-type:export-only; text-decoration:none;} span.msoIns {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-style-name:""; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} span.msoDel {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-style-name:""; text-decoration:line-through; color:red;} @page Section1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:70.85pt 3.0cm 70.85pt 3.0cm; mso-header-margin:36.0pt; mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;} @page Section1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:70.85pt 3.0cm 70.85pt 3.0cm; mso-header-margin:36.0pt; mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> Abstract.- The method of sympatry inference and network analysis recently presented as an alternative to existing methods to identify areas of endemism is critically examined here.  The results of that examination show that the method easily fails to consider as different many patterns that are clearly distinct, subsuming them in just one unit of co-occurrence.  This happens because the method simplistically equates any overlap between species with coextensive sympatry, and forces the results into non-overlapping patterns of co-occurrence.  The method is thus easily misled by data not presenting those characteristics, as shown by simple hypothetical examples. Abstract.- The method of sympatry inference and network analysis recently presented as an alternative to existing methods to identify areas of endemism is critically examined here.  The results of that examination show that the method easily fails to consider as different many patterns that are clearly distinct, subsuming them in just one unit of co-occurrence.  This happens because the method simplistically equates any overlap between species with coextensive sympatry, and forces the results into non-overlapping patterns of co-occurrence.  The method is thus easily misled by data not presenting those characteristics, as shown by simple hypothetical examples. Abstract.- The method of sympatry inference and network analysis recently presented as an alternative to existing methods to identify areas of endemism is critically examined here.  The results of that examination show that the method easily fails to consider as different many patterns that are clearly distinct, subsuming them in just one unit of co-occurrence.  This happens because the method simplistically equates any overlap between species with coextensive sympatry, and forces the results into non-overlapping patterns of co-occurrence.  The method is thus easily misled by data not presenting those characteristics, as shown by simple hypothetical examples. <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;} @page Section1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:70.85pt 3.0cm 70.85pt 3.0cm; mso-header-margin:36.0pt; mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> Abstract.- The method of sympatry inference and network analysis recently presented as an alternative to existing methods to identify areas of endemism is critically examined here.  The results of that examination show that the method easily fails to consider as different many patterns that are clearly distinct, subsuming them in just one unit of co-occurrence.  This happens because the method simplistically equates any overlap between species with coextensive sympatry, and forces the results into non-overlapping patterns of co-occurrence.  The method is thus easily misled by data not presenting those characteristics, as shown by simple hypothetical examples.