Research ArticleIBP1015840 A New Index to Estimate Biogeographical Peculiarity

Roberto Pizzolotto and Pietro Brandmayr

Universita della Calabria Dipartimento Ecologia 87036 Rende Italy

Correspondence should be addressed to Roberto Pizzolotto pizunicalit

Received 2 October 2013 Accepted 27 October 2013 Published 8 January 2014

Academic Editors R Dodd and D Sanchez-Fernandez

Copyright copy 2014 R Pizzolotto and P Brandmayr This is an open access article distributed under the Creative CommonsAttribution License which permits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original work isproperly cited

The biogeographical peculiarity of a given geographical area is directly linked to the number of its endemic species This paperaims to formulate an index directly linked to the biogeographical peculiarity of an area A graphical model and an index of thebiogeographical peculiarity are proposed based on a cumulative sum (ie including all the amounts that were added previously)An example of the computations is proposed based on the number of different types of geographical ranges (ie chorotypes)characterizing two different ecosystems their biogeographical peculiarity of was evaluated on the basis of presence versus absenceof carabid species Both the graphical model and the indexmirrored the different faunistic compositions of the ecosystems becausethe index reached a higher value where more endemic species have been found Our investigation has found a new method forevaluating the biogeographical peculiarity of a given area or biota in a simple way The index could be used for either conservationbiogeography (eg monitoring of biotic homogenization) or for theoretical studies integrating ecology and biogeography

1 Introduction

The geographical distribution of living organisms is the resultof cladogenesis combined with palaeogeographic events (egcontinental drift) and palaeoclimatic events (eg ice ages)[1ndash3] For a discussion on cladistic versus evolutionist see[4] Furthermore living organisms whether or not theyare undergoing the process of speciation have to deal withchangeable environmental factors (eg biotic interactionshuman factors realized ecological niche and dispersal abil-ity) where their power of adaptation is a decisive factor indetermining their present distribution range [5]

The types of geographical range in a given area character-ize the natural resources of that area not only taxonomicallybut also ecologically because the geographical range of aspecies is directly linked to several morphofunctional traitsof that species which allow it to survive in a particularenvironment for sufficient time to cope with the constraintsof evolution [6ndash9] This is why the species distributionrange is not simply a matter of squared kilometers whileit is reasonable to regard it as a biological characteristic of

a species [10 11] This way it is an important parameterto be taken into account for example in the evaluation ofconservation protocols [12ndash15]

Similarities among geographical ranges make it possibleto classify them into types called chorotypes the sum ofwhich gives the chorological spectrum of a given biota[16 17] Each chorological spectrum is a sort of pictureof the peculiarity of the taxa in that biota It is usual tomake comparisons among biota or other geographical unitseither from a quantitative point of view on the basis of thenumber of species belonging to each chorotype or by a visualcomparison of the chorological spectrum histograms [18ndash21] Generally more attention appears to have been paid toendemic species [22] on the basis of either a subjective [21 23]or an objective criterion [24]

The aim of this paper is to propose a new method forcomparing different biota or ecogeographical units basedon the formulation of an index directly linked to the biogeo-graphical peculiarity of the chorological spectrum in a givenunit Since a high biogeographical peculiarity is a propertyof a given biota when many species live only within that

Hindawi Publishing CorporationISRN EcologyVolume 2014 Article ID 198707 9 pageshttpdxdoiorg1011552014198707

2 ISRN Ecology

biota for example when there are many endemic species[4 25] our aim is to find an index that integrates in a simplemeasure the weight of the endemic species compared againstthe weight of the other chorotypes

From a biogeographical point of view this index mightbe a valuable help in cases where for example two regionssheltering the same number of endemic species differ inspecies richness furthermore it could aid in determiningbiogeographical peculiarities for conservation policies forexample the preservation of endemism centres (see [26]) orthe habitat conservation for avoiding species range contrac-tion [27]

2 Method

The family of carabid beetles was used just as an example ofhow the index performs In particular attention was focusedon Italian species Carabids have been thoroughly studiedfrom the taxonomical and biogeographical point of view atleast in Europe (see httpwwwfaunaeurorg)

The Italian carabid fauna has several geographical rangeswhich can be classified into chorotypes following [28] seealso [29]

The index presently proposed is based on that of [30]applied by [31ndash38] In the present paper the index proposedby [30] has been implemented for avoiding the possibility ofgetting inaccurate results

21 Data Organization Prerequisites For the index computa-tion it is necessary to first classify the biological distinctive-ness of an area This is why we have grouped the chorotypesinto chorological categories based on their degree of pecu-liarity where a high biogeographical peculiarity is a propertyof a given biota when many species live only within thatbiota for example when there are many endemic species [425] In the following the categories (ie peculiarity degrees)in roman numeral are ordered according to decreasingpeculiaritymdashI regional endemic species II Italian speciesIIIm Mediterranean and Euro-Mediterranean species IIIEuropean species IV Euro-Asiatic Euro-Siberian speciesand V Palaearctic Holarctic species Such a classificationwas used with the exclusive intent of testing how the indexperforms It is likely that it has no general value outsidethe Mediterranean basin but it has the advantage that it ispossible to outline the carabid chorological spectrum for anyterritorial unit (administrative biogeographical ecologicaland geomorphological)

The categories I and II are themost peculiar biogeograph-ical features of their territorial unit because they represent aunique faunistic resource of that unit (ie endemic species)or of that geographical area (Italian species) Therefore forachieving the aim of this paper these categories have beenranked at the highest degree of peculiarity

The category IIIm includes the chorotypes linked to theMediterranean basin (Euro-Mediterranean circum-Mediter-ranean Sicily-Maghreb and so on) They were grouped in

10

09

08

07

06

05

04

03

02

01

00

I II IIIm III IV V

Figure 1 Graphical model of the biogeographical peculiarity(GMBP) based on a cumulative sumwhere the relative abundance ofeach chorological category has been summed starting from themostpeculiar one and including all the amounts that have been addedpreviously (IBP1015840 = 092)

a separate category for reasons of peculiarity because themain part of the Italian territory is in the middle of theMediterranean basin which is characterized by a particularbiogeographical history [39ndash44] hence just for the purposeof this example the IIIm category has been considered a littlemore peculiar to the Italian fauna than category III

As a second step to compute the index it is necessary tooutline an operational ecological unit (OEU) where it willbe possible to analyse the biogeographical spectrum Admin-istrative hydrological (catchment) or ecological (CORINEhabitats and ecosystems) criteriamay be followed for drawingthe boundaries of the unit

These steps are similar to those described in [30 35] instudies of environmental evaluation for conservation

22 The Index of the Biogeographical Peculiarity (IBP) Therelative abundance of each chorological category inside anyOEU is given by the ratio of species belonging to that categoryto the number of species living in theOEUAfinite number ofspecies live in anyOEU and there could be some chorologicalcategory that is not represented by that species This meansthat for example if the fauna of a given OEU has beenpopulated by the IV and V categories over time then thatfauna is not peculiar to thatOEUConversely if thatOEUwasa speciation site or a confinement site for geographical relictsthen its fauna may be marked by many endemic specieshence that fauna has high degree of peculiarity to that OEU

In Figure 1 the chorological diversity of a hypotheticalOEU is depicted by drawing a graphical model of the biogeo-graphical peculiarity (GMBP) where the relative abundanceof each chorological category was summed starting from themost peculiar one and including all the amounts that wereadded previously (see Table 1 for the detailed computationsteps) From a mathematical point of view it is possible toevaluate such a graphical model by a cumulative sum (119860)

ISRN Ecology 3

Table 1 Rank ord rank order of the categories chorcat chorological categories relab relative abundance of each category GMBP step bystep cumulative sum (left) for getting the numbers (right) used to draw the Graphical Model of Biogeographical Peculiarity (Figure 1) IBP1015840sum (first six cells) and computation (bottom separate cells) of the Index of Biogeographical Peculiarity (in bold)

Rank ord Chorcat Relab GMBP IBP1015840

6 I 1 1 1 +5 II 05 1 + 05 = 15 15 +4 IIIm 15 1 + 05 + 15 = 3 3 +3 III 35 1 + 05 + 15 + 35 = 65 65 +2 IV 2 1 + 05 + 15 + 35 + 2 = 85 85 +1 V 15 1 + 05 + 15 + 35 + 2 + 15 = 1 10 =

305(305 minus 1)(6 minus 1) = 41

(41 + 6)(1 + 6) = 92

Table 2 Hypothesized scenario for the IBP Several cases have been hypothesized in the OEUs from 1a to 6 that is from the highest to thelowest number of endemic species To get consistent values of peculiarity the IBP must be weighed so that the value of each chorologicalspectrum is gradually decreasing from 1a to 6 If the IBP is computed following [3] it fluctuates from 1a to 6 with inconsistent values (eg 2aversus 2b) while the IBP1015840 gradually decreases from 1a to 6 following the gradient of decreasing peculiarity

Rankord

Caseschorcat

1a 1b 2a 2b 3a 3b 4a 4b 5a 5b 6 Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ

6 I 1 1 010 010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 II 0 1 0 01 1 1 001 001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 IIIm 0 1 0 01 0 1 0 001 1 1 001 001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 III 0 1 0 01 0 1 0 001 0 1 0 001 1 1 001 001 0 0 0 0 0 02 IV 0 1 0 01 0 1 0 001 0 1 0 001 0 1 0 001 1 1 001 001 0 01 V 0 1 09 1 0 1 099 1 0 1 099 1 0 1 099 1 0 1 099 1 1 1

IBP 1 0100 0800 0008 0600 0006 04 0004 0200 0002 0000wIBP 7 61 58 501 46 40 34 30 22 20 10IBP1015840 1 087 083 072 066 057 049 043 031 029 014

which is in direct relation to the number of endemic species(ie peculiarity) as follows

119860 = (

119899119888

sum

119895=1

119895

sum

119894=1

119883119894) minus 1 (1)

where ldquo119883119894rdquo is the relative abundance of each chorological

category (ie ratio of species belonging to that categoryto the total number of species) and ldquo119899119888rdquo is the number ofchorological categories (the last category will always add upto over 1 and it is not depicted by an area in the graph whichis why 1 is subtracted)

It is easy to link the grey area of Figure 1 to an index ofthe biogeographical peculiarity (IBP) ranging between 0 and1 and directly related to the categoriesmost characterizing theOEU fauna (ie endemic species in our example)

The maximum value of 119860 is reached when all the speciesbelong to the most peculiar category

119860max = 119899119888 minus 1 (2)

therefore the IBP is

IBP = ( 119860119860max) (3)

In this way the IBP is directly linked to the chorotypethat enhances the biogeographical peculiarity Furthermoreby simply multiplying the IBP by 100 we would get thepercentage of peculiarity The steps for drawing Figure 1 andits related IBP have been summarized in Table 1

Worth of attention is the fact that as a consequence of theproperties of numerical series IBP gives comparable valueswhendifferentOEUs aremade by the same categories while itis possible to get biogeographically inconsistent values whenthe maximum peculiarity category is not the same in thedifferent OEUs as clearly shown in Table 2

To get comparable values from any chorological spectrumthe IBP must be weighed so that for example a chorologicalspectrum with at least one endemic species is ranked higherthan a chorological spectrum made with all category IIspecies while the latter gets an intermediate rank between thefirst spectrum and a spectrum made with all category IIImspecies and so on for as much as the number of categories

An effective weighing rule is to add the rank order ofthe most peculiar category to IBP Several cases have beenhypothesized in Table 2 where for example in case 2b thereare species belonging to categories II and V thus II being themost peculiar and in 5th position (V is in the 1st position andI is in the 6th position) 5 will be added to the computed IBP

4 ISRN Ecology

Table 3 Carabid species in eight sample sites of the Mediterranean bioclimatic region Column headings with Le holm oak while Su corkoak Ci Mediterranean short bushes Choro chorological category Mean mean percentage value of each category 119868 information value ofeach category and Evenness value (119864 bottom cell)

Sclerophyllous forests Le Su1 Su2 TLe2 TCi TLe3 TLe4 TLeQ ChoroAbax ater curtulus Fairmaire 1856 1 IIIAmara fusca Dejean 1828 1 IVBrachinus brevicollisMotschulsky 1844 1 IVBrachinus crepitans (Linne 1758) 1 VCalathus cinctusMotschulsky 1850 1 1 VCalathus fuscipes latus Serville 1821 1 1 1 IIImCalathus montivagus Dejean 1831 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IICalosoma sycophanta (Linne 1758) 1 1 1 VCarabus convexus convexus Fabricius 1775 1 IVCarabus coriaceus mediterraneus Born 1906 1 1 IIICarabus lefebvrei lefebvrei Dejean 1826 1 1 IICychrus italicus Bonelli 1809 1 IICymindis axillaris (Fabricius 1794) 1 VHarpalus attenuatus Stephens 1828 1 IIImHarpalus rubripes (Duftschmid 1812) 1 1 IVHarpalus sulphuripes sulphuripes Germar 1824 1 1 IIImLaemostenus cimmerius cimmerius (Fischer-Waldheim 1823) 1 IIImMasoreus wetterhallii wetterhallii (Gyllenhal 1813) 1 1 VMicroderes scaritides Sturm 1818 1 IVMicrolestes luctuosusHoldhaus 1904 1 IVNebria brevicollis (Fabricius 1792) 1 IVNebria kratteri Dejean 1831 1 1 IIINotiophilus rufipes Curtis 1829 1 1 1 1 IIIOphonus pumilio (Dejean 1829) 1 IIImPercus bilineatus (Dejean 1828) 1 1 IIPlatyderus neapolitanus jannonei Binaghi in Magistretti 1955 1 1 1 1 1 IIPseudomasoreus canigoulensis (Fairmaire amp Laboulbene 1854) 1 1 1 1 IIImPseudoophonus rufipes (Degeer 1774) 1 VSteropus melas italicus (Dejean 1828) 1 1 1 1 1 IIITrechus quadristriatus (Schrank 1781) 1 1 1 IVSpecies number 5 14 8 6 15 3 6 8

Mean 119868

V 020 014 013 0 02 033 017 013 016 029IV 0 021 013 017 027 0 017 013 013 027III 020 014 013 050 013 033 017 038 025 035IIIm 0 021 025 017 027 0 017 013 015 028II 06 029 038 017 013 033 033 025 031 036I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

E = 087

of 0008 giving a weighed wIBP = 5008 Consequently thenew weighed maximum value will be

w119860max = IBPmax + 119899119888 = 1 + 119899119888 (4)

therefore the new IBP1015840 will be

IBP1015840 = wIBPw119860max (5)

and in our example IBP1015840 = 50087 = 072

An application example of the IBP is given using realdata from 16 sample sites located in two different typesof ecosystems (ie two OEUs) in the Calabria region ofsouthern Italy [45] In this case the boundaries betweenOEUs are ecological and not geographical Carabid beetleswere sampled with pitfall traps Eight samples were collectedinMediterranean sclerophyllous forests (holm and cork oak)while the others were collected in oro-Mediterranean beechforests (Tables 3 and 4) The mean relative abundance in

ISRN Ecology 5

Table 4 Carabid species in eight beech forests Column headings different localities and same vegetation Choro chorological categoryMean mean percentage value of each category 119868 information value of each category and Evenness value (119864 bottom cell)

Beech Fa3 Fa2 Fa AsF AF3 AF1 AbF AF2 ChoroAbax ater curtulus Fairmaire 1856 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIIParanchus albipes (Fabricius 1796) 1 VBothriopterus quadrifoveolatus (Letzner 1852) 1 IIIMetallina lampros (Herbst 1784) 1 VOcydromus latinus (Netolitzky 1911) 1 IIICalathus fracassii fracassiiHeyden 1908 1 1 IICalathus fuscipes latus Serville 1821 1 1 1 1 IIImCalathus montivagus Dejean 1831 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IICalathus piceus (Marsham 1802) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIICarabus convexus convexus Fabricius 1775 1 1 1 1 1 IVCarabus lefebvrei lefebvrei Dejean 1826 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IICarabus preslii neumeyeri Schaum 1856 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIICychrus italicus Bonelli 1809 1 1 1 1 1 1 IILeistus fulvibarbis fulvibarbis Dejean 1826 1 IIImLeistus spinibarbis fiorii Lutshnik 1913 1 1 1 IIINebria kratteri Dejean 1831 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIINotiophilus biguttatus (Fabricius 1779) 1 VNotiophilus rufipes Curtis 1829 1 IIIOphonus jeanneli Sciaky 1987 1 IIIPlatyderus neapolitanus jannonei Binaghi in Magistretti 1955 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIHaptoderus apenninus (Dejean 1831) 1 1 1 1 IIPlatysma nigrita (Paykull 1790) 1 VSteropus melas italicus (Dejean 1828) 1 1 IIIPterostichus micansHeer 1841 1 IIPterostichus ruffoi Sciaky 1986 1 1 1 ISynuchus vivalis (Illiger 1798) 1 IVTrechus quadristriatus (Schrank 1781) 1 IVTrichotichnus nitens (Heer 1838) 1 IIISpecies number 13 11 12 7 11 14 11 12

Mean 119868

V 0 0 008 0 009 0 009 008 004 014IV 023 009 008 0 009 0 0 008 007 019III 046 036 050 057 036 043 027 042 042 036IIIm 0 009 0 014 009 007 0 008 006 017II 031 045 033 029 036 043 055 025 037 037I 0 0 0 0 0 007 009 008 003 011

E = 074

the sites was evaluated for each chorological category andused to compute the Evenness Index (ie the ratio betweenthe information content and themaximumpossible informa-tion see Tables 3 and 4) and the IBP

3 Results

Table 2 shows a possible scenario of the index variation fromcomplete peculiarity (case 1a) to lack of peculiarity (case 6) Inthe examples of Table 2 there are six chorological categorieswith rank order ranging from 6 for the most peculiar (I) to1 for the least peculiar (V) so that the chorological spectra

including category I will be weighed by adding the value of6 while spectra including at most category II will be weighedby adding the value of 5 and so on ending with spectra madewith category V that will be weighed by adding the value of 1In Table 2 it is possible to see that the values of IBP fluctuatefrom left to right while IBP1015840 gradually decreases consistentlywith decreasing peculiarity from case 1a to case 6

A cumulative sum and a chart were linked to eachsampled OEU as in Figures 2 and 3 In sclerophyllousforests the weight of the categories ranges between 013and 031 while in beech forests the range is between 004and 042 (see Tables 3 and 4) Weights are more evenly

6 ISRN Ecology

10

08

06

04

02

00

I II IIIm III IV V

Figure 2 Graphical model of the biogeographical peculiarity in thesclerophyllous forests of Table 3 (IBP1015840 = 078)

10

08

06

04

02

00

I II IIIm III IV V

Figure 3 Graphical model of the biogeographical peculiarity in thebeech forests of Table 4 (IBP1015840 = 094)

distributed among categories in the sclerophyllous foreststhan in the beech forests as confirmed by the Evenness Indexwhich is 087 for the former while it is 074 for the latterThe Evenness is mirrored also by the graphical model ofthe biogeographical peculiarity as the sclerophyllous chart(Figure 2) rises gradually to 1 while the beech chart (Figure 3)is broken into two steps with increasing steepness among thebreaks

Figures 2 and 3 show that the Italian endemic speciestogether with European species are more abundant in beechforests than in sclerophyllous ones while Mediterraneanspecies are more abundant in sclerophyllous forests Onlya few species with a wide distribution range (categories IVand V) colonized mountain environments while they are asabundant as Mediterranean species in sclerophyllous forests

The species composition is mirrored by the IBP of eachecosystemThe IBP1015840 is higher where the fauna was populatedby more peculiar species that is beech forests (IBP1015840 = 094)where the index is 16 points higher than in sclerophyllousforests (IBP1015840 = 078)

The index has also been calculated for each sampledsite two series of eight values have been obtained and then

statistically compared by the 119880 test The IBP1015840 is significantlydifferent for the two ecosystems (119880 = 9 119899

1= 1198992= 8 and

119875 = 002)To get a very high degree of peculiarity in beech forests

there should have been fewer European species (category III)and a significant number of endemic species (category I)

4 Discussion

The index of biogeographical peculiarity gives a new methodfor integrating in a singlemeasure of peculiarity the chorolog-ical spectrum characterizing the present species compositionof a given OEU This means that the IBP takes into accountthe relative weight of every chorological category that undera biological point of view means to give a value to the wholebiogeographical history of a given OEU and not only tothe endemism phenomenon alone As a consequence totalspecies richness of the OEUs will have an influence on theIBP because if for example two OEUs sheltering the samenumber of endemic species differ in species richness thenthe OEU with the higher species richness will probably havesmaller IBP This is a property the index was intended for

Another property lies in the possibility to compare thepeculiarity of different OEUs belonging to similar biogeo-graphical areas The application of the index at the localscale is needed because the characterization of the speciesis based on chorological categories that should be commonFurthermore this index is adaptable because different opera-tional units can be chosen either administrative boundariesor biogeographical units or surfaces

From a mathematical point of view the most importantfactor influencing the index variability is the order of thechorological category weights because if the highest weightsare found at the beginning of the numerical series then theIBP1015840 will have high values while the opposite case will leadto low IBP1015840 valuesThe IBP is a value linked with a numericalseries but complex mathematical operations are needed tolink numerical series with a single value this is why themathematical simplicity of the IBP is limited by the fact thatany IBP is linked to a set of graphs slightly different from eachother (ie the curves smooth in slightly different ways) whilethe GMBP is unique for each chorological spectrum As ageneral rule the higher the IBP1015840 the higher the contributionof the categories leftward of the ordinal sequence (119909-axis)The highest IBP1015840 is reached when all the species belong to theleftmost category

This method can be accurately applied to areas with acomplete knowledge of the biota in question since a uniquenew record of an endemic species can change the scoremoreover the significance among small differences of theindex must be interpreted under a biogeographical ratherthan numerical perspective

As outlined by [23] an index should not be used asan a priori tool in biogeographical studies because livingorganisms are characterised by different bioevolutionaryfeatures We think that the chorological spectrum of a givenregion is strongly affected by the biogeographical history ofthat region whose understanding should be framed into the

ISRN Ecology 7

processes of speciation extinction and population dynamic[10] The comparison of different IBP1015840 values may be anaid in such understanding as for the above example wherecarabid species belonging to category II have been foundto be very abundant in beech forests It is possible thatthis is a consequence of the glacial ages which exerted astrong influence on the dispersal of living organisms bypushing species southward along the Italian peninsula [4647] Then during interglacial periods the cold-preferringfauna was forced to find shelter upward either latitudinally oraltitudinally on the mountains where some species evolvedto endemic status In the coastal part of the Calabria thenew (in the sense that it appeared during the Pleistocenicera) biome of the Mediterranean sclerophyllous forest wascolonized by widely tolerant species with a wide geographicalrange Palaeoclimatic circumstances gave rise to a morepeculiar fauna in temperate montane environments than inthe Mediterranean belt This greater peculiarity is clearlymirrored by the IBP1015840 values

Spatiotemporal features of chorotypes are the result ofevolutionary events as well as of proximate causes [48]and focusing on the typology of the chorotype (eg localregional and national endemism) should give more insightinto the global nature of spatial variation in geographicrange sizes and a better understanding of how these relateto ecosystems [49 50] This means that it is possible toadapt or to improve the index with chorotypes tailored to theparticular features (if any) of the studied territory

The index is useful not only to outline the faunistic orfloristic history of a region but also to highlight the con-centration of endemic species for addressing conservationpriorities [51] This is why it can be used to evaluate biotichomogenization [52] because it is sensitive to the incomingof allochthonous species which change the chorologicalspectrum Allochthonous species are clearly the less peculiarones so that they must be placed near the end of 119909-axiseven by adding a new category if necessary Furthermore thegraphical model linked to the IBP may be used to monitortemporal changes towards homogenization or differentiationor for hypothesizing future scenarios to optimize broad-scalesurveillance of invasive species [17] either in the case of thespreading of individual species [53] or when native versusnonnative species interaction has to be evaluated [54]

From a general point of view evaluation for conservationshould be based not simply on species richness but alsoon species life strategies The chorotype of a species eithermirrors its adaptive pathway because it is the manifestationof complex interactions between speciesrsquo niche and environ-mental pressures [55] or is a short-term response at thepopulation level [56] This is why it is indirectly related tospecies life strategies The IBP1015840 which synthesizes the setof chorotypes of a given region could be used for studiesintegrating ecology and biogeography [57] or for parallelinganalysis from a hotspots approach [58] or for monitoringconservation efficiency in priority areas for conservation [59]

In the light of some global changemonitoring approachesbased on species range study (eg global coherence approach[60] global versus local diversity variation [61] projectingmodels of current species range [62]) policies focusing on

multispecies management could be helped by applying oneevaluation index (ie the IBP1015840) for comparing plants andanimals responses to climate variation

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

References

[1] R S Dodd and Z Afzal Rafii ldquoEvolutionary genetics ofmangroves continental drift to recent climate changerdquo Treesvol 16 no 2ndash3 pp 80ndash86 2002

[2] A Tribsch and P Schonswetter ldquoPatterns of endemism andcomparative phylogeography confirm palaeoenvironmentalevidence for Pleistocene refugia in the EasternAlpsrdquoTaxon vol52 no 3 pp 477ndash497 2003

[3] B Krystufek E V Buzan W F Hutchinson and B HanflingldquoPhylogeography of the rare Balkan endemic Martinorsquos voleDinaromys bogdanovi reveals strong differentiation within thewestern Balkan PeninsulardquoMolecular Ecology vol 16 no 6 pp1221ndash1232 2007

[4] E C Pielou Biogeograpy Krieger Malabar Fla USA 1stedition 1992

[5] J J Wiens and M J Donoghue ldquoHistorical biogeographyecology and species richnessrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 19 no 12 pp 639ndash644 2004

[6] MKirkpatrick andNH Barton ldquoEvolution of a speciesrsquo rangerdquoThe American Naturalist vol 150 no 1 pp 1ndash23 1997

[7] C Finlayson ldquoBiogeography and evolution of the genusHomordquoTrends in Ecology and Evolution vol 20 no 8 pp 457ndash4632005

[8] G C Costa C Wolfe D B Shepard J P Caldwell and L JVitt ldquoDetecting the influence of climatic variables on speciesdistributions a test using GIS niche-basedmodels along a steeplongitudinal environmental gradientrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 35 no 4 pp 637ndash646 2008

[9] SW Punyasena G Eshel and J CMcElwain ldquoThe influence ofclimate on the spatial patterning of Neotropical plant familiesrdquoJournal of Biogeography vol 35 no 1 pp 117ndash130 2008

[10] K J Gaston ldquoSpecies-range size distributions products ofspeciation extinction and transformationrdquo Philosophical Trans-actions of the Royal Society B vol 353 no 1366 pp 219ndash2301998

[11] R Pizzolotto ldquoCharacterization of different habitats on the basisof the species traits and eco-field approachrdquo Acta Oecologicavol 35 no 1 pp 142ndash148 2009

[12] H T Arita F Figueroa A Frisch P Rodrıguez and K Santos-Del-Prado ldquoGeographical range size and the conservation ofMexican mammalsrdquo Conservation Biology vol 11 no 1 pp 92ndash100 1997

[13] G Ceballos P R Ehrlich J Soberon I Salazar and J PFay ldquoGlobal mammal conservation what must we managerdquoScience vol 309 no 5734 pp 603ndash607 2005

[14] R J Whittaker M B Araujo P Jepson R J Ladle J EM Watson and K J Willis ldquoConservation biogeographyassessment and prospectrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 11no 1 pp 3ndash23 2005

8 ISRN Ecology

[15] N Cooper J Bielby G HThomas and A Purvis ldquoMacroecol-ogy and extinction risk correlates of frogsrdquo Global Ecology andBiogeography vol 17 no 2 pp 211ndash221 2008

[16] P Brandmayr T Zetto and R Pizzolotto in I ColeotteriCarabidi per la valutazione ambientale e la conservazione dellabiodiversita APAT Rome Italy 2005

[17] R Real A L Marquez A Estrada A R Munoz and JM Vargas ldquoModelling chorotypes of invasive vertebrates inmainland Spainrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 14 no 2 pp364ndash373 2008

[18] B Y Vilenkin and V I Chikatunov ldquoParticipation of specieswith different zoogeographical ranks in the formation of localfaunas a case studyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 27 no 5 pp1201ndash1208 2000

[19] CM Cartagena and E Galante ldquoLoss of Iberian island tenebri-onid beetles and conservationmanagement recommendationsrdquoJournal of Insect Conservation vol 6 no 2 pp 73ndash81 2002

[20] S W Laffan and M D Crisp ldquoAssessing endemism at multiplespatial scales with an example from the Australian vascularflorardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 30 no 4 pp 511ndash520 2003

[21] S Lavergne W Thuiller J Molina and M Debussche ldquoEnvi-ronmental and human factors influencing rare plant localoccurrence extinction and persistence a 115-year study in theMediterranean regionrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 32 no 5pp 799ndash811 2005

[22] C A Szumik F Cuezzo P A Goloboff and A E ChalupldquoAn optimality criterion to determine areas of endemismrdquoSystematic Biology vol 51 no 5 pp 806ndash816 2002

[23] S Fattorini ldquoLevels of endemism are not necessarily biased bythe co-presence of species with different range sizes a case studyof Vilenkin and Chikatunovrsquos modelsrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 34 no 6 pp 994ndash1007 2007

[24] M D Crisp S Laffan H P Linder and A Monro ldquoEndemismin the Australian florardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 28 no 2pp 183ndash198 2001

[25] S Anderson ldquoArea and endemismrdquo The Quarterly Review ofBiology vol 69 no 4 pp 451ndash471 1994

[26] J F Mota F J Perez-Garcıa M L Jimenez Sanchez J J Amateand J de Giles Penas ldquoPhytogeographical relationships amonghigh mountain areas in the baetic ranges (South Spain)rdquoGlobalEcology and Biogeography vol 11 no 6 pp 497ndash504 2002

[27] T Kull and M J Hutchings ldquoA comparative analysis of declinein the distribution ranges of orchid species in Estonia and theUnitedKingdomrdquoBiological Conservation vol 129 no 1 pp 31ndash39 2006

[28] A V Taglianti A Audisio M Biondi M Bologna GCarpaneto A De Biase et al ldquoA proposal for a chorotypeclassification of the Near East fauna in the framework of theWestern Palearctic regionrdquo Biogeographia vol 20 pp 31ndash591999

[29] H Turin L Penev and A CasaleTheGenus Carabus in EuropeA Synthesis Pensoft Sofia Bulgaria 2003

[30] R Pizzolotto and P Brandmayr ldquoAn index to evaluate landscapeconservation state based on land-use pattern analysis andgeographic information system techniquesrdquo Coenoses vol 11no 1 pp 37ndash44 1996

[31] L Xiu-zhen X Du-ning H Yuan-man and W Xian-li ldquoEffectof spatial pattern on nutrient reduction in the liaohe deltardquoJournal of Geographical Sciences vol 11 no 3 pp 336ndash349 2001

[32] F Catani B Lastrucci and S Moretti ldquoSustainability of waterand natural resources management an integrated approachrdquoProgress in Water Resources vol 8 pp 411ndash420 2003

[33] C Ricotta M Marignani F Campaiola G C Avena and CBlasi ldquoA partial order approach for summarizing landscapequalityrdquo Community Ecology vol 4 no 2 pp 121ndash127 2003

[34] C Blasi L Zavattero M Marignani et al ldquoThe concept of landecological network and its design using a land unit approachrdquoPlant Biosystems vol 142 no 3 pp 540ndash549 2008

[35] C Ferrari G Pezzi L Diani and M Corazza ldquoEvaluatinglandscape quality with vegetation naturalness maps an indexand some inferencesrdquo Applied Vegetation Science vol 11 no 2pp 243ndash250 2008

[36] C Guarino S Santoro and L De Simone ldquoAssessment ofvegetation and naturalness a study case in Southern ItalyrdquoiForest vol 1 pp 114ndash121 2008

[37] P Di Marzio P Di Martino L Mastronardi P Fortini CGiancola and V Viscosi ldquoAnalisi integrata socio-economica edi copertura del suolo in un paesaggio a prevalente matriceagricolardquo Italian Journal of Agronomy vol 3 pp 47ndash52 2009

[38] M Bodesmo L Pacicco B Romano and A Ranfa ldquoThe roleof environmental and socio-demographic indicators in theanalysis of land use changes in a protected area of the Natura2000 Network the case study of Lake Trasimeno UmbriaCentral Italyrdquo Environmental Monitoring and Assessment vol184 no 2 pp 831ndash843 2012

[39] W Schule ldquoMammals vegetation and the initial humansettlement of the Mediterranean islands a palaeoecologicalapproachrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 20 no 4 pp 399ndash4121993

[40] R Verlaque F Medail P Quezel and J Babinot ldquoEndemismevegetal et paleogeographie dans le Bassin MediterraneenrdquoGeobios vol 30 supplement 2 pp 159ndash166 1997

[41] F Medail and P Quezel ldquoHot-spots analysis for conservationof plant biodiversity in the Mediterranean Basinrdquo Annals of theMissouri Botanical Garden vol 84 no 1 pp 112ndash127 1997

[42] D T Bilton P M Mirol S Mascheretti K Fredga J Zima andJ B Searle ldquoMediterranean Europe as an area of endemism forsmall mammals rather than a source for northwards postglacialcolonizationrdquo Proceedings of the Royal Society B vol 265 no1402 pp 1219ndash1226 1998

[43] A Pons and P Quezel ldquoA propos de la mise en place du climatmediterraneenrdquo Comptes Rendus De LrsquoAcaDemie Des SciencesSeries IIA vol 327 no 11 pp 755ndash760 1998

[44] K J Willis and R J Whittaker ldquoThe refugial debaterdquo Sciencevol 287 no 5457 pp 1406ndash1407 2000

[45] R Pizzolotto P Brandmayr andAMazzei ldquoCarabid beetles in aMediterranean region biogeographical and ecological featuresrdquoReport of the Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences vol 114pp 243ndash254 2005

[46] M La Greca ldquoLrsquoorigine della fauna italianardquo Le Scienze vol 187pp 66ndash79 1984

[47] DMagri G G Vendramin B Comps et al ldquoA new scenario forthe quaternary history of European beech populations palaeob-otanical evidence and genetic consequencesrdquo New Phytologistvol 171 no 1 pp 199ndash221 2006

[48] J Blondel and J Vigne ldquoSpace time and man as determinantsof diversity of birds andmammals in theMediterranean regionrdquoin Species Diversity in Ecological Communities R E Ricklefsand D Schluter Eds pp 135ndash146 University of Chicago PressChicago Ill USA 1993

[49] R Grenyer C D L Orme S F Jackson et al ldquoGlobal distri-bution and conservation of rare and threatened vertebratesrdquoNature vol 444 no 7115 pp 93ndash96 2006

ISRN Ecology 9

[50] C D L Orme R G Davies V A Olson et al ldquoGlobal patternsof geographic range size in birdsrdquo PLoS Biology vol 4 no 7 pp1276ndash1283 2006

[51] G Casazza G Barberis and L Minuto ldquoEcological character-istics and rarity of endemic plants of the ItalianMaritime AlpsrdquoBiological Conservation vol 123 no 3 pp 361ndash371 2005

[52] J D Olden ldquoBiotic homogenization a new research agenda forconservation biogeographyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no12 pp 2027ndash2039 2006

[53] P Pysek V Jarosık J Mullerova J Pergl and J Wild ldquoCompar-ing the rate of invasion by heracleum mantegazzianum at con-tinental regional and local scalesrdquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 355ndash363 2008

[54] F Leprieur O Beauchard B Hugueny G Grenouillet and SBrosse ldquoNull model of biotic homogenization a test with theEuropean freshwater fish faunardquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 291ndash300 2008

[55] J H BrownG C Stevens andDMKaufman ldquoThe geographicrange size shape boundaries and internal structurerdquo AnnualReview of Ecology and Systematics vol 27 pp 597ndash623 1996

[56] C Parmesan T L Root and M R Willig ldquoImpacts ofextreme weather and climate on terrestrial biotardquo Bulletin ofthe American Meteorological Society vol 81 no 3 pp 443ndash4502000

[57] M Crisp ldquoBiome assembly what we know and what we needto knowrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no 8 pp 1332ndash13332006

[58] N Myers R A Mittermeler C G Mittermeler G A B DaFonseca and J Kent ldquoBiodiversity hotspots for conservationprioritiesrdquo Nature vol 403 no 6772 pp 853ndash858 2000

[59] G M Harris C N Jenkins and S L Pimm ldquoRefiningbiodiversity conservation prioritiesrdquo Conservation Biology vol19 no 6 pp 1957ndash1968 2005

[60] C Parmesan and G Yohe ldquoA globally coherent fingerprint ofclimate change impacts across natural systemsrdquoNature vol 421no 6918 pp 37ndash42 2003

[61] D F Sax and S D Gaines ldquoSpecies diversity from globaldecreases to local increasesrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 18 no 11 pp 561ndash566 2003

[62] J O Meynecke ldquoEffects of global climate change on geographicdistributions of vertebrates in North Queenslandrdquo EcologicalModelling vol 174 no 4 pp 347ndash357 2004

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental and Public Health

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcosystemsJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

MeteorologyAdvances in

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Marine BiologyJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

Advances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental Chemistry

Atmospheric SciencesInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Waste ManagementJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Geophysics

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Geological ResearchJournal of

EarthquakesJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

OceanographyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of Computational Environmental SciencesHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ClimatologyJournal of

2 ISRN Ecology

biota for example when there are many endemic species[4 25] our aim is to find an index that integrates in a simplemeasure the weight of the endemic species compared againstthe weight of the other chorotypes

From a biogeographical point of view this index mightbe a valuable help in cases where for example two regionssheltering the same number of endemic species differ inspecies richness furthermore it could aid in determiningbiogeographical peculiarities for conservation policies forexample the preservation of endemism centres (see [26]) orthe habitat conservation for avoiding species range contrac-tion [27]

2 Method

The family of carabid beetles was used just as an example ofhow the index performs In particular attention was focusedon Italian species Carabids have been thoroughly studiedfrom the taxonomical and biogeographical point of view atleast in Europe (see httpwwwfaunaeurorg)

The Italian carabid fauna has several geographical rangeswhich can be classified into chorotypes following [28] seealso [29]

The index presently proposed is based on that of [30]applied by [31ndash38] In the present paper the index proposedby [30] has been implemented for avoiding the possibility ofgetting inaccurate results

21 Data Organization Prerequisites For the index computa-tion it is necessary to first classify the biological distinctive-ness of an area This is why we have grouped the chorotypesinto chorological categories based on their degree of pecu-liarity where a high biogeographical peculiarity is a propertyof a given biota when many species live only within thatbiota for example when there are many endemic species [425] In the following the categories (ie peculiarity degrees)in roman numeral are ordered according to decreasingpeculiaritymdashI regional endemic species II Italian speciesIIIm Mediterranean and Euro-Mediterranean species IIIEuropean species IV Euro-Asiatic Euro-Siberian speciesand V Palaearctic Holarctic species Such a classificationwas used with the exclusive intent of testing how the indexperforms It is likely that it has no general value outsidethe Mediterranean basin but it has the advantage that it ispossible to outline the carabid chorological spectrum for anyterritorial unit (administrative biogeographical ecologicaland geomorphological)

The categories I and II are themost peculiar biogeograph-ical features of their territorial unit because they represent aunique faunistic resource of that unit (ie endemic species)or of that geographical area (Italian species) Therefore forachieving the aim of this paper these categories have beenranked at the highest degree of peculiarity

The category IIIm includes the chorotypes linked to theMediterranean basin (Euro-Mediterranean circum-Mediter-ranean Sicily-Maghreb and so on) They were grouped in

10

09

08

07

06

05

04

03

02

01

00

I II IIIm III IV V

Figure 1 Graphical model of the biogeographical peculiarity(GMBP) based on a cumulative sumwhere the relative abundance ofeach chorological category has been summed starting from themostpeculiar one and including all the amounts that have been addedpreviously (IBP1015840 = 092)

a separate category for reasons of peculiarity because themain part of the Italian territory is in the middle of theMediterranean basin which is characterized by a particularbiogeographical history [39ndash44] hence just for the purposeof this example the IIIm category has been considered a littlemore peculiar to the Italian fauna than category III

As a second step to compute the index it is necessary tooutline an operational ecological unit (OEU) where it willbe possible to analyse the biogeographical spectrum Admin-istrative hydrological (catchment) or ecological (CORINEhabitats and ecosystems) criteriamay be followed for drawingthe boundaries of the unit

These steps are similar to those described in [30 35] instudies of environmental evaluation for conservation

22 The Index of the Biogeographical Peculiarity (IBP) Therelative abundance of each chorological category inside anyOEU is given by the ratio of species belonging to that categoryto the number of species living in theOEUAfinite number ofspecies live in anyOEU and there could be some chorologicalcategory that is not represented by that species This meansthat for example if the fauna of a given OEU has beenpopulated by the IV and V categories over time then thatfauna is not peculiar to thatOEUConversely if thatOEUwasa speciation site or a confinement site for geographical relictsthen its fauna may be marked by many endemic specieshence that fauna has high degree of peculiarity to that OEU

In Figure 1 the chorological diversity of a hypotheticalOEU is depicted by drawing a graphical model of the biogeo-graphical peculiarity (GMBP) where the relative abundanceof each chorological category was summed starting from themost peculiar one and including all the amounts that wereadded previously (see Table 1 for the detailed computationsteps) From a mathematical point of view it is possible toevaluate such a graphical model by a cumulative sum (119860)

ISRN Ecology 3

Table 1 Rank ord rank order of the categories chorcat chorological categories relab relative abundance of each category GMBP step bystep cumulative sum (left) for getting the numbers (right) used to draw the Graphical Model of Biogeographical Peculiarity (Figure 1) IBP1015840sum (first six cells) and computation (bottom separate cells) of the Index of Biogeographical Peculiarity (in bold)

Rank ord Chorcat Relab GMBP IBP1015840

6 I 1 1 1 +5 II 05 1 + 05 = 15 15 +4 IIIm 15 1 + 05 + 15 = 3 3 +3 III 35 1 + 05 + 15 + 35 = 65 65 +2 IV 2 1 + 05 + 15 + 35 + 2 = 85 85 +1 V 15 1 + 05 + 15 + 35 + 2 + 15 = 1 10 =

305(305 minus 1)(6 minus 1) = 41

(41 + 6)(1 + 6) = 92

Table 2 Hypothesized scenario for the IBP Several cases have been hypothesized in the OEUs from 1a to 6 that is from the highest to thelowest number of endemic species To get consistent values of peculiarity the IBP must be weighed so that the value of each chorologicalspectrum is gradually decreasing from 1a to 6 If the IBP is computed following [3] it fluctuates from 1a to 6 with inconsistent values (eg 2aversus 2b) while the IBP1015840 gradually decreases from 1a to 6 following the gradient of decreasing peculiarity

Rankord

Caseschorcat

1a 1b 2a 2b 3a 3b 4a 4b 5a 5b 6 Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ

6 I 1 1 010 010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 II 0 1 0 01 1 1 001 001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 IIIm 0 1 0 01 0 1 0 001 1 1 001 001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 III 0 1 0 01 0 1 0 001 0 1 0 001 1 1 001 001 0 0 0 0 0 02 IV 0 1 0 01 0 1 0 001 0 1 0 001 0 1 0 001 1 1 001 001 0 01 V 0 1 09 1 0 1 099 1 0 1 099 1 0 1 099 1 0 1 099 1 1 1

IBP 1 0100 0800 0008 0600 0006 04 0004 0200 0002 0000wIBP 7 61 58 501 46 40 34 30 22 20 10IBP1015840 1 087 083 072 066 057 049 043 031 029 014

which is in direct relation to the number of endemic species(ie peculiarity) as follows

119860 = (

119899119888

sum

119895=1

119895

sum

119894=1

119883119894) minus 1 (1)

where ldquo119883119894rdquo is the relative abundance of each chorological

category (ie ratio of species belonging to that categoryto the total number of species) and ldquo119899119888rdquo is the number ofchorological categories (the last category will always add upto over 1 and it is not depicted by an area in the graph whichis why 1 is subtracted)

It is easy to link the grey area of Figure 1 to an index ofthe biogeographical peculiarity (IBP) ranging between 0 and1 and directly related to the categoriesmost characterizing theOEU fauna (ie endemic species in our example)

The maximum value of 119860 is reached when all the speciesbelong to the most peculiar category

119860max = 119899119888 minus 1 (2)

therefore the IBP is

IBP = ( 119860119860max) (3)

In this way the IBP is directly linked to the chorotypethat enhances the biogeographical peculiarity Furthermoreby simply multiplying the IBP by 100 we would get thepercentage of peculiarity The steps for drawing Figure 1 andits related IBP have been summarized in Table 1

Worth of attention is the fact that as a consequence of theproperties of numerical series IBP gives comparable valueswhendifferentOEUs aremade by the same categories while itis possible to get biogeographically inconsistent values whenthe maximum peculiarity category is not the same in thedifferent OEUs as clearly shown in Table 2

To get comparable values from any chorological spectrumthe IBP must be weighed so that for example a chorologicalspectrum with at least one endemic species is ranked higherthan a chorological spectrum made with all category IIspecies while the latter gets an intermediate rank between thefirst spectrum and a spectrum made with all category IIImspecies and so on for as much as the number of categories

An effective weighing rule is to add the rank order ofthe most peculiar category to IBP Several cases have beenhypothesized in Table 2 where for example in case 2b thereare species belonging to categories II and V thus II being themost peculiar and in 5th position (V is in the 1st position andI is in the 6th position) 5 will be added to the computed IBP

4 ISRN Ecology

Table 3 Carabid species in eight sample sites of the Mediterranean bioclimatic region Column headings with Le holm oak while Su corkoak Ci Mediterranean short bushes Choro chorological category Mean mean percentage value of each category 119868 information value ofeach category and Evenness value (119864 bottom cell)

Sclerophyllous forests Le Su1 Su2 TLe2 TCi TLe3 TLe4 TLeQ ChoroAbax ater curtulus Fairmaire 1856 1 IIIAmara fusca Dejean 1828 1 IVBrachinus brevicollisMotschulsky 1844 1 IVBrachinus crepitans (Linne 1758) 1 VCalathus cinctusMotschulsky 1850 1 1 VCalathus fuscipes latus Serville 1821 1 1 1 IIImCalathus montivagus Dejean 1831 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IICalosoma sycophanta (Linne 1758) 1 1 1 VCarabus convexus convexus Fabricius 1775 1 IVCarabus coriaceus mediterraneus Born 1906 1 1 IIICarabus lefebvrei lefebvrei Dejean 1826 1 1 IICychrus italicus Bonelli 1809 1 IICymindis axillaris (Fabricius 1794) 1 VHarpalus attenuatus Stephens 1828 1 IIImHarpalus rubripes (Duftschmid 1812) 1 1 IVHarpalus sulphuripes sulphuripes Germar 1824 1 1 IIImLaemostenus cimmerius cimmerius (Fischer-Waldheim 1823) 1 IIImMasoreus wetterhallii wetterhallii (Gyllenhal 1813) 1 1 VMicroderes scaritides Sturm 1818 1 IVMicrolestes luctuosusHoldhaus 1904 1 IVNebria brevicollis (Fabricius 1792) 1 IVNebria kratteri Dejean 1831 1 1 IIINotiophilus rufipes Curtis 1829 1 1 1 1 IIIOphonus pumilio (Dejean 1829) 1 IIImPercus bilineatus (Dejean 1828) 1 1 IIPlatyderus neapolitanus jannonei Binaghi in Magistretti 1955 1 1 1 1 1 IIPseudomasoreus canigoulensis (Fairmaire amp Laboulbene 1854) 1 1 1 1 IIImPseudoophonus rufipes (Degeer 1774) 1 VSteropus melas italicus (Dejean 1828) 1 1 1 1 1 IIITrechus quadristriatus (Schrank 1781) 1 1 1 IVSpecies number 5 14 8 6 15 3 6 8

Mean 119868

V 020 014 013 0 02 033 017 013 016 029IV 0 021 013 017 027 0 017 013 013 027III 020 014 013 050 013 033 017 038 025 035IIIm 0 021 025 017 027 0 017 013 015 028II 06 029 038 017 013 033 033 025 031 036I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

E = 087

of 0008 giving a weighed wIBP = 5008 Consequently thenew weighed maximum value will be

w119860max = IBPmax + 119899119888 = 1 + 119899119888 (4)

therefore the new IBP1015840 will be

IBP1015840 = wIBPw119860max (5)

and in our example IBP1015840 = 50087 = 072

An application example of the IBP is given using realdata from 16 sample sites located in two different typesof ecosystems (ie two OEUs) in the Calabria region ofsouthern Italy [45] In this case the boundaries betweenOEUs are ecological and not geographical Carabid beetleswere sampled with pitfall traps Eight samples were collectedinMediterranean sclerophyllous forests (holm and cork oak)while the others were collected in oro-Mediterranean beechforests (Tables 3 and 4) The mean relative abundance in

ISRN Ecology 5

Table 4 Carabid species in eight beech forests Column headings different localities and same vegetation Choro chorological categoryMean mean percentage value of each category 119868 information value of each category and Evenness value (119864 bottom cell)

Beech Fa3 Fa2 Fa AsF AF3 AF1 AbF AF2 ChoroAbax ater curtulus Fairmaire 1856 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIIParanchus albipes (Fabricius 1796) 1 VBothriopterus quadrifoveolatus (Letzner 1852) 1 IIIMetallina lampros (Herbst 1784) 1 VOcydromus latinus (Netolitzky 1911) 1 IIICalathus fracassii fracassiiHeyden 1908 1 1 IICalathus fuscipes latus Serville 1821 1 1 1 1 IIImCalathus montivagus Dejean 1831 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IICalathus piceus (Marsham 1802) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIICarabus convexus convexus Fabricius 1775 1 1 1 1 1 IVCarabus lefebvrei lefebvrei Dejean 1826 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IICarabus preslii neumeyeri Schaum 1856 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIICychrus italicus Bonelli 1809 1 1 1 1 1 1 IILeistus fulvibarbis fulvibarbis Dejean 1826 1 IIImLeistus spinibarbis fiorii Lutshnik 1913 1 1 1 IIINebria kratteri Dejean 1831 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIINotiophilus biguttatus (Fabricius 1779) 1 VNotiophilus rufipes Curtis 1829 1 IIIOphonus jeanneli Sciaky 1987 1 IIIPlatyderus neapolitanus jannonei Binaghi in Magistretti 1955 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIHaptoderus apenninus (Dejean 1831) 1 1 1 1 IIPlatysma nigrita (Paykull 1790) 1 VSteropus melas italicus (Dejean 1828) 1 1 IIIPterostichus micansHeer 1841 1 IIPterostichus ruffoi Sciaky 1986 1 1 1 ISynuchus vivalis (Illiger 1798) 1 IVTrechus quadristriatus (Schrank 1781) 1 IVTrichotichnus nitens (Heer 1838) 1 IIISpecies number 13 11 12 7 11 14 11 12

Mean 119868

V 0 0 008 0 009 0 009 008 004 014IV 023 009 008 0 009 0 0 008 007 019III 046 036 050 057 036 043 027 042 042 036IIIm 0 009 0 014 009 007 0 008 006 017II 031 045 033 029 036 043 055 025 037 037I 0 0 0 0 0 007 009 008 003 011

E = 074

the sites was evaluated for each chorological category andused to compute the Evenness Index (ie the ratio betweenthe information content and themaximumpossible informa-tion see Tables 3 and 4) and the IBP

3 Results

Table 2 shows a possible scenario of the index variation fromcomplete peculiarity (case 1a) to lack of peculiarity (case 6) Inthe examples of Table 2 there are six chorological categorieswith rank order ranging from 6 for the most peculiar (I) to1 for the least peculiar (V) so that the chorological spectra

including category I will be weighed by adding the value of6 while spectra including at most category II will be weighedby adding the value of 5 and so on ending with spectra madewith category V that will be weighed by adding the value of 1In Table 2 it is possible to see that the values of IBP fluctuatefrom left to right while IBP1015840 gradually decreases consistentlywith decreasing peculiarity from case 1a to case 6

A cumulative sum and a chart were linked to eachsampled OEU as in Figures 2 and 3 In sclerophyllousforests the weight of the categories ranges between 013and 031 while in beech forests the range is between 004and 042 (see Tables 3 and 4) Weights are more evenly

6 ISRN Ecology

10

08

06

04

02

00

I II IIIm III IV V

Figure 2 Graphical model of the biogeographical peculiarity in thesclerophyllous forests of Table 3 (IBP1015840 = 078)

10

08

06

04

02

00

I II IIIm III IV V

Figure 3 Graphical model of the biogeographical peculiarity in thebeech forests of Table 4 (IBP1015840 = 094)

distributed among categories in the sclerophyllous foreststhan in the beech forests as confirmed by the Evenness Indexwhich is 087 for the former while it is 074 for the latterThe Evenness is mirrored also by the graphical model ofthe biogeographical peculiarity as the sclerophyllous chart(Figure 2) rises gradually to 1 while the beech chart (Figure 3)is broken into two steps with increasing steepness among thebreaks

Figures 2 and 3 show that the Italian endemic speciestogether with European species are more abundant in beechforests than in sclerophyllous ones while Mediterraneanspecies are more abundant in sclerophyllous forests Onlya few species with a wide distribution range (categories IVand V) colonized mountain environments while they are asabundant as Mediterranean species in sclerophyllous forests

The species composition is mirrored by the IBP of eachecosystemThe IBP1015840 is higher where the fauna was populatedby more peculiar species that is beech forests (IBP1015840 = 094)where the index is 16 points higher than in sclerophyllousforests (IBP1015840 = 078)

The index has also been calculated for each sampledsite two series of eight values have been obtained and then

statistically compared by the 119880 test The IBP1015840 is significantlydifferent for the two ecosystems (119880 = 9 119899

1= 1198992= 8 and

119875 = 002)To get a very high degree of peculiarity in beech forests

there should have been fewer European species (category III)and a significant number of endemic species (category I)

4 Discussion

The index of biogeographical peculiarity gives a new methodfor integrating in a singlemeasure of peculiarity the chorolog-ical spectrum characterizing the present species compositionof a given OEU This means that the IBP takes into accountthe relative weight of every chorological category that undera biological point of view means to give a value to the wholebiogeographical history of a given OEU and not only tothe endemism phenomenon alone As a consequence totalspecies richness of the OEUs will have an influence on theIBP because if for example two OEUs sheltering the samenumber of endemic species differ in species richness thenthe OEU with the higher species richness will probably havesmaller IBP This is a property the index was intended for

Another property lies in the possibility to compare thepeculiarity of different OEUs belonging to similar biogeo-graphical areas The application of the index at the localscale is needed because the characterization of the speciesis based on chorological categories that should be commonFurthermore this index is adaptable because different opera-tional units can be chosen either administrative boundariesor biogeographical units or surfaces

From a mathematical point of view the most importantfactor influencing the index variability is the order of thechorological category weights because if the highest weightsare found at the beginning of the numerical series then theIBP1015840 will have high values while the opposite case will leadto low IBP1015840 valuesThe IBP is a value linked with a numericalseries but complex mathematical operations are needed tolink numerical series with a single value this is why themathematical simplicity of the IBP is limited by the fact thatany IBP is linked to a set of graphs slightly different from eachother (ie the curves smooth in slightly different ways) whilethe GMBP is unique for each chorological spectrum As ageneral rule the higher the IBP1015840 the higher the contributionof the categories leftward of the ordinal sequence (119909-axis)The highest IBP1015840 is reached when all the species belong to theleftmost category

This method can be accurately applied to areas with acomplete knowledge of the biota in question since a uniquenew record of an endemic species can change the scoremoreover the significance among small differences of theindex must be interpreted under a biogeographical ratherthan numerical perspective

As outlined by [23] an index should not be used asan a priori tool in biogeographical studies because livingorganisms are characterised by different bioevolutionaryfeatures We think that the chorological spectrum of a givenregion is strongly affected by the biogeographical history ofthat region whose understanding should be framed into the

ISRN Ecology 7

processes of speciation extinction and population dynamic[10] The comparison of different IBP1015840 values may be anaid in such understanding as for the above example wherecarabid species belonging to category II have been foundto be very abundant in beech forests It is possible thatthis is a consequence of the glacial ages which exerted astrong influence on the dispersal of living organisms bypushing species southward along the Italian peninsula [4647] Then during interglacial periods the cold-preferringfauna was forced to find shelter upward either latitudinally oraltitudinally on the mountains where some species evolvedto endemic status In the coastal part of the Calabria thenew (in the sense that it appeared during the Pleistocenicera) biome of the Mediterranean sclerophyllous forest wascolonized by widely tolerant species with a wide geographicalrange Palaeoclimatic circumstances gave rise to a morepeculiar fauna in temperate montane environments than inthe Mediterranean belt This greater peculiarity is clearlymirrored by the IBP1015840 values

Spatiotemporal features of chorotypes are the result ofevolutionary events as well as of proximate causes [48]and focusing on the typology of the chorotype (eg localregional and national endemism) should give more insightinto the global nature of spatial variation in geographicrange sizes and a better understanding of how these relateto ecosystems [49 50] This means that it is possible toadapt or to improve the index with chorotypes tailored to theparticular features (if any) of the studied territory

The index is useful not only to outline the faunistic orfloristic history of a region but also to highlight the con-centration of endemic species for addressing conservationpriorities [51] This is why it can be used to evaluate biotichomogenization [52] because it is sensitive to the incomingof allochthonous species which change the chorologicalspectrum Allochthonous species are clearly the less peculiarones so that they must be placed near the end of 119909-axiseven by adding a new category if necessary Furthermore thegraphical model linked to the IBP may be used to monitortemporal changes towards homogenization or differentiationor for hypothesizing future scenarios to optimize broad-scalesurveillance of invasive species [17] either in the case of thespreading of individual species [53] or when native versusnonnative species interaction has to be evaluated [54]

From a general point of view evaluation for conservationshould be based not simply on species richness but alsoon species life strategies The chorotype of a species eithermirrors its adaptive pathway because it is the manifestationof complex interactions between speciesrsquo niche and environ-mental pressures [55] or is a short-term response at thepopulation level [56] This is why it is indirectly related tospecies life strategies The IBP1015840 which synthesizes the setof chorotypes of a given region could be used for studiesintegrating ecology and biogeography [57] or for parallelinganalysis from a hotspots approach [58] or for monitoringconservation efficiency in priority areas for conservation [59]

In the light of some global changemonitoring approachesbased on species range study (eg global coherence approach[60] global versus local diversity variation [61] projectingmodels of current species range [62]) policies focusing on

multispecies management could be helped by applying oneevaluation index (ie the IBP1015840) for comparing plants andanimals responses to climate variation

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

References

[1] R S Dodd and Z Afzal Rafii ldquoEvolutionary genetics ofmangroves continental drift to recent climate changerdquo Treesvol 16 no 2ndash3 pp 80ndash86 2002

[2] A Tribsch and P Schonswetter ldquoPatterns of endemism andcomparative phylogeography confirm palaeoenvironmentalevidence for Pleistocene refugia in the EasternAlpsrdquoTaxon vol52 no 3 pp 477ndash497 2003

[3] B Krystufek E V Buzan W F Hutchinson and B HanflingldquoPhylogeography of the rare Balkan endemic Martinorsquos voleDinaromys bogdanovi reveals strong differentiation within thewestern Balkan PeninsulardquoMolecular Ecology vol 16 no 6 pp1221ndash1232 2007

[4] E C Pielou Biogeograpy Krieger Malabar Fla USA 1stedition 1992

[5] J J Wiens and M J Donoghue ldquoHistorical biogeographyecology and species richnessrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 19 no 12 pp 639ndash644 2004

[6] MKirkpatrick andNH Barton ldquoEvolution of a speciesrsquo rangerdquoThe American Naturalist vol 150 no 1 pp 1ndash23 1997

[7] C Finlayson ldquoBiogeography and evolution of the genusHomordquoTrends in Ecology and Evolution vol 20 no 8 pp 457ndash4632005

[8] G C Costa C Wolfe D B Shepard J P Caldwell and L JVitt ldquoDetecting the influence of climatic variables on speciesdistributions a test using GIS niche-basedmodels along a steeplongitudinal environmental gradientrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 35 no 4 pp 637ndash646 2008

[9] SW Punyasena G Eshel and J CMcElwain ldquoThe influence ofclimate on the spatial patterning of Neotropical plant familiesrdquoJournal of Biogeography vol 35 no 1 pp 117ndash130 2008

[10] K J Gaston ldquoSpecies-range size distributions products ofspeciation extinction and transformationrdquo Philosophical Trans-actions of the Royal Society B vol 353 no 1366 pp 219ndash2301998

[11] R Pizzolotto ldquoCharacterization of different habitats on the basisof the species traits and eco-field approachrdquo Acta Oecologicavol 35 no 1 pp 142ndash148 2009

[12] H T Arita F Figueroa A Frisch P Rodrıguez and K Santos-Del-Prado ldquoGeographical range size and the conservation ofMexican mammalsrdquo Conservation Biology vol 11 no 1 pp 92ndash100 1997

[13] G Ceballos P R Ehrlich J Soberon I Salazar and J PFay ldquoGlobal mammal conservation what must we managerdquoScience vol 309 no 5734 pp 603ndash607 2005

[14] R J Whittaker M B Araujo P Jepson R J Ladle J EM Watson and K J Willis ldquoConservation biogeographyassessment and prospectrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 11no 1 pp 3ndash23 2005

8 ISRN Ecology

[15] N Cooper J Bielby G HThomas and A Purvis ldquoMacroecol-ogy and extinction risk correlates of frogsrdquo Global Ecology andBiogeography vol 17 no 2 pp 211ndash221 2008

[16] P Brandmayr T Zetto and R Pizzolotto in I ColeotteriCarabidi per la valutazione ambientale e la conservazione dellabiodiversita APAT Rome Italy 2005

[17] R Real A L Marquez A Estrada A R Munoz and JM Vargas ldquoModelling chorotypes of invasive vertebrates inmainland Spainrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 14 no 2 pp364ndash373 2008

[18] B Y Vilenkin and V I Chikatunov ldquoParticipation of specieswith different zoogeographical ranks in the formation of localfaunas a case studyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 27 no 5 pp1201ndash1208 2000

[19] CM Cartagena and E Galante ldquoLoss of Iberian island tenebri-onid beetles and conservationmanagement recommendationsrdquoJournal of Insect Conservation vol 6 no 2 pp 73ndash81 2002

[20] S W Laffan and M D Crisp ldquoAssessing endemism at multiplespatial scales with an example from the Australian vascularflorardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 30 no 4 pp 511ndash520 2003

[21] S Lavergne W Thuiller J Molina and M Debussche ldquoEnvi-ronmental and human factors influencing rare plant localoccurrence extinction and persistence a 115-year study in theMediterranean regionrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 32 no 5pp 799ndash811 2005

[22] C A Szumik F Cuezzo P A Goloboff and A E ChalupldquoAn optimality criterion to determine areas of endemismrdquoSystematic Biology vol 51 no 5 pp 806ndash816 2002

[23] S Fattorini ldquoLevels of endemism are not necessarily biased bythe co-presence of species with different range sizes a case studyof Vilenkin and Chikatunovrsquos modelsrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 34 no 6 pp 994ndash1007 2007

[24] M D Crisp S Laffan H P Linder and A Monro ldquoEndemismin the Australian florardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 28 no 2pp 183ndash198 2001

[25] S Anderson ldquoArea and endemismrdquo The Quarterly Review ofBiology vol 69 no 4 pp 451ndash471 1994

[26] J F Mota F J Perez-Garcıa M L Jimenez Sanchez J J Amateand J de Giles Penas ldquoPhytogeographical relationships amonghigh mountain areas in the baetic ranges (South Spain)rdquoGlobalEcology and Biogeography vol 11 no 6 pp 497ndash504 2002

[27] T Kull and M J Hutchings ldquoA comparative analysis of declinein the distribution ranges of orchid species in Estonia and theUnitedKingdomrdquoBiological Conservation vol 129 no 1 pp 31ndash39 2006

[28] A V Taglianti A Audisio M Biondi M Bologna GCarpaneto A De Biase et al ldquoA proposal for a chorotypeclassification of the Near East fauna in the framework of theWestern Palearctic regionrdquo Biogeographia vol 20 pp 31ndash591999

[29] H Turin L Penev and A CasaleTheGenus Carabus in EuropeA Synthesis Pensoft Sofia Bulgaria 2003

[30] R Pizzolotto and P Brandmayr ldquoAn index to evaluate landscapeconservation state based on land-use pattern analysis andgeographic information system techniquesrdquo Coenoses vol 11no 1 pp 37ndash44 1996

[31] L Xiu-zhen X Du-ning H Yuan-man and W Xian-li ldquoEffectof spatial pattern on nutrient reduction in the liaohe deltardquoJournal of Geographical Sciences vol 11 no 3 pp 336ndash349 2001

[32] F Catani B Lastrucci and S Moretti ldquoSustainability of waterand natural resources management an integrated approachrdquoProgress in Water Resources vol 8 pp 411ndash420 2003

[33] C Ricotta M Marignani F Campaiola G C Avena and CBlasi ldquoA partial order approach for summarizing landscapequalityrdquo Community Ecology vol 4 no 2 pp 121ndash127 2003

[34] C Blasi L Zavattero M Marignani et al ldquoThe concept of landecological network and its design using a land unit approachrdquoPlant Biosystems vol 142 no 3 pp 540ndash549 2008

[35] C Ferrari G Pezzi L Diani and M Corazza ldquoEvaluatinglandscape quality with vegetation naturalness maps an indexand some inferencesrdquo Applied Vegetation Science vol 11 no 2pp 243ndash250 2008

[36] C Guarino S Santoro and L De Simone ldquoAssessment ofvegetation and naturalness a study case in Southern ItalyrdquoiForest vol 1 pp 114ndash121 2008

[37] P Di Marzio P Di Martino L Mastronardi P Fortini CGiancola and V Viscosi ldquoAnalisi integrata socio-economica edi copertura del suolo in un paesaggio a prevalente matriceagricolardquo Italian Journal of Agronomy vol 3 pp 47ndash52 2009

[38] M Bodesmo L Pacicco B Romano and A Ranfa ldquoThe roleof environmental and socio-demographic indicators in theanalysis of land use changes in a protected area of the Natura2000 Network the case study of Lake Trasimeno UmbriaCentral Italyrdquo Environmental Monitoring and Assessment vol184 no 2 pp 831ndash843 2012

[39] W Schule ldquoMammals vegetation and the initial humansettlement of the Mediterranean islands a palaeoecologicalapproachrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 20 no 4 pp 399ndash4121993

[40] R Verlaque F Medail P Quezel and J Babinot ldquoEndemismevegetal et paleogeographie dans le Bassin MediterraneenrdquoGeobios vol 30 supplement 2 pp 159ndash166 1997

[41] F Medail and P Quezel ldquoHot-spots analysis for conservationof plant biodiversity in the Mediterranean Basinrdquo Annals of theMissouri Botanical Garden vol 84 no 1 pp 112ndash127 1997

[42] D T Bilton P M Mirol S Mascheretti K Fredga J Zima andJ B Searle ldquoMediterranean Europe as an area of endemism forsmall mammals rather than a source for northwards postglacialcolonizationrdquo Proceedings of the Royal Society B vol 265 no1402 pp 1219ndash1226 1998

[43] A Pons and P Quezel ldquoA propos de la mise en place du climatmediterraneenrdquo Comptes Rendus De LrsquoAcaDemie Des SciencesSeries IIA vol 327 no 11 pp 755ndash760 1998

[44] K J Willis and R J Whittaker ldquoThe refugial debaterdquo Sciencevol 287 no 5457 pp 1406ndash1407 2000

[45] R Pizzolotto P Brandmayr andAMazzei ldquoCarabid beetles in aMediterranean region biogeographical and ecological featuresrdquoReport of the Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences vol 114pp 243ndash254 2005

[46] M La Greca ldquoLrsquoorigine della fauna italianardquo Le Scienze vol 187pp 66ndash79 1984

[47] DMagri G G Vendramin B Comps et al ldquoA new scenario forthe quaternary history of European beech populations palaeob-otanical evidence and genetic consequencesrdquo New Phytologistvol 171 no 1 pp 199ndash221 2006

[48] J Blondel and J Vigne ldquoSpace time and man as determinantsof diversity of birds andmammals in theMediterranean regionrdquoin Species Diversity in Ecological Communities R E Ricklefsand D Schluter Eds pp 135ndash146 University of Chicago PressChicago Ill USA 1993

[49] R Grenyer C D L Orme S F Jackson et al ldquoGlobal distri-bution and conservation of rare and threatened vertebratesrdquoNature vol 444 no 7115 pp 93ndash96 2006

ISRN Ecology 9

[50] C D L Orme R G Davies V A Olson et al ldquoGlobal patternsof geographic range size in birdsrdquo PLoS Biology vol 4 no 7 pp1276ndash1283 2006

[51] G Casazza G Barberis and L Minuto ldquoEcological character-istics and rarity of endemic plants of the ItalianMaritime AlpsrdquoBiological Conservation vol 123 no 3 pp 361ndash371 2005

[52] J D Olden ldquoBiotic homogenization a new research agenda forconservation biogeographyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no12 pp 2027ndash2039 2006

[53] P Pysek V Jarosık J Mullerova J Pergl and J Wild ldquoCompar-ing the rate of invasion by heracleum mantegazzianum at con-tinental regional and local scalesrdquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 355ndash363 2008

[54] F Leprieur O Beauchard B Hugueny G Grenouillet and SBrosse ldquoNull model of biotic homogenization a test with theEuropean freshwater fish faunardquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 291ndash300 2008

[55] J H BrownG C Stevens andDMKaufman ldquoThe geographicrange size shape boundaries and internal structurerdquo AnnualReview of Ecology and Systematics vol 27 pp 597ndash623 1996

[56] C Parmesan T L Root and M R Willig ldquoImpacts ofextreme weather and climate on terrestrial biotardquo Bulletin ofthe American Meteorological Society vol 81 no 3 pp 443ndash4502000

[57] M Crisp ldquoBiome assembly what we know and what we needto knowrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no 8 pp 1332ndash13332006

[58] N Myers R A Mittermeler C G Mittermeler G A B DaFonseca and J Kent ldquoBiodiversity hotspots for conservationprioritiesrdquo Nature vol 403 no 6772 pp 853ndash858 2000

[59] G M Harris C N Jenkins and S L Pimm ldquoRefiningbiodiversity conservation prioritiesrdquo Conservation Biology vol19 no 6 pp 1957ndash1968 2005

[60] C Parmesan and G Yohe ldquoA globally coherent fingerprint ofclimate change impacts across natural systemsrdquoNature vol 421no 6918 pp 37ndash42 2003

[61] D F Sax and S D Gaines ldquoSpecies diversity from globaldecreases to local increasesrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 18 no 11 pp 561ndash566 2003

[62] J O Meynecke ldquoEffects of global climate change on geographicdistributions of vertebrates in North Queenslandrdquo EcologicalModelling vol 174 no 4 pp 347ndash357 2004

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental and Public Health

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcosystemsJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

MeteorologyAdvances in

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Marine BiologyJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

Advances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental Chemistry

Atmospheric SciencesInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Waste ManagementJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Geophysics

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Geological ResearchJournal of

EarthquakesJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

OceanographyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of Computational Environmental SciencesHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ClimatologyJournal of

ISRN Ecology 3

Table 1 Rank ord rank order of the categories chorcat chorological categories relab relative abundance of each category GMBP step bystep cumulative sum (left) for getting the numbers (right) used to draw the Graphical Model of Biogeographical Peculiarity (Figure 1) IBP1015840sum (first six cells) and computation (bottom separate cells) of the Index of Biogeographical Peculiarity (in bold)

Rank ord Chorcat Relab GMBP IBP1015840

6 I 1 1 1 +5 II 05 1 + 05 = 15 15 +4 IIIm 15 1 + 05 + 15 = 3 3 +3 III 35 1 + 05 + 15 + 35 = 65 65 +2 IV 2 1 + 05 + 15 + 35 + 2 = 85 85 +1 V 15 1 + 05 + 15 + 35 + 2 + 15 = 1 10 =

305(305 minus 1)(6 minus 1) = 41

(41 + 6)(1 + 6) = 92

Table 2 Hypothesized scenario for the IBP Several cases have been hypothesized in the OEUs from 1a to 6 that is from the highest to thelowest number of endemic species To get consistent values of peculiarity the IBP must be weighed so that the value of each chorologicalspectrum is gradually decreasing from 1a to 6 If the IBP is computed following [3] it fluctuates from 1a to 6 with inconsistent values (eg 2aversus 2b) while the IBP1015840 gradually decreases from 1a to 6 following the gradient of decreasing peculiarity

Rankord

Caseschorcat

1a 1b 2a 2b 3a 3b 4a 4b 5a 5b 6 Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ Σ

6 I 1 1 010 010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 II 0 1 0 01 1 1 001 001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 IIIm 0 1 0 01 0 1 0 001 1 1 001 001 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 III 0 1 0 01 0 1 0 001 0 1 0 001 1 1 001 001 0 0 0 0 0 02 IV 0 1 0 01 0 1 0 001 0 1 0 001 0 1 0 001 1 1 001 001 0 01 V 0 1 09 1 0 1 099 1 0 1 099 1 0 1 099 1 0 1 099 1 1 1

IBP 1 0100 0800 0008 0600 0006 04 0004 0200 0002 0000wIBP 7 61 58 501 46 40 34 30 22 20 10IBP1015840 1 087 083 072 066 057 049 043 031 029 014

which is in direct relation to the number of endemic species(ie peculiarity) as follows

119860 = (

119899119888

sum

119895=1

119895

sum

119894=1

119883119894) minus 1 (1)

where ldquo119883119894rdquo is the relative abundance of each chorological

category (ie ratio of species belonging to that categoryto the total number of species) and ldquo119899119888rdquo is the number ofchorological categories (the last category will always add upto over 1 and it is not depicted by an area in the graph whichis why 1 is subtracted)

It is easy to link the grey area of Figure 1 to an index ofthe biogeographical peculiarity (IBP) ranging between 0 and1 and directly related to the categoriesmost characterizing theOEU fauna (ie endemic species in our example)

The maximum value of 119860 is reached when all the speciesbelong to the most peculiar category

119860max = 119899119888 minus 1 (2)

therefore the IBP is

IBP = ( 119860119860max) (3)

In this way the IBP is directly linked to the chorotypethat enhances the biogeographical peculiarity Furthermoreby simply multiplying the IBP by 100 we would get thepercentage of peculiarity The steps for drawing Figure 1 andits related IBP have been summarized in Table 1

Worth of attention is the fact that as a consequence of theproperties of numerical series IBP gives comparable valueswhendifferentOEUs aremade by the same categories while itis possible to get biogeographically inconsistent values whenthe maximum peculiarity category is not the same in thedifferent OEUs as clearly shown in Table 2

To get comparable values from any chorological spectrumthe IBP must be weighed so that for example a chorologicalspectrum with at least one endemic species is ranked higherthan a chorological spectrum made with all category IIspecies while the latter gets an intermediate rank between thefirst spectrum and a spectrum made with all category IIImspecies and so on for as much as the number of categories

An effective weighing rule is to add the rank order ofthe most peculiar category to IBP Several cases have beenhypothesized in Table 2 where for example in case 2b thereare species belonging to categories II and V thus II being themost peculiar and in 5th position (V is in the 1st position andI is in the 6th position) 5 will be added to the computed IBP

4 ISRN Ecology

Table 3 Carabid species in eight sample sites of the Mediterranean bioclimatic region Column headings with Le holm oak while Su corkoak Ci Mediterranean short bushes Choro chorological category Mean mean percentage value of each category 119868 information value ofeach category and Evenness value (119864 bottom cell)

Sclerophyllous forests Le Su1 Su2 TLe2 TCi TLe3 TLe4 TLeQ ChoroAbax ater curtulus Fairmaire 1856 1 IIIAmara fusca Dejean 1828 1 IVBrachinus brevicollisMotschulsky 1844 1 IVBrachinus crepitans (Linne 1758) 1 VCalathus cinctusMotschulsky 1850 1 1 VCalathus fuscipes latus Serville 1821 1 1 1 IIImCalathus montivagus Dejean 1831 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IICalosoma sycophanta (Linne 1758) 1 1 1 VCarabus convexus convexus Fabricius 1775 1 IVCarabus coriaceus mediterraneus Born 1906 1 1 IIICarabus lefebvrei lefebvrei Dejean 1826 1 1 IICychrus italicus Bonelli 1809 1 IICymindis axillaris (Fabricius 1794) 1 VHarpalus attenuatus Stephens 1828 1 IIImHarpalus rubripes (Duftschmid 1812) 1 1 IVHarpalus sulphuripes sulphuripes Germar 1824 1 1 IIImLaemostenus cimmerius cimmerius (Fischer-Waldheim 1823) 1 IIImMasoreus wetterhallii wetterhallii (Gyllenhal 1813) 1 1 VMicroderes scaritides Sturm 1818 1 IVMicrolestes luctuosusHoldhaus 1904 1 IVNebria brevicollis (Fabricius 1792) 1 IVNebria kratteri Dejean 1831 1 1 IIINotiophilus rufipes Curtis 1829 1 1 1 1 IIIOphonus pumilio (Dejean 1829) 1 IIImPercus bilineatus (Dejean 1828) 1 1 IIPlatyderus neapolitanus jannonei Binaghi in Magistretti 1955 1 1 1 1 1 IIPseudomasoreus canigoulensis (Fairmaire amp Laboulbene 1854) 1 1 1 1 IIImPseudoophonus rufipes (Degeer 1774) 1 VSteropus melas italicus (Dejean 1828) 1 1 1 1 1 IIITrechus quadristriatus (Schrank 1781) 1 1 1 IVSpecies number 5 14 8 6 15 3 6 8

Mean 119868

V 020 014 013 0 02 033 017 013 016 029IV 0 021 013 017 027 0 017 013 013 027III 020 014 013 050 013 033 017 038 025 035IIIm 0 021 025 017 027 0 017 013 015 028II 06 029 038 017 013 033 033 025 031 036I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

E = 087

of 0008 giving a weighed wIBP = 5008 Consequently thenew weighed maximum value will be

w119860max = IBPmax + 119899119888 = 1 + 119899119888 (4)

therefore the new IBP1015840 will be

IBP1015840 = wIBPw119860max (5)

and in our example IBP1015840 = 50087 = 072

An application example of the IBP is given using realdata from 16 sample sites located in two different typesof ecosystems (ie two OEUs) in the Calabria region ofsouthern Italy [45] In this case the boundaries betweenOEUs are ecological and not geographical Carabid beetleswere sampled with pitfall traps Eight samples were collectedinMediterranean sclerophyllous forests (holm and cork oak)while the others were collected in oro-Mediterranean beechforests (Tables 3 and 4) The mean relative abundance in

ISRN Ecology 5

Table 4 Carabid species in eight beech forests Column headings different localities and same vegetation Choro chorological categoryMean mean percentage value of each category 119868 information value of each category and Evenness value (119864 bottom cell)

Beech Fa3 Fa2 Fa AsF AF3 AF1 AbF AF2 ChoroAbax ater curtulus Fairmaire 1856 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIIParanchus albipes (Fabricius 1796) 1 VBothriopterus quadrifoveolatus (Letzner 1852) 1 IIIMetallina lampros (Herbst 1784) 1 VOcydromus latinus (Netolitzky 1911) 1 IIICalathus fracassii fracassiiHeyden 1908 1 1 IICalathus fuscipes latus Serville 1821 1 1 1 1 IIImCalathus montivagus Dejean 1831 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IICalathus piceus (Marsham 1802) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIICarabus convexus convexus Fabricius 1775 1 1 1 1 1 IVCarabus lefebvrei lefebvrei Dejean 1826 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IICarabus preslii neumeyeri Schaum 1856 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIICychrus italicus Bonelli 1809 1 1 1 1 1 1 IILeistus fulvibarbis fulvibarbis Dejean 1826 1 IIImLeistus spinibarbis fiorii Lutshnik 1913 1 1 1 IIINebria kratteri Dejean 1831 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIINotiophilus biguttatus (Fabricius 1779) 1 VNotiophilus rufipes Curtis 1829 1 IIIOphonus jeanneli Sciaky 1987 1 IIIPlatyderus neapolitanus jannonei Binaghi in Magistretti 1955 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIHaptoderus apenninus (Dejean 1831) 1 1 1 1 IIPlatysma nigrita (Paykull 1790) 1 VSteropus melas italicus (Dejean 1828) 1 1 IIIPterostichus micansHeer 1841 1 IIPterostichus ruffoi Sciaky 1986 1 1 1 ISynuchus vivalis (Illiger 1798) 1 IVTrechus quadristriatus (Schrank 1781) 1 IVTrichotichnus nitens (Heer 1838) 1 IIISpecies number 13 11 12 7 11 14 11 12

Mean 119868

V 0 0 008 0 009 0 009 008 004 014IV 023 009 008 0 009 0 0 008 007 019III 046 036 050 057 036 043 027 042 042 036IIIm 0 009 0 014 009 007 0 008 006 017II 031 045 033 029 036 043 055 025 037 037I 0 0 0 0 0 007 009 008 003 011

E = 074

the sites was evaluated for each chorological category andused to compute the Evenness Index (ie the ratio betweenthe information content and themaximumpossible informa-tion see Tables 3 and 4) and the IBP

3 Results

Table 2 shows a possible scenario of the index variation fromcomplete peculiarity (case 1a) to lack of peculiarity (case 6) Inthe examples of Table 2 there are six chorological categorieswith rank order ranging from 6 for the most peculiar (I) to1 for the least peculiar (V) so that the chorological spectra

including category I will be weighed by adding the value of6 while spectra including at most category II will be weighedby adding the value of 5 and so on ending with spectra madewith category V that will be weighed by adding the value of 1In Table 2 it is possible to see that the values of IBP fluctuatefrom left to right while IBP1015840 gradually decreases consistentlywith decreasing peculiarity from case 1a to case 6

A cumulative sum and a chart were linked to eachsampled OEU as in Figures 2 and 3 In sclerophyllousforests the weight of the categories ranges between 013and 031 while in beech forests the range is between 004and 042 (see Tables 3 and 4) Weights are more evenly

6 ISRN Ecology

10

08

06

04

02

00

I II IIIm III IV V

Figure 2 Graphical model of the biogeographical peculiarity in thesclerophyllous forests of Table 3 (IBP1015840 = 078)

10

08

06

04

02

00

I II IIIm III IV V

Figure 3 Graphical model of the biogeographical peculiarity in thebeech forests of Table 4 (IBP1015840 = 094)

distributed among categories in the sclerophyllous foreststhan in the beech forests as confirmed by the Evenness Indexwhich is 087 for the former while it is 074 for the latterThe Evenness is mirrored also by the graphical model ofthe biogeographical peculiarity as the sclerophyllous chart(Figure 2) rises gradually to 1 while the beech chart (Figure 3)is broken into two steps with increasing steepness among thebreaks

Figures 2 and 3 show that the Italian endemic speciestogether with European species are more abundant in beechforests than in sclerophyllous ones while Mediterraneanspecies are more abundant in sclerophyllous forests Onlya few species with a wide distribution range (categories IVand V) colonized mountain environments while they are asabundant as Mediterranean species in sclerophyllous forests

The species composition is mirrored by the IBP of eachecosystemThe IBP1015840 is higher where the fauna was populatedby more peculiar species that is beech forests (IBP1015840 = 094)where the index is 16 points higher than in sclerophyllousforests (IBP1015840 = 078)

The index has also been calculated for each sampledsite two series of eight values have been obtained and then

statistically compared by the 119880 test The IBP1015840 is significantlydifferent for the two ecosystems (119880 = 9 119899

1= 1198992= 8 and

119875 = 002)To get a very high degree of peculiarity in beech forests

there should have been fewer European species (category III)and a significant number of endemic species (category I)

4 Discussion

The index of biogeographical peculiarity gives a new methodfor integrating in a singlemeasure of peculiarity the chorolog-ical spectrum characterizing the present species compositionof a given OEU This means that the IBP takes into accountthe relative weight of every chorological category that undera biological point of view means to give a value to the wholebiogeographical history of a given OEU and not only tothe endemism phenomenon alone As a consequence totalspecies richness of the OEUs will have an influence on theIBP because if for example two OEUs sheltering the samenumber of endemic species differ in species richness thenthe OEU with the higher species richness will probably havesmaller IBP This is a property the index was intended for

Another property lies in the possibility to compare thepeculiarity of different OEUs belonging to similar biogeo-graphical areas The application of the index at the localscale is needed because the characterization of the speciesis based on chorological categories that should be commonFurthermore this index is adaptable because different opera-tional units can be chosen either administrative boundariesor biogeographical units or surfaces

From a mathematical point of view the most importantfactor influencing the index variability is the order of thechorological category weights because if the highest weightsare found at the beginning of the numerical series then theIBP1015840 will have high values while the opposite case will leadto low IBP1015840 valuesThe IBP is a value linked with a numericalseries but complex mathematical operations are needed tolink numerical series with a single value this is why themathematical simplicity of the IBP is limited by the fact thatany IBP is linked to a set of graphs slightly different from eachother (ie the curves smooth in slightly different ways) whilethe GMBP is unique for each chorological spectrum As ageneral rule the higher the IBP1015840 the higher the contributionof the categories leftward of the ordinal sequence (119909-axis)The highest IBP1015840 is reached when all the species belong to theleftmost category

This method can be accurately applied to areas with acomplete knowledge of the biota in question since a uniquenew record of an endemic species can change the scoremoreover the significance among small differences of theindex must be interpreted under a biogeographical ratherthan numerical perspective

As outlined by [23] an index should not be used asan a priori tool in biogeographical studies because livingorganisms are characterised by different bioevolutionaryfeatures We think that the chorological spectrum of a givenregion is strongly affected by the biogeographical history ofthat region whose understanding should be framed into the

ISRN Ecology 7

processes of speciation extinction and population dynamic[10] The comparison of different IBP1015840 values may be anaid in such understanding as for the above example wherecarabid species belonging to category II have been foundto be very abundant in beech forests It is possible thatthis is a consequence of the glacial ages which exerted astrong influence on the dispersal of living organisms bypushing species southward along the Italian peninsula [4647] Then during interglacial periods the cold-preferringfauna was forced to find shelter upward either latitudinally oraltitudinally on the mountains where some species evolvedto endemic status In the coastal part of the Calabria thenew (in the sense that it appeared during the Pleistocenicera) biome of the Mediterranean sclerophyllous forest wascolonized by widely tolerant species with a wide geographicalrange Palaeoclimatic circumstances gave rise to a morepeculiar fauna in temperate montane environments than inthe Mediterranean belt This greater peculiarity is clearlymirrored by the IBP1015840 values

Spatiotemporal features of chorotypes are the result ofevolutionary events as well as of proximate causes [48]and focusing on the typology of the chorotype (eg localregional and national endemism) should give more insightinto the global nature of spatial variation in geographicrange sizes and a better understanding of how these relateto ecosystems [49 50] This means that it is possible toadapt or to improve the index with chorotypes tailored to theparticular features (if any) of the studied territory

The index is useful not only to outline the faunistic orfloristic history of a region but also to highlight the con-centration of endemic species for addressing conservationpriorities [51] This is why it can be used to evaluate biotichomogenization [52] because it is sensitive to the incomingof allochthonous species which change the chorologicalspectrum Allochthonous species are clearly the less peculiarones so that they must be placed near the end of 119909-axiseven by adding a new category if necessary Furthermore thegraphical model linked to the IBP may be used to monitortemporal changes towards homogenization or differentiationor for hypothesizing future scenarios to optimize broad-scalesurveillance of invasive species [17] either in the case of thespreading of individual species [53] or when native versusnonnative species interaction has to be evaluated [54]

From a general point of view evaluation for conservationshould be based not simply on species richness but alsoon species life strategies The chorotype of a species eithermirrors its adaptive pathway because it is the manifestationof complex interactions between speciesrsquo niche and environ-mental pressures [55] or is a short-term response at thepopulation level [56] This is why it is indirectly related tospecies life strategies The IBP1015840 which synthesizes the setof chorotypes of a given region could be used for studiesintegrating ecology and biogeography [57] or for parallelinganalysis from a hotspots approach [58] or for monitoringconservation efficiency in priority areas for conservation [59]

In the light of some global changemonitoring approachesbased on species range study (eg global coherence approach[60] global versus local diversity variation [61] projectingmodels of current species range [62]) policies focusing on

multispecies management could be helped by applying oneevaluation index (ie the IBP1015840) for comparing plants andanimals responses to climate variation

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

References

[1] R S Dodd and Z Afzal Rafii ldquoEvolutionary genetics ofmangroves continental drift to recent climate changerdquo Treesvol 16 no 2ndash3 pp 80ndash86 2002

[2] A Tribsch and P Schonswetter ldquoPatterns of endemism andcomparative phylogeography confirm palaeoenvironmentalevidence for Pleistocene refugia in the EasternAlpsrdquoTaxon vol52 no 3 pp 477ndash497 2003

[3] B Krystufek E V Buzan W F Hutchinson and B HanflingldquoPhylogeography of the rare Balkan endemic Martinorsquos voleDinaromys bogdanovi reveals strong differentiation within thewestern Balkan PeninsulardquoMolecular Ecology vol 16 no 6 pp1221ndash1232 2007

[4] E C Pielou Biogeograpy Krieger Malabar Fla USA 1stedition 1992

[5] J J Wiens and M J Donoghue ldquoHistorical biogeographyecology and species richnessrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 19 no 12 pp 639ndash644 2004

[6] MKirkpatrick andNH Barton ldquoEvolution of a speciesrsquo rangerdquoThe American Naturalist vol 150 no 1 pp 1ndash23 1997

[7] C Finlayson ldquoBiogeography and evolution of the genusHomordquoTrends in Ecology and Evolution vol 20 no 8 pp 457ndash4632005

[8] G C Costa C Wolfe D B Shepard J P Caldwell and L JVitt ldquoDetecting the influence of climatic variables on speciesdistributions a test using GIS niche-basedmodels along a steeplongitudinal environmental gradientrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 35 no 4 pp 637ndash646 2008

[9] SW Punyasena G Eshel and J CMcElwain ldquoThe influence ofclimate on the spatial patterning of Neotropical plant familiesrdquoJournal of Biogeography vol 35 no 1 pp 117ndash130 2008

[10] K J Gaston ldquoSpecies-range size distributions products ofspeciation extinction and transformationrdquo Philosophical Trans-actions of the Royal Society B vol 353 no 1366 pp 219ndash2301998

[11] R Pizzolotto ldquoCharacterization of different habitats on the basisof the species traits and eco-field approachrdquo Acta Oecologicavol 35 no 1 pp 142ndash148 2009

[12] H T Arita F Figueroa A Frisch P Rodrıguez and K Santos-Del-Prado ldquoGeographical range size and the conservation ofMexican mammalsrdquo Conservation Biology vol 11 no 1 pp 92ndash100 1997

[13] G Ceballos P R Ehrlich J Soberon I Salazar and J PFay ldquoGlobal mammal conservation what must we managerdquoScience vol 309 no 5734 pp 603ndash607 2005

[14] R J Whittaker M B Araujo P Jepson R J Ladle J EM Watson and K J Willis ldquoConservation biogeographyassessment and prospectrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 11no 1 pp 3ndash23 2005

8 ISRN Ecology

[15] N Cooper J Bielby G HThomas and A Purvis ldquoMacroecol-ogy and extinction risk correlates of frogsrdquo Global Ecology andBiogeography vol 17 no 2 pp 211ndash221 2008

[16] P Brandmayr T Zetto and R Pizzolotto in I ColeotteriCarabidi per la valutazione ambientale e la conservazione dellabiodiversita APAT Rome Italy 2005

[17] R Real A L Marquez A Estrada A R Munoz and JM Vargas ldquoModelling chorotypes of invasive vertebrates inmainland Spainrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 14 no 2 pp364ndash373 2008

[18] B Y Vilenkin and V I Chikatunov ldquoParticipation of specieswith different zoogeographical ranks in the formation of localfaunas a case studyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 27 no 5 pp1201ndash1208 2000

[19] CM Cartagena and E Galante ldquoLoss of Iberian island tenebri-onid beetles and conservationmanagement recommendationsrdquoJournal of Insect Conservation vol 6 no 2 pp 73ndash81 2002

[20] S W Laffan and M D Crisp ldquoAssessing endemism at multiplespatial scales with an example from the Australian vascularflorardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 30 no 4 pp 511ndash520 2003

[21] S Lavergne W Thuiller J Molina and M Debussche ldquoEnvi-ronmental and human factors influencing rare plant localoccurrence extinction and persistence a 115-year study in theMediterranean regionrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 32 no 5pp 799ndash811 2005

[22] C A Szumik F Cuezzo P A Goloboff and A E ChalupldquoAn optimality criterion to determine areas of endemismrdquoSystematic Biology vol 51 no 5 pp 806ndash816 2002

[23] S Fattorini ldquoLevels of endemism are not necessarily biased bythe co-presence of species with different range sizes a case studyof Vilenkin and Chikatunovrsquos modelsrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 34 no 6 pp 994ndash1007 2007

[24] M D Crisp S Laffan H P Linder and A Monro ldquoEndemismin the Australian florardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 28 no 2pp 183ndash198 2001

[25] S Anderson ldquoArea and endemismrdquo The Quarterly Review ofBiology vol 69 no 4 pp 451ndash471 1994

[26] J F Mota F J Perez-Garcıa M L Jimenez Sanchez J J Amateand J de Giles Penas ldquoPhytogeographical relationships amonghigh mountain areas in the baetic ranges (South Spain)rdquoGlobalEcology and Biogeography vol 11 no 6 pp 497ndash504 2002

[27] T Kull and M J Hutchings ldquoA comparative analysis of declinein the distribution ranges of orchid species in Estonia and theUnitedKingdomrdquoBiological Conservation vol 129 no 1 pp 31ndash39 2006

[28] A V Taglianti A Audisio M Biondi M Bologna GCarpaneto A De Biase et al ldquoA proposal for a chorotypeclassification of the Near East fauna in the framework of theWestern Palearctic regionrdquo Biogeographia vol 20 pp 31ndash591999

[29] H Turin L Penev and A CasaleTheGenus Carabus in EuropeA Synthesis Pensoft Sofia Bulgaria 2003

[30] R Pizzolotto and P Brandmayr ldquoAn index to evaluate landscapeconservation state based on land-use pattern analysis andgeographic information system techniquesrdquo Coenoses vol 11no 1 pp 37ndash44 1996

[31] L Xiu-zhen X Du-ning H Yuan-man and W Xian-li ldquoEffectof spatial pattern on nutrient reduction in the liaohe deltardquoJournal of Geographical Sciences vol 11 no 3 pp 336ndash349 2001

[32] F Catani B Lastrucci and S Moretti ldquoSustainability of waterand natural resources management an integrated approachrdquoProgress in Water Resources vol 8 pp 411ndash420 2003

[33] C Ricotta M Marignani F Campaiola G C Avena and CBlasi ldquoA partial order approach for summarizing landscapequalityrdquo Community Ecology vol 4 no 2 pp 121ndash127 2003

[34] C Blasi L Zavattero M Marignani et al ldquoThe concept of landecological network and its design using a land unit approachrdquoPlant Biosystems vol 142 no 3 pp 540ndash549 2008

[35] C Ferrari G Pezzi L Diani and M Corazza ldquoEvaluatinglandscape quality with vegetation naturalness maps an indexand some inferencesrdquo Applied Vegetation Science vol 11 no 2pp 243ndash250 2008

[36] C Guarino S Santoro and L De Simone ldquoAssessment ofvegetation and naturalness a study case in Southern ItalyrdquoiForest vol 1 pp 114ndash121 2008

[37] P Di Marzio P Di Martino L Mastronardi P Fortini CGiancola and V Viscosi ldquoAnalisi integrata socio-economica edi copertura del suolo in un paesaggio a prevalente matriceagricolardquo Italian Journal of Agronomy vol 3 pp 47ndash52 2009

[38] M Bodesmo L Pacicco B Romano and A Ranfa ldquoThe roleof environmental and socio-demographic indicators in theanalysis of land use changes in a protected area of the Natura2000 Network the case study of Lake Trasimeno UmbriaCentral Italyrdquo Environmental Monitoring and Assessment vol184 no 2 pp 831ndash843 2012

[39] W Schule ldquoMammals vegetation and the initial humansettlement of the Mediterranean islands a palaeoecologicalapproachrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 20 no 4 pp 399ndash4121993

[40] R Verlaque F Medail P Quezel and J Babinot ldquoEndemismevegetal et paleogeographie dans le Bassin MediterraneenrdquoGeobios vol 30 supplement 2 pp 159ndash166 1997

[41] F Medail and P Quezel ldquoHot-spots analysis for conservationof plant biodiversity in the Mediterranean Basinrdquo Annals of theMissouri Botanical Garden vol 84 no 1 pp 112ndash127 1997

[42] D T Bilton P M Mirol S Mascheretti K Fredga J Zima andJ B Searle ldquoMediterranean Europe as an area of endemism forsmall mammals rather than a source for northwards postglacialcolonizationrdquo Proceedings of the Royal Society B vol 265 no1402 pp 1219ndash1226 1998

[43] A Pons and P Quezel ldquoA propos de la mise en place du climatmediterraneenrdquo Comptes Rendus De LrsquoAcaDemie Des SciencesSeries IIA vol 327 no 11 pp 755ndash760 1998

[44] K J Willis and R J Whittaker ldquoThe refugial debaterdquo Sciencevol 287 no 5457 pp 1406ndash1407 2000

[45] R Pizzolotto P Brandmayr andAMazzei ldquoCarabid beetles in aMediterranean region biogeographical and ecological featuresrdquoReport of the Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences vol 114pp 243ndash254 2005

[46] M La Greca ldquoLrsquoorigine della fauna italianardquo Le Scienze vol 187pp 66ndash79 1984

[47] DMagri G G Vendramin B Comps et al ldquoA new scenario forthe quaternary history of European beech populations palaeob-otanical evidence and genetic consequencesrdquo New Phytologistvol 171 no 1 pp 199ndash221 2006

[48] J Blondel and J Vigne ldquoSpace time and man as determinantsof diversity of birds andmammals in theMediterranean regionrdquoin Species Diversity in Ecological Communities R E Ricklefsand D Schluter Eds pp 135ndash146 University of Chicago PressChicago Ill USA 1993

[49] R Grenyer C D L Orme S F Jackson et al ldquoGlobal distri-bution and conservation of rare and threatened vertebratesrdquoNature vol 444 no 7115 pp 93ndash96 2006

ISRN Ecology 9

[50] C D L Orme R G Davies V A Olson et al ldquoGlobal patternsof geographic range size in birdsrdquo PLoS Biology vol 4 no 7 pp1276ndash1283 2006

[51] G Casazza G Barberis and L Minuto ldquoEcological character-istics and rarity of endemic plants of the ItalianMaritime AlpsrdquoBiological Conservation vol 123 no 3 pp 361ndash371 2005

[52] J D Olden ldquoBiotic homogenization a new research agenda forconservation biogeographyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no12 pp 2027ndash2039 2006

[53] P Pysek V Jarosık J Mullerova J Pergl and J Wild ldquoCompar-ing the rate of invasion by heracleum mantegazzianum at con-tinental regional and local scalesrdquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 355ndash363 2008

[54] F Leprieur O Beauchard B Hugueny G Grenouillet and SBrosse ldquoNull model of biotic homogenization a test with theEuropean freshwater fish faunardquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 291ndash300 2008

[55] J H BrownG C Stevens andDMKaufman ldquoThe geographicrange size shape boundaries and internal structurerdquo AnnualReview of Ecology and Systematics vol 27 pp 597ndash623 1996

[56] C Parmesan T L Root and M R Willig ldquoImpacts ofextreme weather and climate on terrestrial biotardquo Bulletin ofthe American Meteorological Society vol 81 no 3 pp 443ndash4502000

[57] M Crisp ldquoBiome assembly what we know and what we needto knowrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no 8 pp 1332ndash13332006

[58] N Myers R A Mittermeler C G Mittermeler G A B DaFonseca and J Kent ldquoBiodiversity hotspots for conservationprioritiesrdquo Nature vol 403 no 6772 pp 853ndash858 2000

[59] G M Harris C N Jenkins and S L Pimm ldquoRefiningbiodiversity conservation prioritiesrdquo Conservation Biology vol19 no 6 pp 1957ndash1968 2005

[60] C Parmesan and G Yohe ldquoA globally coherent fingerprint ofclimate change impacts across natural systemsrdquoNature vol 421no 6918 pp 37ndash42 2003

[61] D F Sax and S D Gaines ldquoSpecies diversity from globaldecreases to local increasesrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 18 no 11 pp 561ndash566 2003

[62] J O Meynecke ldquoEffects of global climate change on geographicdistributions of vertebrates in North Queenslandrdquo EcologicalModelling vol 174 no 4 pp 347ndash357 2004

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental and Public Health

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcosystemsJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

MeteorologyAdvances in

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Marine BiologyJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

Advances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental Chemistry

Atmospheric SciencesInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Waste ManagementJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Geophysics

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Geological ResearchJournal of

EarthquakesJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

OceanographyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of Computational Environmental SciencesHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ClimatologyJournal of

4 ISRN Ecology

Table 3 Carabid species in eight sample sites of the Mediterranean bioclimatic region Column headings with Le holm oak while Su corkoak Ci Mediterranean short bushes Choro chorological category Mean mean percentage value of each category 119868 information value ofeach category and Evenness value (119864 bottom cell)

Sclerophyllous forests Le Su1 Su2 TLe2 TCi TLe3 TLe4 TLeQ ChoroAbax ater curtulus Fairmaire 1856 1 IIIAmara fusca Dejean 1828 1 IVBrachinus brevicollisMotschulsky 1844 1 IVBrachinus crepitans (Linne 1758) 1 VCalathus cinctusMotschulsky 1850 1 1 VCalathus fuscipes latus Serville 1821 1 1 1 IIImCalathus montivagus Dejean 1831 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IICalosoma sycophanta (Linne 1758) 1 1 1 VCarabus convexus convexus Fabricius 1775 1 IVCarabus coriaceus mediterraneus Born 1906 1 1 IIICarabus lefebvrei lefebvrei Dejean 1826 1 1 IICychrus italicus Bonelli 1809 1 IICymindis axillaris (Fabricius 1794) 1 VHarpalus attenuatus Stephens 1828 1 IIImHarpalus rubripes (Duftschmid 1812) 1 1 IVHarpalus sulphuripes sulphuripes Germar 1824 1 1 IIImLaemostenus cimmerius cimmerius (Fischer-Waldheim 1823) 1 IIImMasoreus wetterhallii wetterhallii (Gyllenhal 1813) 1 1 VMicroderes scaritides Sturm 1818 1 IVMicrolestes luctuosusHoldhaus 1904 1 IVNebria brevicollis (Fabricius 1792) 1 IVNebria kratteri Dejean 1831 1 1 IIINotiophilus rufipes Curtis 1829 1 1 1 1 IIIOphonus pumilio (Dejean 1829) 1 IIImPercus bilineatus (Dejean 1828) 1 1 IIPlatyderus neapolitanus jannonei Binaghi in Magistretti 1955 1 1 1 1 1 IIPseudomasoreus canigoulensis (Fairmaire amp Laboulbene 1854) 1 1 1 1 IIImPseudoophonus rufipes (Degeer 1774) 1 VSteropus melas italicus (Dejean 1828) 1 1 1 1 1 IIITrechus quadristriatus (Schrank 1781) 1 1 1 IVSpecies number 5 14 8 6 15 3 6 8

Mean 119868

V 020 014 013 0 02 033 017 013 016 029IV 0 021 013 017 027 0 017 013 013 027III 020 014 013 050 013 033 017 038 025 035IIIm 0 021 025 017 027 0 017 013 015 028II 06 029 038 017 013 033 033 025 031 036I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

E = 087

of 0008 giving a weighed wIBP = 5008 Consequently thenew weighed maximum value will be

w119860max = IBPmax + 119899119888 = 1 + 119899119888 (4)

therefore the new IBP1015840 will be

IBP1015840 = wIBPw119860max (5)

and in our example IBP1015840 = 50087 = 072

An application example of the IBP is given using realdata from 16 sample sites located in two different typesof ecosystems (ie two OEUs) in the Calabria region ofsouthern Italy [45] In this case the boundaries betweenOEUs are ecological and not geographical Carabid beetleswere sampled with pitfall traps Eight samples were collectedinMediterranean sclerophyllous forests (holm and cork oak)while the others were collected in oro-Mediterranean beechforests (Tables 3 and 4) The mean relative abundance in

ISRN Ecology 5

Table 4 Carabid species in eight beech forests Column headings different localities and same vegetation Choro chorological categoryMean mean percentage value of each category 119868 information value of each category and Evenness value (119864 bottom cell)

Beech Fa3 Fa2 Fa AsF AF3 AF1 AbF AF2 ChoroAbax ater curtulus Fairmaire 1856 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIIParanchus albipes (Fabricius 1796) 1 VBothriopterus quadrifoveolatus (Letzner 1852) 1 IIIMetallina lampros (Herbst 1784) 1 VOcydromus latinus (Netolitzky 1911) 1 IIICalathus fracassii fracassiiHeyden 1908 1 1 IICalathus fuscipes latus Serville 1821 1 1 1 1 IIImCalathus montivagus Dejean 1831 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IICalathus piceus (Marsham 1802) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIICarabus convexus convexus Fabricius 1775 1 1 1 1 1 IVCarabus lefebvrei lefebvrei Dejean 1826 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IICarabus preslii neumeyeri Schaum 1856 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIICychrus italicus Bonelli 1809 1 1 1 1 1 1 IILeistus fulvibarbis fulvibarbis Dejean 1826 1 IIImLeistus spinibarbis fiorii Lutshnik 1913 1 1 1 IIINebria kratteri Dejean 1831 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIINotiophilus biguttatus (Fabricius 1779) 1 VNotiophilus rufipes Curtis 1829 1 IIIOphonus jeanneli Sciaky 1987 1 IIIPlatyderus neapolitanus jannonei Binaghi in Magistretti 1955 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIHaptoderus apenninus (Dejean 1831) 1 1 1 1 IIPlatysma nigrita (Paykull 1790) 1 VSteropus melas italicus (Dejean 1828) 1 1 IIIPterostichus micansHeer 1841 1 IIPterostichus ruffoi Sciaky 1986 1 1 1 ISynuchus vivalis (Illiger 1798) 1 IVTrechus quadristriatus (Schrank 1781) 1 IVTrichotichnus nitens (Heer 1838) 1 IIISpecies number 13 11 12 7 11 14 11 12

Mean 119868

V 0 0 008 0 009 0 009 008 004 014IV 023 009 008 0 009 0 0 008 007 019III 046 036 050 057 036 043 027 042 042 036IIIm 0 009 0 014 009 007 0 008 006 017II 031 045 033 029 036 043 055 025 037 037I 0 0 0 0 0 007 009 008 003 011

E = 074

the sites was evaluated for each chorological category andused to compute the Evenness Index (ie the ratio betweenthe information content and themaximumpossible informa-tion see Tables 3 and 4) and the IBP

3 Results

Table 2 shows a possible scenario of the index variation fromcomplete peculiarity (case 1a) to lack of peculiarity (case 6) Inthe examples of Table 2 there are six chorological categorieswith rank order ranging from 6 for the most peculiar (I) to1 for the least peculiar (V) so that the chorological spectra

including category I will be weighed by adding the value of6 while spectra including at most category II will be weighedby adding the value of 5 and so on ending with spectra madewith category V that will be weighed by adding the value of 1In Table 2 it is possible to see that the values of IBP fluctuatefrom left to right while IBP1015840 gradually decreases consistentlywith decreasing peculiarity from case 1a to case 6

A cumulative sum and a chart were linked to eachsampled OEU as in Figures 2 and 3 In sclerophyllousforests the weight of the categories ranges between 013and 031 while in beech forests the range is between 004and 042 (see Tables 3 and 4) Weights are more evenly

6 ISRN Ecology

10

08

06

04

02

00

I II IIIm III IV V

Figure 2 Graphical model of the biogeographical peculiarity in thesclerophyllous forests of Table 3 (IBP1015840 = 078)

10

08

06

04

02

00

I II IIIm III IV V

Figure 3 Graphical model of the biogeographical peculiarity in thebeech forests of Table 4 (IBP1015840 = 094)

distributed among categories in the sclerophyllous foreststhan in the beech forests as confirmed by the Evenness Indexwhich is 087 for the former while it is 074 for the latterThe Evenness is mirrored also by the graphical model ofthe biogeographical peculiarity as the sclerophyllous chart(Figure 2) rises gradually to 1 while the beech chart (Figure 3)is broken into two steps with increasing steepness among thebreaks

Figures 2 and 3 show that the Italian endemic speciestogether with European species are more abundant in beechforests than in sclerophyllous ones while Mediterraneanspecies are more abundant in sclerophyllous forests Onlya few species with a wide distribution range (categories IVand V) colonized mountain environments while they are asabundant as Mediterranean species in sclerophyllous forests

The species composition is mirrored by the IBP of eachecosystemThe IBP1015840 is higher where the fauna was populatedby more peculiar species that is beech forests (IBP1015840 = 094)where the index is 16 points higher than in sclerophyllousforests (IBP1015840 = 078)

The index has also been calculated for each sampledsite two series of eight values have been obtained and then

statistically compared by the 119880 test The IBP1015840 is significantlydifferent for the two ecosystems (119880 = 9 119899

1= 1198992= 8 and

119875 = 002)To get a very high degree of peculiarity in beech forests

there should have been fewer European species (category III)and a significant number of endemic species (category I)

4 Discussion

The index of biogeographical peculiarity gives a new methodfor integrating in a singlemeasure of peculiarity the chorolog-ical spectrum characterizing the present species compositionof a given OEU This means that the IBP takes into accountthe relative weight of every chorological category that undera biological point of view means to give a value to the wholebiogeographical history of a given OEU and not only tothe endemism phenomenon alone As a consequence totalspecies richness of the OEUs will have an influence on theIBP because if for example two OEUs sheltering the samenumber of endemic species differ in species richness thenthe OEU with the higher species richness will probably havesmaller IBP This is a property the index was intended for

Another property lies in the possibility to compare thepeculiarity of different OEUs belonging to similar biogeo-graphical areas The application of the index at the localscale is needed because the characterization of the speciesis based on chorological categories that should be commonFurthermore this index is adaptable because different opera-tional units can be chosen either administrative boundariesor biogeographical units or surfaces

From a mathematical point of view the most importantfactor influencing the index variability is the order of thechorological category weights because if the highest weightsare found at the beginning of the numerical series then theIBP1015840 will have high values while the opposite case will leadto low IBP1015840 valuesThe IBP is a value linked with a numericalseries but complex mathematical operations are needed tolink numerical series with a single value this is why themathematical simplicity of the IBP is limited by the fact thatany IBP is linked to a set of graphs slightly different from eachother (ie the curves smooth in slightly different ways) whilethe GMBP is unique for each chorological spectrum As ageneral rule the higher the IBP1015840 the higher the contributionof the categories leftward of the ordinal sequence (119909-axis)The highest IBP1015840 is reached when all the species belong to theleftmost category

This method can be accurately applied to areas with acomplete knowledge of the biota in question since a uniquenew record of an endemic species can change the scoremoreover the significance among small differences of theindex must be interpreted under a biogeographical ratherthan numerical perspective

As outlined by [23] an index should not be used asan a priori tool in biogeographical studies because livingorganisms are characterised by different bioevolutionaryfeatures We think that the chorological spectrum of a givenregion is strongly affected by the biogeographical history ofthat region whose understanding should be framed into the

ISRN Ecology 7

processes of speciation extinction and population dynamic[10] The comparison of different IBP1015840 values may be anaid in such understanding as for the above example wherecarabid species belonging to category II have been foundto be very abundant in beech forests It is possible thatthis is a consequence of the glacial ages which exerted astrong influence on the dispersal of living organisms bypushing species southward along the Italian peninsula [4647] Then during interglacial periods the cold-preferringfauna was forced to find shelter upward either latitudinally oraltitudinally on the mountains where some species evolvedto endemic status In the coastal part of the Calabria thenew (in the sense that it appeared during the Pleistocenicera) biome of the Mediterranean sclerophyllous forest wascolonized by widely tolerant species with a wide geographicalrange Palaeoclimatic circumstances gave rise to a morepeculiar fauna in temperate montane environments than inthe Mediterranean belt This greater peculiarity is clearlymirrored by the IBP1015840 values

Spatiotemporal features of chorotypes are the result ofevolutionary events as well as of proximate causes [48]and focusing on the typology of the chorotype (eg localregional and national endemism) should give more insightinto the global nature of spatial variation in geographicrange sizes and a better understanding of how these relateto ecosystems [49 50] This means that it is possible toadapt or to improve the index with chorotypes tailored to theparticular features (if any) of the studied territory

The index is useful not only to outline the faunistic orfloristic history of a region but also to highlight the con-centration of endemic species for addressing conservationpriorities [51] This is why it can be used to evaluate biotichomogenization [52] because it is sensitive to the incomingof allochthonous species which change the chorologicalspectrum Allochthonous species are clearly the less peculiarones so that they must be placed near the end of 119909-axiseven by adding a new category if necessary Furthermore thegraphical model linked to the IBP may be used to monitortemporal changes towards homogenization or differentiationor for hypothesizing future scenarios to optimize broad-scalesurveillance of invasive species [17] either in the case of thespreading of individual species [53] or when native versusnonnative species interaction has to be evaluated [54]

From a general point of view evaluation for conservationshould be based not simply on species richness but alsoon species life strategies The chorotype of a species eithermirrors its adaptive pathway because it is the manifestationof complex interactions between speciesrsquo niche and environ-mental pressures [55] or is a short-term response at thepopulation level [56] This is why it is indirectly related tospecies life strategies The IBP1015840 which synthesizes the setof chorotypes of a given region could be used for studiesintegrating ecology and biogeography [57] or for parallelinganalysis from a hotspots approach [58] or for monitoringconservation efficiency in priority areas for conservation [59]

In the light of some global changemonitoring approachesbased on species range study (eg global coherence approach[60] global versus local diversity variation [61] projectingmodels of current species range [62]) policies focusing on

multispecies management could be helped by applying oneevaluation index (ie the IBP1015840) for comparing plants andanimals responses to climate variation

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

References

[1] R S Dodd and Z Afzal Rafii ldquoEvolutionary genetics ofmangroves continental drift to recent climate changerdquo Treesvol 16 no 2ndash3 pp 80ndash86 2002

[2] A Tribsch and P Schonswetter ldquoPatterns of endemism andcomparative phylogeography confirm palaeoenvironmentalevidence for Pleistocene refugia in the EasternAlpsrdquoTaxon vol52 no 3 pp 477ndash497 2003

[3] B Krystufek E V Buzan W F Hutchinson and B HanflingldquoPhylogeography of the rare Balkan endemic Martinorsquos voleDinaromys bogdanovi reveals strong differentiation within thewestern Balkan PeninsulardquoMolecular Ecology vol 16 no 6 pp1221ndash1232 2007

[4] E C Pielou Biogeograpy Krieger Malabar Fla USA 1stedition 1992

[5] J J Wiens and M J Donoghue ldquoHistorical biogeographyecology and species richnessrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 19 no 12 pp 639ndash644 2004

[6] MKirkpatrick andNH Barton ldquoEvolution of a speciesrsquo rangerdquoThe American Naturalist vol 150 no 1 pp 1ndash23 1997

[7] C Finlayson ldquoBiogeography and evolution of the genusHomordquoTrends in Ecology and Evolution vol 20 no 8 pp 457ndash4632005

[8] G C Costa C Wolfe D B Shepard J P Caldwell and L JVitt ldquoDetecting the influence of climatic variables on speciesdistributions a test using GIS niche-basedmodels along a steeplongitudinal environmental gradientrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 35 no 4 pp 637ndash646 2008

[9] SW Punyasena G Eshel and J CMcElwain ldquoThe influence ofclimate on the spatial patterning of Neotropical plant familiesrdquoJournal of Biogeography vol 35 no 1 pp 117ndash130 2008

[10] K J Gaston ldquoSpecies-range size distributions products ofspeciation extinction and transformationrdquo Philosophical Trans-actions of the Royal Society B vol 353 no 1366 pp 219ndash2301998

[11] R Pizzolotto ldquoCharacterization of different habitats on the basisof the species traits and eco-field approachrdquo Acta Oecologicavol 35 no 1 pp 142ndash148 2009

[12] H T Arita F Figueroa A Frisch P Rodrıguez and K Santos-Del-Prado ldquoGeographical range size and the conservation ofMexican mammalsrdquo Conservation Biology vol 11 no 1 pp 92ndash100 1997

[13] G Ceballos P R Ehrlich J Soberon I Salazar and J PFay ldquoGlobal mammal conservation what must we managerdquoScience vol 309 no 5734 pp 603ndash607 2005

[14] R J Whittaker M B Araujo P Jepson R J Ladle J EM Watson and K J Willis ldquoConservation biogeographyassessment and prospectrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 11no 1 pp 3ndash23 2005

8 ISRN Ecology

[15] N Cooper J Bielby G HThomas and A Purvis ldquoMacroecol-ogy and extinction risk correlates of frogsrdquo Global Ecology andBiogeography vol 17 no 2 pp 211ndash221 2008

[16] P Brandmayr T Zetto and R Pizzolotto in I ColeotteriCarabidi per la valutazione ambientale e la conservazione dellabiodiversita APAT Rome Italy 2005

[17] R Real A L Marquez A Estrada A R Munoz and JM Vargas ldquoModelling chorotypes of invasive vertebrates inmainland Spainrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 14 no 2 pp364ndash373 2008

[18] B Y Vilenkin and V I Chikatunov ldquoParticipation of specieswith different zoogeographical ranks in the formation of localfaunas a case studyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 27 no 5 pp1201ndash1208 2000

[19] CM Cartagena and E Galante ldquoLoss of Iberian island tenebri-onid beetles and conservationmanagement recommendationsrdquoJournal of Insect Conservation vol 6 no 2 pp 73ndash81 2002

[20] S W Laffan and M D Crisp ldquoAssessing endemism at multiplespatial scales with an example from the Australian vascularflorardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 30 no 4 pp 511ndash520 2003

[21] S Lavergne W Thuiller J Molina and M Debussche ldquoEnvi-ronmental and human factors influencing rare plant localoccurrence extinction and persistence a 115-year study in theMediterranean regionrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 32 no 5pp 799ndash811 2005

[22] C A Szumik F Cuezzo P A Goloboff and A E ChalupldquoAn optimality criterion to determine areas of endemismrdquoSystematic Biology vol 51 no 5 pp 806ndash816 2002

[23] S Fattorini ldquoLevels of endemism are not necessarily biased bythe co-presence of species with different range sizes a case studyof Vilenkin and Chikatunovrsquos modelsrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 34 no 6 pp 994ndash1007 2007

[24] M D Crisp S Laffan H P Linder and A Monro ldquoEndemismin the Australian florardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 28 no 2pp 183ndash198 2001

[25] S Anderson ldquoArea and endemismrdquo The Quarterly Review ofBiology vol 69 no 4 pp 451ndash471 1994

[26] J F Mota F J Perez-Garcıa M L Jimenez Sanchez J J Amateand J de Giles Penas ldquoPhytogeographical relationships amonghigh mountain areas in the baetic ranges (South Spain)rdquoGlobalEcology and Biogeography vol 11 no 6 pp 497ndash504 2002

[27] T Kull and M J Hutchings ldquoA comparative analysis of declinein the distribution ranges of orchid species in Estonia and theUnitedKingdomrdquoBiological Conservation vol 129 no 1 pp 31ndash39 2006

[28] A V Taglianti A Audisio M Biondi M Bologna GCarpaneto A De Biase et al ldquoA proposal for a chorotypeclassification of the Near East fauna in the framework of theWestern Palearctic regionrdquo Biogeographia vol 20 pp 31ndash591999

[29] H Turin L Penev and A CasaleTheGenus Carabus in EuropeA Synthesis Pensoft Sofia Bulgaria 2003

[30] R Pizzolotto and P Brandmayr ldquoAn index to evaluate landscapeconservation state based on land-use pattern analysis andgeographic information system techniquesrdquo Coenoses vol 11no 1 pp 37ndash44 1996

[31] L Xiu-zhen X Du-ning H Yuan-man and W Xian-li ldquoEffectof spatial pattern on nutrient reduction in the liaohe deltardquoJournal of Geographical Sciences vol 11 no 3 pp 336ndash349 2001

[32] F Catani B Lastrucci and S Moretti ldquoSustainability of waterand natural resources management an integrated approachrdquoProgress in Water Resources vol 8 pp 411ndash420 2003

[33] C Ricotta M Marignani F Campaiola G C Avena and CBlasi ldquoA partial order approach for summarizing landscapequalityrdquo Community Ecology vol 4 no 2 pp 121ndash127 2003

[34] C Blasi L Zavattero M Marignani et al ldquoThe concept of landecological network and its design using a land unit approachrdquoPlant Biosystems vol 142 no 3 pp 540ndash549 2008

[35] C Ferrari G Pezzi L Diani and M Corazza ldquoEvaluatinglandscape quality with vegetation naturalness maps an indexand some inferencesrdquo Applied Vegetation Science vol 11 no 2pp 243ndash250 2008

[36] C Guarino S Santoro and L De Simone ldquoAssessment ofvegetation and naturalness a study case in Southern ItalyrdquoiForest vol 1 pp 114ndash121 2008

[37] P Di Marzio P Di Martino L Mastronardi P Fortini CGiancola and V Viscosi ldquoAnalisi integrata socio-economica edi copertura del suolo in un paesaggio a prevalente matriceagricolardquo Italian Journal of Agronomy vol 3 pp 47ndash52 2009

[38] M Bodesmo L Pacicco B Romano and A Ranfa ldquoThe roleof environmental and socio-demographic indicators in theanalysis of land use changes in a protected area of the Natura2000 Network the case study of Lake Trasimeno UmbriaCentral Italyrdquo Environmental Monitoring and Assessment vol184 no 2 pp 831ndash843 2012

[39] W Schule ldquoMammals vegetation and the initial humansettlement of the Mediterranean islands a palaeoecologicalapproachrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 20 no 4 pp 399ndash4121993

[40] R Verlaque F Medail P Quezel and J Babinot ldquoEndemismevegetal et paleogeographie dans le Bassin MediterraneenrdquoGeobios vol 30 supplement 2 pp 159ndash166 1997

[41] F Medail and P Quezel ldquoHot-spots analysis for conservationof plant biodiversity in the Mediterranean Basinrdquo Annals of theMissouri Botanical Garden vol 84 no 1 pp 112ndash127 1997

[42] D T Bilton P M Mirol S Mascheretti K Fredga J Zima andJ B Searle ldquoMediterranean Europe as an area of endemism forsmall mammals rather than a source for northwards postglacialcolonizationrdquo Proceedings of the Royal Society B vol 265 no1402 pp 1219ndash1226 1998

[43] A Pons and P Quezel ldquoA propos de la mise en place du climatmediterraneenrdquo Comptes Rendus De LrsquoAcaDemie Des SciencesSeries IIA vol 327 no 11 pp 755ndash760 1998

[44] K J Willis and R J Whittaker ldquoThe refugial debaterdquo Sciencevol 287 no 5457 pp 1406ndash1407 2000

[45] R Pizzolotto P Brandmayr andAMazzei ldquoCarabid beetles in aMediterranean region biogeographical and ecological featuresrdquoReport of the Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences vol 114pp 243ndash254 2005

[46] M La Greca ldquoLrsquoorigine della fauna italianardquo Le Scienze vol 187pp 66ndash79 1984

[47] DMagri G G Vendramin B Comps et al ldquoA new scenario forthe quaternary history of European beech populations palaeob-otanical evidence and genetic consequencesrdquo New Phytologistvol 171 no 1 pp 199ndash221 2006

[48] J Blondel and J Vigne ldquoSpace time and man as determinantsof diversity of birds andmammals in theMediterranean regionrdquoin Species Diversity in Ecological Communities R E Ricklefsand D Schluter Eds pp 135ndash146 University of Chicago PressChicago Ill USA 1993

[49] R Grenyer C D L Orme S F Jackson et al ldquoGlobal distri-bution and conservation of rare and threatened vertebratesrdquoNature vol 444 no 7115 pp 93ndash96 2006

ISRN Ecology 9

[50] C D L Orme R G Davies V A Olson et al ldquoGlobal patternsof geographic range size in birdsrdquo PLoS Biology vol 4 no 7 pp1276ndash1283 2006

[51] G Casazza G Barberis and L Minuto ldquoEcological character-istics and rarity of endemic plants of the ItalianMaritime AlpsrdquoBiological Conservation vol 123 no 3 pp 361ndash371 2005

[52] J D Olden ldquoBiotic homogenization a new research agenda forconservation biogeographyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no12 pp 2027ndash2039 2006

[53] P Pysek V Jarosık J Mullerova J Pergl and J Wild ldquoCompar-ing the rate of invasion by heracleum mantegazzianum at con-tinental regional and local scalesrdquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 355ndash363 2008

[54] F Leprieur O Beauchard B Hugueny G Grenouillet and SBrosse ldquoNull model of biotic homogenization a test with theEuropean freshwater fish faunardquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 291ndash300 2008

[55] J H BrownG C Stevens andDMKaufman ldquoThe geographicrange size shape boundaries and internal structurerdquo AnnualReview of Ecology and Systematics vol 27 pp 597ndash623 1996

[56] C Parmesan T L Root and M R Willig ldquoImpacts ofextreme weather and climate on terrestrial biotardquo Bulletin ofthe American Meteorological Society vol 81 no 3 pp 443ndash4502000

[57] M Crisp ldquoBiome assembly what we know and what we needto knowrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no 8 pp 1332ndash13332006

[58] N Myers R A Mittermeler C G Mittermeler G A B DaFonseca and J Kent ldquoBiodiversity hotspots for conservationprioritiesrdquo Nature vol 403 no 6772 pp 853ndash858 2000

[59] G M Harris C N Jenkins and S L Pimm ldquoRefiningbiodiversity conservation prioritiesrdquo Conservation Biology vol19 no 6 pp 1957ndash1968 2005

[60] C Parmesan and G Yohe ldquoA globally coherent fingerprint ofclimate change impacts across natural systemsrdquoNature vol 421no 6918 pp 37ndash42 2003

[61] D F Sax and S D Gaines ldquoSpecies diversity from globaldecreases to local increasesrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 18 no 11 pp 561ndash566 2003

[62] J O Meynecke ldquoEffects of global climate change on geographicdistributions of vertebrates in North Queenslandrdquo EcologicalModelling vol 174 no 4 pp 347ndash357 2004

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental and Public Health

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcosystemsJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

MeteorologyAdvances in

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Marine BiologyJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

Advances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental Chemistry

Atmospheric SciencesInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Waste ManagementJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Geophysics

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Geological ResearchJournal of

EarthquakesJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

OceanographyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of Computational Environmental SciencesHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ClimatologyJournal of

ISRN Ecology 5

Table 4 Carabid species in eight beech forests Column headings different localities and same vegetation Choro chorological categoryMean mean percentage value of each category 119868 information value of each category and Evenness value (119864 bottom cell)

Beech Fa3 Fa2 Fa AsF AF3 AF1 AbF AF2 ChoroAbax ater curtulus Fairmaire 1856 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIIParanchus albipes (Fabricius 1796) 1 VBothriopterus quadrifoveolatus (Letzner 1852) 1 IIIMetallina lampros (Herbst 1784) 1 VOcydromus latinus (Netolitzky 1911) 1 IIICalathus fracassii fracassiiHeyden 1908 1 1 IICalathus fuscipes latus Serville 1821 1 1 1 1 IIImCalathus montivagus Dejean 1831 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IICalathus piceus (Marsham 1802) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIICarabus convexus convexus Fabricius 1775 1 1 1 1 1 IVCarabus lefebvrei lefebvrei Dejean 1826 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IICarabus preslii neumeyeri Schaum 1856 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIICychrus italicus Bonelli 1809 1 1 1 1 1 1 IILeistus fulvibarbis fulvibarbis Dejean 1826 1 IIImLeistus spinibarbis fiorii Lutshnik 1913 1 1 1 IIINebria kratteri Dejean 1831 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIINotiophilus biguttatus (Fabricius 1779) 1 VNotiophilus rufipes Curtis 1829 1 IIIOphonus jeanneli Sciaky 1987 1 IIIPlatyderus neapolitanus jannonei Binaghi in Magistretti 1955 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIHaptoderus apenninus (Dejean 1831) 1 1 1 1 IIPlatysma nigrita (Paykull 1790) 1 VSteropus melas italicus (Dejean 1828) 1 1 IIIPterostichus micansHeer 1841 1 IIPterostichus ruffoi Sciaky 1986 1 1 1 ISynuchus vivalis (Illiger 1798) 1 IVTrechus quadristriatus (Schrank 1781) 1 IVTrichotichnus nitens (Heer 1838) 1 IIISpecies number 13 11 12 7 11 14 11 12

Mean 119868

V 0 0 008 0 009 0 009 008 004 014IV 023 009 008 0 009 0 0 008 007 019III 046 036 050 057 036 043 027 042 042 036IIIm 0 009 0 014 009 007 0 008 006 017II 031 045 033 029 036 043 055 025 037 037I 0 0 0 0 0 007 009 008 003 011

E = 074

the sites was evaluated for each chorological category andused to compute the Evenness Index (ie the ratio betweenthe information content and themaximumpossible informa-tion see Tables 3 and 4) and the IBP

3 Results

Table 2 shows a possible scenario of the index variation fromcomplete peculiarity (case 1a) to lack of peculiarity (case 6) Inthe examples of Table 2 there are six chorological categorieswith rank order ranging from 6 for the most peculiar (I) to1 for the least peculiar (V) so that the chorological spectra

including category I will be weighed by adding the value of6 while spectra including at most category II will be weighedby adding the value of 5 and so on ending with spectra madewith category V that will be weighed by adding the value of 1In Table 2 it is possible to see that the values of IBP fluctuatefrom left to right while IBP1015840 gradually decreases consistentlywith decreasing peculiarity from case 1a to case 6

A cumulative sum and a chart were linked to eachsampled OEU as in Figures 2 and 3 In sclerophyllousforests the weight of the categories ranges between 013and 031 while in beech forests the range is between 004and 042 (see Tables 3 and 4) Weights are more evenly

6 ISRN Ecology

10

08

06

04

02

00

I II IIIm III IV V

Figure 2 Graphical model of the biogeographical peculiarity in thesclerophyllous forests of Table 3 (IBP1015840 = 078)

10

08

06

04

02

00

I II IIIm III IV V

Figure 3 Graphical model of the biogeographical peculiarity in thebeech forests of Table 4 (IBP1015840 = 094)

distributed among categories in the sclerophyllous foreststhan in the beech forests as confirmed by the Evenness Indexwhich is 087 for the former while it is 074 for the latterThe Evenness is mirrored also by the graphical model ofthe biogeographical peculiarity as the sclerophyllous chart(Figure 2) rises gradually to 1 while the beech chart (Figure 3)is broken into two steps with increasing steepness among thebreaks

Figures 2 and 3 show that the Italian endemic speciestogether with European species are more abundant in beechforests than in sclerophyllous ones while Mediterraneanspecies are more abundant in sclerophyllous forests Onlya few species with a wide distribution range (categories IVand V) colonized mountain environments while they are asabundant as Mediterranean species in sclerophyllous forests

The species composition is mirrored by the IBP of eachecosystemThe IBP1015840 is higher where the fauna was populatedby more peculiar species that is beech forests (IBP1015840 = 094)where the index is 16 points higher than in sclerophyllousforests (IBP1015840 = 078)

The index has also been calculated for each sampledsite two series of eight values have been obtained and then

statistically compared by the 119880 test The IBP1015840 is significantlydifferent for the two ecosystems (119880 = 9 119899

1= 1198992= 8 and

119875 = 002)To get a very high degree of peculiarity in beech forests

there should have been fewer European species (category III)and a significant number of endemic species (category I)

4 Discussion

The index of biogeographical peculiarity gives a new methodfor integrating in a singlemeasure of peculiarity the chorolog-ical spectrum characterizing the present species compositionof a given OEU This means that the IBP takes into accountthe relative weight of every chorological category that undera biological point of view means to give a value to the wholebiogeographical history of a given OEU and not only tothe endemism phenomenon alone As a consequence totalspecies richness of the OEUs will have an influence on theIBP because if for example two OEUs sheltering the samenumber of endemic species differ in species richness thenthe OEU with the higher species richness will probably havesmaller IBP This is a property the index was intended for

Another property lies in the possibility to compare thepeculiarity of different OEUs belonging to similar biogeo-graphical areas The application of the index at the localscale is needed because the characterization of the speciesis based on chorological categories that should be commonFurthermore this index is adaptable because different opera-tional units can be chosen either administrative boundariesor biogeographical units or surfaces

From a mathematical point of view the most importantfactor influencing the index variability is the order of thechorological category weights because if the highest weightsare found at the beginning of the numerical series then theIBP1015840 will have high values while the opposite case will leadto low IBP1015840 valuesThe IBP is a value linked with a numericalseries but complex mathematical operations are needed tolink numerical series with a single value this is why themathematical simplicity of the IBP is limited by the fact thatany IBP is linked to a set of graphs slightly different from eachother (ie the curves smooth in slightly different ways) whilethe GMBP is unique for each chorological spectrum As ageneral rule the higher the IBP1015840 the higher the contributionof the categories leftward of the ordinal sequence (119909-axis)The highest IBP1015840 is reached when all the species belong to theleftmost category

This method can be accurately applied to areas with acomplete knowledge of the biota in question since a uniquenew record of an endemic species can change the scoremoreover the significance among small differences of theindex must be interpreted under a biogeographical ratherthan numerical perspective

As outlined by [23] an index should not be used asan a priori tool in biogeographical studies because livingorganisms are characterised by different bioevolutionaryfeatures We think that the chorological spectrum of a givenregion is strongly affected by the biogeographical history ofthat region whose understanding should be framed into the

ISRN Ecology 7

processes of speciation extinction and population dynamic[10] The comparison of different IBP1015840 values may be anaid in such understanding as for the above example wherecarabid species belonging to category II have been foundto be very abundant in beech forests It is possible thatthis is a consequence of the glacial ages which exerted astrong influence on the dispersal of living organisms bypushing species southward along the Italian peninsula [4647] Then during interglacial periods the cold-preferringfauna was forced to find shelter upward either latitudinally oraltitudinally on the mountains where some species evolvedto endemic status In the coastal part of the Calabria thenew (in the sense that it appeared during the Pleistocenicera) biome of the Mediterranean sclerophyllous forest wascolonized by widely tolerant species with a wide geographicalrange Palaeoclimatic circumstances gave rise to a morepeculiar fauna in temperate montane environments than inthe Mediterranean belt This greater peculiarity is clearlymirrored by the IBP1015840 values

Spatiotemporal features of chorotypes are the result ofevolutionary events as well as of proximate causes [48]and focusing on the typology of the chorotype (eg localregional and national endemism) should give more insightinto the global nature of spatial variation in geographicrange sizes and a better understanding of how these relateto ecosystems [49 50] This means that it is possible toadapt or to improve the index with chorotypes tailored to theparticular features (if any) of the studied territory

The index is useful not only to outline the faunistic orfloristic history of a region but also to highlight the con-centration of endemic species for addressing conservationpriorities [51] This is why it can be used to evaluate biotichomogenization [52] because it is sensitive to the incomingof allochthonous species which change the chorologicalspectrum Allochthonous species are clearly the less peculiarones so that they must be placed near the end of 119909-axiseven by adding a new category if necessary Furthermore thegraphical model linked to the IBP may be used to monitortemporal changes towards homogenization or differentiationor for hypothesizing future scenarios to optimize broad-scalesurveillance of invasive species [17] either in the case of thespreading of individual species [53] or when native versusnonnative species interaction has to be evaluated [54]

From a general point of view evaluation for conservationshould be based not simply on species richness but alsoon species life strategies The chorotype of a species eithermirrors its adaptive pathway because it is the manifestationof complex interactions between speciesrsquo niche and environ-mental pressures [55] or is a short-term response at thepopulation level [56] This is why it is indirectly related tospecies life strategies The IBP1015840 which synthesizes the setof chorotypes of a given region could be used for studiesintegrating ecology and biogeography [57] or for parallelinganalysis from a hotspots approach [58] or for monitoringconservation efficiency in priority areas for conservation [59]

In the light of some global changemonitoring approachesbased on species range study (eg global coherence approach[60] global versus local diversity variation [61] projectingmodels of current species range [62]) policies focusing on

multispecies management could be helped by applying oneevaluation index (ie the IBP1015840) for comparing plants andanimals responses to climate variation

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

References

[1] R S Dodd and Z Afzal Rafii ldquoEvolutionary genetics ofmangroves continental drift to recent climate changerdquo Treesvol 16 no 2ndash3 pp 80ndash86 2002

[2] A Tribsch and P Schonswetter ldquoPatterns of endemism andcomparative phylogeography confirm palaeoenvironmentalevidence for Pleistocene refugia in the EasternAlpsrdquoTaxon vol52 no 3 pp 477ndash497 2003

[3] B Krystufek E V Buzan W F Hutchinson and B HanflingldquoPhylogeography of the rare Balkan endemic Martinorsquos voleDinaromys bogdanovi reveals strong differentiation within thewestern Balkan PeninsulardquoMolecular Ecology vol 16 no 6 pp1221ndash1232 2007

[4] E C Pielou Biogeograpy Krieger Malabar Fla USA 1stedition 1992

[5] J J Wiens and M J Donoghue ldquoHistorical biogeographyecology and species richnessrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 19 no 12 pp 639ndash644 2004

[6] MKirkpatrick andNH Barton ldquoEvolution of a speciesrsquo rangerdquoThe American Naturalist vol 150 no 1 pp 1ndash23 1997

[7] C Finlayson ldquoBiogeography and evolution of the genusHomordquoTrends in Ecology and Evolution vol 20 no 8 pp 457ndash4632005

[8] G C Costa C Wolfe D B Shepard J P Caldwell and L JVitt ldquoDetecting the influence of climatic variables on speciesdistributions a test using GIS niche-basedmodels along a steeplongitudinal environmental gradientrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 35 no 4 pp 637ndash646 2008

[9] SW Punyasena G Eshel and J CMcElwain ldquoThe influence ofclimate on the spatial patterning of Neotropical plant familiesrdquoJournal of Biogeography vol 35 no 1 pp 117ndash130 2008

[10] K J Gaston ldquoSpecies-range size distributions products ofspeciation extinction and transformationrdquo Philosophical Trans-actions of the Royal Society B vol 353 no 1366 pp 219ndash2301998

[11] R Pizzolotto ldquoCharacterization of different habitats on the basisof the species traits and eco-field approachrdquo Acta Oecologicavol 35 no 1 pp 142ndash148 2009

[12] H T Arita F Figueroa A Frisch P Rodrıguez and K Santos-Del-Prado ldquoGeographical range size and the conservation ofMexican mammalsrdquo Conservation Biology vol 11 no 1 pp 92ndash100 1997

[13] G Ceballos P R Ehrlich J Soberon I Salazar and J PFay ldquoGlobal mammal conservation what must we managerdquoScience vol 309 no 5734 pp 603ndash607 2005

[14] R J Whittaker M B Araujo P Jepson R J Ladle J EM Watson and K J Willis ldquoConservation biogeographyassessment and prospectrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 11no 1 pp 3ndash23 2005

8 ISRN Ecology

[15] N Cooper J Bielby G HThomas and A Purvis ldquoMacroecol-ogy and extinction risk correlates of frogsrdquo Global Ecology andBiogeography vol 17 no 2 pp 211ndash221 2008

[16] P Brandmayr T Zetto and R Pizzolotto in I ColeotteriCarabidi per la valutazione ambientale e la conservazione dellabiodiversita APAT Rome Italy 2005

[17] R Real A L Marquez A Estrada A R Munoz and JM Vargas ldquoModelling chorotypes of invasive vertebrates inmainland Spainrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 14 no 2 pp364ndash373 2008

[18] B Y Vilenkin and V I Chikatunov ldquoParticipation of specieswith different zoogeographical ranks in the formation of localfaunas a case studyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 27 no 5 pp1201ndash1208 2000

[19] CM Cartagena and E Galante ldquoLoss of Iberian island tenebri-onid beetles and conservationmanagement recommendationsrdquoJournal of Insect Conservation vol 6 no 2 pp 73ndash81 2002

[20] S W Laffan and M D Crisp ldquoAssessing endemism at multiplespatial scales with an example from the Australian vascularflorardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 30 no 4 pp 511ndash520 2003

[21] S Lavergne W Thuiller J Molina and M Debussche ldquoEnvi-ronmental and human factors influencing rare plant localoccurrence extinction and persistence a 115-year study in theMediterranean regionrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 32 no 5pp 799ndash811 2005

[22] C A Szumik F Cuezzo P A Goloboff and A E ChalupldquoAn optimality criterion to determine areas of endemismrdquoSystematic Biology vol 51 no 5 pp 806ndash816 2002

[23] S Fattorini ldquoLevels of endemism are not necessarily biased bythe co-presence of species with different range sizes a case studyof Vilenkin and Chikatunovrsquos modelsrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 34 no 6 pp 994ndash1007 2007

[24] M D Crisp S Laffan H P Linder and A Monro ldquoEndemismin the Australian florardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 28 no 2pp 183ndash198 2001

[25] S Anderson ldquoArea and endemismrdquo The Quarterly Review ofBiology vol 69 no 4 pp 451ndash471 1994

[26] J F Mota F J Perez-Garcıa M L Jimenez Sanchez J J Amateand J de Giles Penas ldquoPhytogeographical relationships amonghigh mountain areas in the baetic ranges (South Spain)rdquoGlobalEcology and Biogeography vol 11 no 6 pp 497ndash504 2002

[27] T Kull and M J Hutchings ldquoA comparative analysis of declinein the distribution ranges of orchid species in Estonia and theUnitedKingdomrdquoBiological Conservation vol 129 no 1 pp 31ndash39 2006

[28] A V Taglianti A Audisio M Biondi M Bologna GCarpaneto A De Biase et al ldquoA proposal for a chorotypeclassification of the Near East fauna in the framework of theWestern Palearctic regionrdquo Biogeographia vol 20 pp 31ndash591999

[29] H Turin L Penev and A CasaleTheGenus Carabus in EuropeA Synthesis Pensoft Sofia Bulgaria 2003

[30] R Pizzolotto and P Brandmayr ldquoAn index to evaluate landscapeconservation state based on land-use pattern analysis andgeographic information system techniquesrdquo Coenoses vol 11no 1 pp 37ndash44 1996

[31] L Xiu-zhen X Du-ning H Yuan-man and W Xian-li ldquoEffectof spatial pattern on nutrient reduction in the liaohe deltardquoJournal of Geographical Sciences vol 11 no 3 pp 336ndash349 2001

[32] F Catani B Lastrucci and S Moretti ldquoSustainability of waterand natural resources management an integrated approachrdquoProgress in Water Resources vol 8 pp 411ndash420 2003

[33] C Ricotta M Marignani F Campaiola G C Avena and CBlasi ldquoA partial order approach for summarizing landscapequalityrdquo Community Ecology vol 4 no 2 pp 121ndash127 2003

[34] C Blasi L Zavattero M Marignani et al ldquoThe concept of landecological network and its design using a land unit approachrdquoPlant Biosystems vol 142 no 3 pp 540ndash549 2008

[35] C Ferrari G Pezzi L Diani and M Corazza ldquoEvaluatinglandscape quality with vegetation naturalness maps an indexand some inferencesrdquo Applied Vegetation Science vol 11 no 2pp 243ndash250 2008

[36] C Guarino S Santoro and L De Simone ldquoAssessment ofvegetation and naturalness a study case in Southern ItalyrdquoiForest vol 1 pp 114ndash121 2008

[37] P Di Marzio P Di Martino L Mastronardi P Fortini CGiancola and V Viscosi ldquoAnalisi integrata socio-economica edi copertura del suolo in un paesaggio a prevalente matriceagricolardquo Italian Journal of Agronomy vol 3 pp 47ndash52 2009

[38] M Bodesmo L Pacicco B Romano and A Ranfa ldquoThe roleof environmental and socio-demographic indicators in theanalysis of land use changes in a protected area of the Natura2000 Network the case study of Lake Trasimeno UmbriaCentral Italyrdquo Environmental Monitoring and Assessment vol184 no 2 pp 831ndash843 2012

[39] W Schule ldquoMammals vegetation and the initial humansettlement of the Mediterranean islands a palaeoecologicalapproachrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 20 no 4 pp 399ndash4121993

[40] R Verlaque F Medail P Quezel and J Babinot ldquoEndemismevegetal et paleogeographie dans le Bassin MediterraneenrdquoGeobios vol 30 supplement 2 pp 159ndash166 1997

[41] F Medail and P Quezel ldquoHot-spots analysis for conservationof plant biodiversity in the Mediterranean Basinrdquo Annals of theMissouri Botanical Garden vol 84 no 1 pp 112ndash127 1997

[42] D T Bilton P M Mirol S Mascheretti K Fredga J Zima andJ B Searle ldquoMediterranean Europe as an area of endemism forsmall mammals rather than a source for northwards postglacialcolonizationrdquo Proceedings of the Royal Society B vol 265 no1402 pp 1219ndash1226 1998

[43] A Pons and P Quezel ldquoA propos de la mise en place du climatmediterraneenrdquo Comptes Rendus De LrsquoAcaDemie Des SciencesSeries IIA vol 327 no 11 pp 755ndash760 1998

[44] K J Willis and R J Whittaker ldquoThe refugial debaterdquo Sciencevol 287 no 5457 pp 1406ndash1407 2000

[45] R Pizzolotto P Brandmayr andAMazzei ldquoCarabid beetles in aMediterranean region biogeographical and ecological featuresrdquoReport of the Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences vol 114pp 243ndash254 2005

[46] M La Greca ldquoLrsquoorigine della fauna italianardquo Le Scienze vol 187pp 66ndash79 1984

[47] DMagri G G Vendramin B Comps et al ldquoA new scenario forthe quaternary history of European beech populations palaeob-otanical evidence and genetic consequencesrdquo New Phytologistvol 171 no 1 pp 199ndash221 2006

[48] J Blondel and J Vigne ldquoSpace time and man as determinantsof diversity of birds andmammals in theMediterranean regionrdquoin Species Diversity in Ecological Communities R E Ricklefsand D Schluter Eds pp 135ndash146 University of Chicago PressChicago Ill USA 1993

[49] R Grenyer C D L Orme S F Jackson et al ldquoGlobal distri-bution and conservation of rare and threatened vertebratesrdquoNature vol 444 no 7115 pp 93ndash96 2006

ISRN Ecology 9

[50] C D L Orme R G Davies V A Olson et al ldquoGlobal patternsof geographic range size in birdsrdquo PLoS Biology vol 4 no 7 pp1276ndash1283 2006

[51] G Casazza G Barberis and L Minuto ldquoEcological character-istics and rarity of endemic plants of the ItalianMaritime AlpsrdquoBiological Conservation vol 123 no 3 pp 361ndash371 2005

[52] J D Olden ldquoBiotic homogenization a new research agenda forconservation biogeographyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no12 pp 2027ndash2039 2006

[53] P Pysek V Jarosık J Mullerova J Pergl and J Wild ldquoCompar-ing the rate of invasion by heracleum mantegazzianum at con-tinental regional and local scalesrdquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 355ndash363 2008

[54] F Leprieur O Beauchard B Hugueny G Grenouillet and SBrosse ldquoNull model of biotic homogenization a test with theEuropean freshwater fish faunardquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 291ndash300 2008

[55] J H BrownG C Stevens andDMKaufman ldquoThe geographicrange size shape boundaries and internal structurerdquo AnnualReview of Ecology and Systematics vol 27 pp 597ndash623 1996

[56] C Parmesan T L Root and M R Willig ldquoImpacts ofextreme weather and climate on terrestrial biotardquo Bulletin ofthe American Meteorological Society vol 81 no 3 pp 443ndash4502000

[57] M Crisp ldquoBiome assembly what we know and what we needto knowrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no 8 pp 1332ndash13332006

[58] N Myers R A Mittermeler C G Mittermeler G A B DaFonseca and J Kent ldquoBiodiversity hotspots for conservationprioritiesrdquo Nature vol 403 no 6772 pp 853ndash858 2000

[59] G M Harris C N Jenkins and S L Pimm ldquoRefiningbiodiversity conservation prioritiesrdquo Conservation Biology vol19 no 6 pp 1957ndash1968 2005

[60] C Parmesan and G Yohe ldquoA globally coherent fingerprint ofclimate change impacts across natural systemsrdquoNature vol 421no 6918 pp 37ndash42 2003

[61] D F Sax and S D Gaines ldquoSpecies diversity from globaldecreases to local increasesrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 18 no 11 pp 561ndash566 2003

[62] J O Meynecke ldquoEffects of global climate change on geographicdistributions of vertebrates in North Queenslandrdquo EcologicalModelling vol 174 no 4 pp 347ndash357 2004

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental and Public Health

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcosystemsJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

MeteorologyAdvances in

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Marine BiologyJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

Advances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental Chemistry

Atmospheric SciencesInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Waste ManagementJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Geophysics

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Geological ResearchJournal of

EarthquakesJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

OceanographyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of Computational Environmental SciencesHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ClimatologyJournal of

6 ISRN Ecology

10

08

06

04

02

00

I II IIIm III IV V

Figure 2 Graphical model of the biogeographical peculiarity in thesclerophyllous forests of Table 3 (IBP1015840 = 078)

10

08

06

04

02

00

I II IIIm III IV V

Figure 3 Graphical model of the biogeographical peculiarity in thebeech forests of Table 4 (IBP1015840 = 094)

distributed among categories in the sclerophyllous foreststhan in the beech forests as confirmed by the Evenness Indexwhich is 087 for the former while it is 074 for the latterThe Evenness is mirrored also by the graphical model ofthe biogeographical peculiarity as the sclerophyllous chart(Figure 2) rises gradually to 1 while the beech chart (Figure 3)is broken into two steps with increasing steepness among thebreaks

Figures 2 and 3 show that the Italian endemic speciestogether with European species are more abundant in beechforests than in sclerophyllous ones while Mediterraneanspecies are more abundant in sclerophyllous forests Onlya few species with a wide distribution range (categories IVand V) colonized mountain environments while they are asabundant as Mediterranean species in sclerophyllous forests

The species composition is mirrored by the IBP of eachecosystemThe IBP1015840 is higher where the fauna was populatedby more peculiar species that is beech forests (IBP1015840 = 094)where the index is 16 points higher than in sclerophyllousforests (IBP1015840 = 078)

The index has also been calculated for each sampledsite two series of eight values have been obtained and then

statistically compared by the 119880 test The IBP1015840 is significantlydifferent for the two ecosystems (119880 = 9 119899

1= 1198992= 8 and

119875 = 002)To get a very high degree of peculiarity in beech forests

there should have been fewer European species (category III)and a significant number of endemic species (category I)

4 Discussion

The index of biogeographical peculiarity gives a new methodfor integrating in a singlemeasure of peculiarity the chorolog-ical spectrum characterizing the present species compositionof a given OEU This means that the IBP takes into accountthe relative weight of every chorological category that undera biological point of view means to give a value to the wholebiogeographical history of a given OEU and not only tothe endemism phenomenon alone As a consequence totalspecies richness of the OEUs will have an influence on theIBP because if for example two OEUs sheltering the samenumber of endemic species differ in species richness thenthe OEU with the higher species richness will probably havesmaller IBP This is a property the index was intended for

Another property lies in the possibility to compare thepeculiarity of different OEUs belonging to similar biogeo-graphical areas The application of the index at the localscale is needed because the characterization of the speciesis based on chorological categories that should be commonFurthermore this index is adaptable because different opera-tional units can be chosen either administrative boundariesor biogeographical units or surfaces

From a mathematical point of view the most importantfactor influencing the index variability is the order of thechorological category weights because if the highest weightsare found at the beginning of the numerical series then theIBP1015840 will have high values while the opposite case will leadto low IBP1015840 valuesThe IBP is a value linked with a numericalseries but complex mathematical operations are needed tolink numerical series with a single value this is why themathematical simplicity of the IBP is limited by the fact thatany IBP is linked to a set of graphs slightly different from eachother (ie the curves smooth in slightly different ways) whilethe GMBP is unique for each chorological spectrum As ageneral rule the higher the IBP1015840 the higher the contributionof the categories leftward of the ordinal sequence (119909-axis)The highest IBP1015840 is reached when all the species belong to theleftmost category

This method can be accurately applied to areas with acomplete knowledge of the biota in question since a uniquenew record of an endemic species can change the scoremoreover the significance among small differences of theindex must be interpreted under a biogeographical ratherthan numerical perspective

As outlined by [23] an index should not be used asan a priori tool in biogeographical studies because livingorganisms are characterised by different bioevolutionaryfeatures We think that the chorological spectrum of a givenregion is strongly affected by the biogeographical history ofthat region whose understanding should be framed into the

ISRN Ecology 7

processes of speciation extinction and population dynamic[10] The comparison of different IBP1015840 values may be anaid in such understanding as for the above example wherecarabid species belonging to category II have been foundto be very abundant in beech forests It is possible thatthis is a consequence of the glacial ages which exerted astrong influence on the dispersal of living organisms bypushing species southward along the Italian peninsula [4647] Then during interglacial periods the cold-preferringfauna was forced to find shelter upward either latitudinally oraltitudinally on the mountains where some species evolvedto endemic status In the coastal part of the Calabria thenew (in the sense that it appeared during the Pleistocenicera) biome of the Mediterranean sclerophyllous forest wascolonized by widely tolerant species with a wide geographicalrange Palaeoclimatic circumstances gave rise to a morepeculiar fauna in temperate montane environments than inthe Mediterranean belt This greater peculiarity is clearlymirrored by the IBP1015840 values

Spatiotemporal features of chorotypes are the result ofevolutionary events as well as of proximate causes [48]and focusing on the typology of the chorotype (eg localregional and national endemism) should give more insightinto the global nature of spatial variation in geographicrange sizes and a better understanding of how these relateto ecosystems [49 50] This means that it is possible toadapt or to improve the index with chorotypes tailored to theparticular features (if any) of the studied territory

The index is useful not only to outline the faunistic orfloristic history of a region but also to highlight the con-centration of endemic species for addressing conservationpriorities [51] This is why it can be used to evaluate biotichomogenization [52] because it is sensitive to the incomingof allochthonous species which change the chorologicalspectrum Allochthonous species are clearly the less peculiarones so that they must be placed near the end of 119909-axiseven by adding a new category if necessary Furthermore thegraphical model linked to the IBP may be used to monitortemporal changes towards homogenization or differentiationor for hypothesizing future scenarios to optimize broad-scalesurveillance of invasive species [17] either in the case of thespreading of individual species [53] or when native versusnonnative species interaction has to be evaluated [54]

From a general point of view evaluation for conservationshould be based not simply on species richness but alsoon species life strategies The chorotype of a species eithermirrors its adaptive pathway because it is the manifestationof complex interactions between speciesrsquo niche and environ-mental pressures [55] or is a short-term response at thepopulation level [56] This is why it is indirectly related tospecies life strategies The IBP1015840 which synthesizes the setof chorotypes of a given region could be used for studiesintegrating ecology and biogeography [57] or for parallelinganalysis from a hotspots approach [58] or for monitoringconservation efficiency in priority areas for conservation [59]

In the light of some global changemonitoring approachesbased on species range study (eg global coherence approach[60] global versus local diversity variation [61] projectingmodels of current species range [62]) policies focusing on

multispecies management could be helped by applying oneevaluation index (ie the IBP1015840) for comparing plants andanimals responses to climate variation

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

References

[1] R S Dodd and Z Afzal Rafii ldquoEvolutionary genetics ofmangroves continental drift to recent climate changerdquo Treesvol 16 no 2ndash3 pp 80ndash86 2002

[2] A Tribsch and P Schonswetter ldquoPatterns of endemism andcomparative phylogeography confirm palaeoenvironmentalevidence for Pleistocene refugia in the EasternAlpsrdquoTaxon vol52 no 3 pp 477ndash497 2003

[3] B Krystufek E V Buzan W F Hutchinson and B HanflingldquoPhylogeography of the rare Balkan endemic Martinorsquos voleDinaromys bogdanovi reveals strong differentiation within thewestern Balkan PeninsulardquoMolecular Ecology vol 16 no 6 pp1221ndash1232 2007

[4] E C Pielou Biogeograpy Krieger Malabar Fla USA 1stedition 1992

[5] J J Wiens and M J Donoghue ldquoHistorical biogeographyecology and species richnessrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 19 no 12 pp 639ndash644 2004

[6] MKirkpatrick andNH Barton ldquoEvolution of a speciesrsquo rangerdquoThe American Naturalist vol 150 no 1 pp 1ndash23 1997

[7] C Finlayson ldquoBiogeography and evolution of the genusHomordquoTrends in Ecology and Evolution vol 20 no 8 pp 457ndash4632005

[8] G C Costa C Wolfe D B Shepard J P Caldwell and L JVitt ldquoDetecting the influence of climatic variables on speciesdistributions a test using GIS niche-basedmodels along a steeplongitudinal environmental gradientrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 35 no 4 pp 637ndash646 2008

[9] SW Punyasena G Eshel and J CMcElwain ldquoThe influence ofclimate on the spatial patterning of Neotropical plant familiesrdquoJournal of Biogeography vol 35 no 1 pp 117ndash130 2008

[10] K J Gaston ldquoSpecies-range size distributions products ofspeciation extinction and transformationrdquo Philosophical Trans-actions of the Royal Society B vol 353 no 1366 pp 219ndash2301998

[11] R Pizzolotto ldquoCharacterization of different habitats on the basisof the species traits and eco-field approachrdquo Acta Oecologicavol 35 no 1 pp 142ndash148 2009

[12] H T Arita F Figueroa A Frisch P Rodrıguez and K Santos-Del-Prado ldquoGeographical range size and the conservation ofMexican mammalsrdquo Conservation Biology vol 11 no 1 pp 92ndash100 1997

[13] G Ceballos P R Ehrlich J Soberon I Salazar and J PFay ldquoGlobal mammal conservation what must we managerdquoScience vol 309 no 5734 pp 603ndash607 2005

[14] R J Whittaker M B Araujo P Jepson R J Ladle J EM Watson and K J Willis ldquoConservation biogeographyassessment and prospectrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 11no 1 pp 3ndash23 2005

8 ISRN Ecology

[15] N Cooper J Bielby G HThomas and A Purvis ldquoMacroecol-ogy and extinction risk correlates of frogsrdquo Global Ecology andBiogeography vol 17 no 2 pp 211ndash221 2008

[16] P Brandmayr T Zetto and R Pizzolotto in I ColeotteriCarabidi per la valutazione ambientale e la conservazione dellabiodiversita APAT Rome Italy 2005

[17] R Real A L Marquez A Estrada A R Munoz and JM Vargas ldquoModelling chorotypes of invasive vertebrates inmainland Spainrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 14 no 2 pp364ndash373 2008

[18] B Y Vilenkin and V I Chikatunov ldquoParticipation of specieswith different zoogeographical ranks in the formation of localfaunas a case studyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 27 no 5 pp1201ndash1208 2000

[19] CM Cartagena and E Galante ldquoLoss of Iberian island tenebri-onid beetles and conservationmanagement recommendationsrdquoJournal of Insect Conservation vol 6 no 2 pp 73ndash81 2002

[20] S W Laffan and M D Crisp ldquoAssessing endemism at multiplespatial scales with an example from the Australian vascularflorardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 30 no 4 pp 511ndash520 2003

[21] S Lavergne W Thuiller J Molina and M Debussche ldquoEnvi-ronmental and human factors influencing rare plant localoccurrence extinction and persistence a 115-year study in theMediterranean regionrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 32 no 5pp 799ndash811 2005

[22] C A Szumik F Cuezzo P A Goloboff and A E ChalupldquoAn optimality criterion to determine areas of endemismrdquoSystematic Biology vol 51 no 5 pp 806ndash816 2002

[23] S Fattorini ldquoLevels of endemism are not necessarily biased bythe co-presence of species with different range sizes a case studyof Vilenkin and Chikatunovrsquos modelsrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 34 no 6 pp 994ndash1007 2007

[24] M D Crisp S Laffan H P Linder and A Monro ldquoEndemismin the Australian florardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 28 no 2pp 183ndash198 2001

[25] S Anderson ldquoArea and endemismrdquo The Quarterly Review ofBiology vol 69 no 4 pp 451ndash471 1994

[26] J F Mota F J Perez-Garcıa M L Jimenez Sanchez J J Amateand J de Giles Penas ldquoPhytogeographical relationships amonghigh mountain areas in the baetic ranges (South Spain)rdquoGlobalEcology and Biogeography vol 11 no 6 pp 497ndash504 2002

[27] T Kull and M J Hutchings ldquoA comparative analysis of declinein the distribution ranges of orchid species in Estonia and theUnitedKingdomrdquoBiological Conservation vol 129 no 1 pp 31ndash39 2006

[28] A V Taglianti A Audisio M Biondi M Bologna GCarpaneto A De Biase et al ldquoA proposal for a chorotypeclassification of the Near East fauna in the framework of theWestern Palearctic regionrdquo Biogeographia vol 20 pp 31ndash591999

[29] H Turin L Penev and A CasaleTheGenus Carabus in EuropeA Synthesis Pensoft Sofia Bulgaria 2003

[30] R Pizzolotto and P Brandmayr ldquoAn index to evaluate landscapeconservation state based on land-use pattern analysis andgeographic information system techniquesrdquo Coenoses vol 11no 1 pp 37ndash44 1996

[31] L Xiu-zhen X Du-ning H Yuan-man and W Xian-li ldquoEffectof spatial pattern on nutrient reduction in the liaohe deltardquoJournal of Geographical Sciences vol 11 no 3 pp 336ndash349 2001

[32] F Catani B Lastrucci and S Moretti ldquoSustainability of waterand natural resources management an integrated approachrdquoProgress in Water Resources vol 8 pp 411ndash420 2003

[33] C Ricotta M Marignani F Campaiola G C Avena and CBlasi ldquoA partial order approach for summarizing landscapequalityrdquo Community Ecology vol 4 no 2 pp 121ndash127 2003

[34] C Blasi L Zavattero M Marignani et al ldquoThe concept of landecological network and its design using a land unit approachrdquoPlant Biosystems vol 142 no 3 pp 540ndash549 2008

[35] C Ferrari G Pezzi L Diani and M Corazza ldquoEvaluatinglandscape quality with vegetation naturalness maps an indexand some inferencesrdquo Applied Vegetation Science vol 11 no 2pp 243ndash250 2008

[36] C Guarino S Santoro and L De Simone ldquoAssessment ofvegetation and naturalness a study case in Southern ItalyrdquoiForest vol 1 pp 114ndash121 2008

[37] P Di Marzio P Di Martino L Mastronardi P Fortini CGiancola and V Viscosi ldquoAnalisi integrata socio-economica edi copertura del suolo in un paesaggio a prevalente matriceagricolardquo Italian Journal of Agronomy vol 3 pp 47ndash52 2009

[38] M Bodesmo L Pacicco B Romano and A Ranfa ldquoThe roleof environmental and socio-demographic indicators in theanalysis of land use changes in a protected area of the Natura2000 Network the case study of Lake Trasimeno UmbriaCentral Italyrdquo Environmental Monitoring and Assessment vol184 no 2 pp 831ndash843 2012

[39] W Schule ldquoMammals vegetation and the initial humansettlement of the Mediterranean islands a palaeoecologicalapproachrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 20 no 4 pp 399ndash4121993

[40] R Verlaque F Medail P Quezel and J Babinot ldquoEndemismevegetal et paleogeographie dans le Bassin MediterraneenrdquoGeobios vol 30 supplement 2 pp 159ndash166 1997

[41] F Medail and P Quezel ldquoHot-spots analysis for conservationof plant biodiversity in the Mediterranean Basinrdquo Annals of theMissouri Botanical Garden vol 84 no 1 pp 112ndash127 1997

[42] D T Bilton P M Mirol S Mascheretti K Fredga J Zima andJ B Searle ldquoMediterranean Europe as an area of endemism forsmall mammals rather than a source for northwards postglacialcolonizationrdquo Proceedings of the Royal Society B vol 265 no1402 pp 1219ndash1226 1998

[43] A Pons and P Quezel ldquoA propos de la mise en place du climatmediterraneenrdquo Comptes Rendus De LrsquoAcaDemie Des SciencesSeries IIA vol 327 no 11 pp 755ndash760 1998

[44] K J Willis and R J Whittaker ldquoThe refugial debaterdquo Sciencevol 287 no 5457 pp 1406ndash1407 2000

[45] R Pizzolotto P Brandmayr andAMazzei ldquoCarabid beetles in aMediterranean region biogeographical and ecological featuresrdquoReport of the Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences vol 114pp 243ndash254 2005

[46] M La Greca ldquoLrsquoorigine della fauna italianardquo Le Scienze vol 187pp 66ndash79 1984

[47] DMagri G G Vendramin B Comps et al ldquoA new scenario forthe quaternary history of European beech populations palaeob-otanical evidence and genetic consequencesrdquo New Phytologistvol 171 no 1 pp 199ndash221 2006

[48] J Blondel and J Vigne ldquoSpace time and man as determinantsof diversity of birds andmammals in theMediterranean regionrdquoin Species Diversity in Ecological Communities R E Ricklefsand D Schluter Eds pp 135ndash146 University of Chicago PressChicago Ill USA 1993

[49] R Grenyer C D L Orme S F Jackson et al ldquoGlobal distri-bution and conservation of rare and threatened vertebratesrdquoNature vol 444 no 7115 pp 93ndash96 2006

ISRN Ecology 9

[50] C D L Orme R G Davies V A Olson et al ldquoGlobal patternsof geographic range size in birdsrdquo PLoS Biology vol 4 no 7 pp1276ndash1283 2006

[51] G Casazza G Barberis and L Minuto ldquoEcological character-istics and rarity of endemic plants of the ItalianMaritime AlpsrdquoBiological Conservation vol 123 no 3 pp 361ndash371 2005

[52] J D Olden ldquoBiotic homogenization a new research agenda forconservation biogeographyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no12 pp 2027ndash2039 2006

[53] P Pysek V Jarosık J Mullerova J Pergl and J Wild ldquoCompar-ing the rate of invasion by heracleum mantegazzianum at con-tinental regional and local scalesrdquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 355ndash363 2008

[54] F Leprieur O Beauchard B Hugueny G Grenouillet and SBrosse ldquoNull model of biotic homogenization a test with theEuropean freshwater fish faunardquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 291ndash300 2008

[55] J H BrownG C Stevens andDMKaufman ldquoThe geographicrange size shape boundaries and internal structurerdquo AnnualReview of Ecology and Systematics vol 27 pp 597ndash623 1996

[56] C Parmesan T L Root and M R Willig ldquoImpacts ofextreme weather and climate on terrestrial biotardquo Bulletin ofthe American Meteorological Society vol 81 no 3 pp 443ndash4502000

[57] M Crisp ldquoBiome assembly what we know and what we needto knowrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no 8 pp 1332ndash13332006

[58] N Myers R A Mittermeler C G Mittermeler G A B DaFonseca and J Kent ldquoBiodiversity hotspots for conservationprioritiesrdquo Nature vol 403 no 6772 pp 853ndash858 2000

[59] G M Harris C N Jenkins and S L Pimm ldquoRefiningbiodiversity conservation prioritiesrdquo Conservation Biology vol19 no 6 pp 1957ndash1968 2005

[60] C Parmesan and G Yohe ldquoA globally coherent fingerprint ofclimate change impacts across natural systemsrdquoNature vol 421no 6918 pp 37ndash42 2003

[61] D F Sax and S D Gaines ldquoSpecies diversity from globaldecreases to local increasesrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 18 no 11 pp 561ndash566 2003

[62] J O Meynecke ldquoEffects of global climate change on geographicdistributions of vertebrates in North Queenslandrdquo EcologicalModelling vol 174 no 4 pp 347ndash357 2004

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental and Public Health

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcosystemsJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

MeteorologyAdvances in

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Marine BiologyJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

Advances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental Chemistry

Atmospheric SciencesInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Waste ManagementJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Geophysics

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Geological ResearchJournal of

EarthquakesJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

OceanographyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of Computational Environmental SciencesHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ClimatologyJournal of

ISRN Ecology 7

processes of speciation extinction and population dynamic[10] The comparison of different IBP1015840 values may be anaid in such understanding as for the above example wherecarabid species belonging to category II have been foundto be very abundant in beech forests It is possible thatthis is a consequence of the glacial ages which exerted astrong influence on the dispersal of living organisms bypushing species southward along the Italian peninsula [4647] Then during interglacial periods the cold-preferringfauna was forced to find shelter upward either latitudinally oraltitudinally on the mountains where some species evolvedto endemic status In the coastal part of the Calabria thenew (in the sense that it appeared during the Pleistocenicera) biome of the Mediterranean sclerophyllous forest wascolonized by widely tolerant species with a wide geographicalrange Palaeoclimatic circumstances gave rise to a morepeculiar fauna in temperate montane environments than inthe Mediterranean belt This greater peculiarity is clearlymirrored by the IBP1015840 values

Spatiotemporal features of chorotypes are the result ofevolutionary events as well as of proximate causes [48]and focusing on the typology of the chorotype (eg localregional and national endemism) should give more insightinto the global nature of spatial variation in geographicrange sizes and a better understanding of how these relateto ecosystems [49 50] This means that it is possible toadapt or to improve the index with chorotypes tailored to theparticular features (if any) of the studied territory

The index is useful not only to outline the faunistic orfloristic history of a region but also to highlight the con-centration of endemic species for addressing conservationpriorities [51] This is why it can be used to evaluate biotichomogenization [52] because it is sensitive to the incomingof allochthonous species which change the chorologicalspectrum Allochthonous species are clearly the less peculiarones so that they must be placed near the end of 119909-axiseven by adding a new category if necessary Furthermore thegraphical model linked to the IBP may be used to monitortemporal changes towards homogenization or differentiationor for hypothesizing future scenarios to optimize broad-scalesurveillance of invasive species [17] either in the case of thespreading of individual species [53] or when native versusnonnative species interaction has to be evaluated [54]

From a general point of view evaluation for conservationshould be based not simply on species richness but alsoon species life strategies The chorotype of a species eithermirrors its adaptive pathway because it is the manifestationof complex interactions between speciesrsquo niche and environ-mental pressures [55] or is a short-term response at thepopulation level [56] This is why it is indirectly related tospecies life strategies The IBP1015840 which synthesizes the setof chorotypes of a given region could be used for studiesintegrating ecology and biogeography [57] or for parallelinganalysis from a hotspots approach [58] or for monitoringconservation efficiency in priority areas for conservation [59]

In the light of some global changemonitoring approachesbased on species range study (eg global coherence approach[60] global versus local diversity variation [61] projectingmodels of current species range [62]) policies focusing on

multispecies management could be helped by applying oneevaluation index (ie the IBP1015840) for comparing plants andanimals responses to climate variation

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

References

[1] R S Dodd and Z Afzal Rafii ldquoEvolutionary genetics ofmangroves continental drift to recent climate changerdquo Treesvol 16 no 2ndash3 pp 80ndash86 2002

[2] A Tribsch and P Schonswetter ldquoPatterns of endemism andcomparative phylogeography confirm palaeoenvironmentalevidence for Pleistocene refugia in the EasternAlpsrdquoTaxon vol52 no 3 pp 477ndash497 2003

[3] B Krystufek E V Buzan W F Hutchinson and B HanflingldquoPhylogeography of the rare Balkan endemic Martinorsquos voleDinaromys bogdanovi reveals strong differentiation within thewestern Balkan PeninsulardquoMolecular Ecology vol 16 no 6 pp1221ndash1232 2007

[4] E C Pielou Biogeograpy Krieger Malabar Fla USA 1stedition 1992

[5] J J Wiens and M J Donoghue ldquoHistorical biogeographyecology and species richnessrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 19 no 12 pp 639ndash644 2004

[6] MKirkpatrick andNH Barton ldquoEvolution of a speciesrsquo rangerdquoThe American Naturalist vol 150 no 1 pp 1ndash23 1997

[7] C Finlayson ldquoBiogeography and evolution of the genusHomordquoTrends in Ecology and Evolution vol 20 no 8 pp 457ndash4632005

[8] G C Costa C Wolfe D B Shepard J P Caldwell and L JVitt ldquoDetecting the influence of climatic variables on speciesdistributions a test using GIS niche-basedmodels along a steeplongitudinal environmental gradientrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 35 no 4 pp 637ndash646 2008

[9] SW Punyasena G Eshel and J CMcElwain ldquoThe influence ofclimate on the spatial patterning of Neotropical plant familiesrdquoJournal of Biogeography vol 35 no 1 pp 117ndash130 2008

[10] K J Gaston ldquoSpecies-range size distributions products ofspeciation extinction and transformationrdquo Philosophical Trans-actions of the Royal Society B vol 353 no 1366 pp 219ndash2301998

[11] R Pizzolotto ldquoCharacterization of different habitats on the basisof the species traits and eco-field approachrdquo Acta Oecologicavol 35 no 1 pp 142ndash148 2009

[12] H T Arita F Figueroa A Frisch P Rodrıguez and K Santos-Del-Prado ldquoGeographical range size and the conservation ofMexican mammalsrdquo Conservation Biology vol 11 no 1 pp 92ndash100 1997

[13] G Ceballos P R Ehrlich J Soberon I Salazar and J PFay ldquoGlobal mammal conservation what must we managerdquoScience vol 309 no 5734 pp 603ndash607 2005

[14] R J Whittaker M B Araujo P Jepson R J Ladle J EM Watson and K J Willis ldquoConservation biogeographyassessment and prospectrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 11no 1 pp 3ndash23 2005

8 ISRN Ecology

[15] N Cooper J Bielby G HThomas and A Purvis ldquoMacroecol-ogy and extinction risk correlates of frogsrdquo Global Ecology andBiogeography vol 17 no 2 pp 211ndash221 2008

[16] P Brandmayr T Zetto and R Pizzolotto in I ColeotteriCarabidi per la valutazione ambientale e la conservazione dellabiodiversita APAT Rome Italy 2005

[17] R Real A L Marquez A Estrada A R Munoz and JM Vargas ldquoModelling chorotypes of invasive vertebrates inmainland Spainrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 14 no 2 pp364ndash373 2008

[18] B Y Vilenkin and V I Chikatunov ldquoParticipation of specieswith different zoogeographical ranks in the formation of localfaunas a case studyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 27 no 5 pp1201ndash1208 2000

[19] CM Cartagena and E Galante ldquoLoss of Iberian island tenebri-onid beetles and conservationmanagement recommendationsrdquoJournal of Insect Conservation vol 6 no 2 pp 73ndash81 2002

[20] S W Laffan and M D Crisp ldquoAssessing endemism at multiplespatial scales with an example from the Australian vascularflorardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 30 no 4 pp 511ndash520 2003

[21] S Lavergne W Thuiller J Molina and M Debussche ldquoEnvi-ronmental and human factors influencing rare plant localoccurrence extinction and persistence a 115-year study in theMediterranean regionrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 32 no 5pp 799ndash811 2005

[22] C A Szumik F Cuezzo P A Goloboff and A E ChalupldquoAn optimality criterion to determine areas of endemismrdquoSystematic Biology vol 51 no 5 pp 806ndash816 2002

[23] S Fattorini ldquoLevels of endemism are not necessarily biased bythe co-presence of species with different range sizes a case studyof Vilenkin and Chikatunovrsquos modelsrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 34 no 6 pp 994ndash1007 2007

[24] M D Crisp S Laffan H P Linder and A Monro ldquoEndemismin the Australian florardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 28 no 2pp 183ndash198 2001

[25] S Anderson ldquoArea and endemismrdquo The Quarterly Review ofBiology vol 69 no 4 pp 451ndash471 1994

[26] J F Mota F J Perez-Garcıa M L Jimenez Sanchez J J Amateand J de Giles Penas ldquoPhytogeographical relationships amonghigh mountain areas in the baetic ranges (South Spain)rdquoGlobalEcology and Biogeography vol 11 no 6 pp 497ndash504 2002

[27] T Kull and M J Hutchings ldquoA comparative analysis of declinein the distribution ranges of orchid species in Estonia and theUnitedKingdomrdquoBiological Conservation vol 129 no 1 pp 31ndash39 2006

[28] A V Taglianti A Audisio M Biondi M Bologna GCarpaneto A De Biase et al ldquoA proposal for a chorotypeclassification of the Near East fauna in the framework of theWestern Palearctic regionrdquo Biogeographia vol 20 pp 31ndash591999

[29] H Turin L Penev and A CasaleTheGenus Carabus in EuropeA Synthesis Pensoft Sofia Bulgaria 2003

[30] R Pizzolotto and P Brandmayr ldquoAn index to evaluate landscapeconservation state based on land-use pattern analysis andgeographic information system techniquesrdquo Coenoses vol 11no 1 pp 37ndash44 1996

[31] L Xiu-zhen X Du-ning H Yuan-man and W Xian-li ldquoEffectof spatial pattern on nutrient reduction in the liaohe deltardquoJournal of Geographical Sciences vol 11 no 3 pp 336ndash349 2001

[32] F Catani B Lastrucci and S Moretti ldquoSustainability of waterand natural resources management an integrated approachrdquoProgress in Water Resources vol 8 pp 411ndash420 2003

[33] C Ricotta M Marignani F Campaiola G C Avena and CBlasi ldquoA partial order approach for summarizing landscapequalityrdquo Community Ecology vol 4 no 2 pp 121ndash127 2003

[34] C Blasi L Zavattero M Marignani et al ldquoThe concept of landecological network and its design using a land unit approachrdquoPlant Biosystems vol 142 no 3 pp 540ndash549 2008

[35] C Ferrari G Pezzi L Diani and M Corazza ldquoEvaluatinglandscape quality with vegetation naturalness maps an indexand some inferencesrdquo Applied Vegetation Science vol 11 no 2pp 243ndash250 2008

[36] C Guarino S Santoro and L De Simone ldquoAssessment ofvegetation and naturalness a study case in Southern ItalyrdquoiForest vol 1 pp 114ndash121 2008

[37] P Di Marzio P Di Martino L Mastronardi P Fortini CGiancola and V Viscosi ldquoAnalisi integrata socio-economica edi copertura del suolo in un paesaggio a prevalente matriceagricolardquo Italian Journal of Agronomy vol 3 pp 47ndash52 2009

[38] M Bodesmo L Pacicco B Romano and A Ranfa ldquoThe roleof environmental and socio-demographic indicators in theanalysis of land use changes in a protected area of the Natura2000 Network the case study of Lake Trasimeno UmbriaCentral Italyrdquo Environmental Monitoring and Assessment vol184 no 2 pp 831ndash843 2012

[39] W Schule ldquoMammals vegetation and the initial humansettlement of the Mediterranean islands a palaeoecologicalapproachrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 20 no 4 pp 399ndash4121993

[40] R Verlaque F Medail P Quezel and J Babinot ldquoEndemismevegetal et paleogeographie dans le Bassin MediterraneenrdquoGeobios vol 30 supplement 2 pp 159ndash166 1997

[41] F Medail and P Quezel ldquoHot-spots analysis for conservationof plant biodiversity in the Mediterranean Basinrdquo Annals of theMissouri Botanical Garden vol 84 no 1 pp 112ndash127 1997

[42] D T Bilton P M Mirol S Mascheretti K Fredga J Zima andJ B Searle ldquoMediterranean Europe as an area of endemism forsmall mammals rather than a source for northwards postglacialcolonizationrdquo Proceedings of the Royal Society B vol 265 no1402 pp 1219ndash1226 1998

[43] A Pons and P Quezel ldquoA propos de la mise en place du climatmediterraneenrdquo Comptes Rendus De LrsquoAcaDemie Des SciencesSeries IIA vol 327 no 11 pp 755ndash760 1998

[44] K J Willis and R J Whittaker ldquoThe refugial debaterdquo Sciencevol 287 no 5457 pp 1406ndash1407 2000

[45] R Pizzolotto P Brandmayr andAMazzei ldquoCarabid beetles in aMediterranean region biogeographical and ecological featuresrdquoReport of the Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences vol 114pp 243ndash254 2005

[46] M La Greca ldquoLrsquoorigine della fauna italianardquo Le Scienze vol 187pp 66ndash79 1984

[47] DMagri G G Vendramin B Comps et al ldquoA new scenario forthe quaternary history of European beech populations palaeob-otanical evidence and genetic consequencesrdquo New Phytologistvol 171 no 1 pp 199ndash221 2006

[48] J Blondel and J Vigne ldquoSpace time and man as determinantsof diversity of birds andmammals in theMediterranean regionrdquoin Species Diversity in Ecological Communities R E Ricklefsand D Schluter Eds pp 135ndash146 University of Chicago PressChicago Ill USA 1993

[49] R Grenyer C D L Orme S F Jackson et al ldquoGlobal distri-bution and conservation of rare and threatened vertebratesrdquoNature vol 444 no 7115 pp 93ndash96 2006

ISRN Ecology 9

[50] C D L Orme R G Davies V A Olson et al ldquoGlobal patternsof geographic range size in birdsrdquo PLoS Biology vol 4 no 7 pp1276ndash1283 2006

[51] G Casazza G Barberis and L Minuto ldquoEcological character-istics and rarity of endemic plants of the ItalianMaritime AlpsrdquoBiological Conservation vol 123 no 3 pp 361ndash371 2005

[52] J D Olden ldquoBiotic homogenization a new research agenda forconservation biogeographyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no12 pp 2027ndash2039 2006

[53] P Pysek V Jarosık J Mullerova J Pergl and J Wild ldquoCompar-ing the rate of invasion by heracleum mantegazzianum at con-tinental regional and local scalesrdquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 355ndash363 2008

[54] F Leprieur O Beauchard B Hugueny G Grenouillet and SBrosse ldquoNull model of biotic homogenization a test with theEuropean freshwater fish faunardquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 291ndash300 2008

[55] J H BrownG C Stevens andDMKaufman ldquoThe geographicrange size shape boundaries and internal structurerdquo AnnualReview of Ecology and Systematics vol 27 pp 597ndash623 1996

[56] C Parmesan T L Root and M R Willig ldquoImpacts ofextreme weather and climate on terrestrial biotardquo Bulletin ofthe American Meteorological Society vol 81 no 3 pp 443ndash4502000

[57] M Crisp ldquoBiome assembly what we know and what we needto knowrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no 8 pp 1332ndash13332006

[58] N Myers R A Mittermeler C G Mittermeler G A B DaFonseca and J Kent ldquoBiodiversity hotspots for conservationprioritiesrdquo Nature vol 403 no 6772 pp 853ndash858 2000

[59] G M Harris C N Jenkins and S L Pimm ldquoRefiningbiodiversity conservation prioritiesrdquo Conservation Biology vol19 no 6 pp 1957ndash1968 2005

[60] C Parmesan and G Yohe ldquoA globally coherent fingerprint ofclimate change impacts across natural systemsrdquoNature vol 421no 6918 pp 37ndash42 2003

[61] D F Sax and S D Gaines ldquoSpecies diversity from globaldecreases to local increasesrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 18 no 11 pp 561ndash566 2003

[62] J O Meynecke ldquoEffects of global climate change on geographicdistributions of vertebrates in North Queenslandrdquo EcologicalModelling vol 174 no 4 pp 347ndash357 2004

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental and Public Health

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcosystemsJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

MeteorologyAdvances in

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Marine BiologyJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

Advances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental Chemistry

Atmospheric SciencesInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Waste ManagementJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Geophysics

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Geological ResearchJournal of

EarthquakesJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

OceanographyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of Computational Environmental SciencesHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ClimatologyJournal of

8 ISRN Ecology

[15] N Cooper J Bielby G HThomas and A Purvis ldquoMacroecol-ogy and extinction risk correlates of frogsrdquo Global Ecology andBiogeography vol 17 no 2 pp 211ndash221 2008

[16] P Brandmayr T Zetto and R Pizzolotto in I ColeotteriCarabidi per la valutazione ambientale e la conservazione dellabiodiversita APAT Rome Italy 2005

[17] R Real A L Marquez A Estrada A R Munoz and JM Vargas ldquoModelling chorotypes of invasive vertebrates inmainland Spainrdquo Diversity and Distributions vol 14 no 2 pp364ndash373 2008

[18] B Y Vilenkin and V I Chikatunov ldquoParticipation of specieswith different zoogeographical ranks in the formation of localfaunas a case studyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 27 no 5 pp1201ndash1208 2000

[19] CM Cartagena and E Galante ldquoLoss of Iberian island tenebri-onid beetles and conservationmanagement recommendationsrdquoJournal of Insect Conservation vol 6 no 2 pp 73ndash81 2002

[20] S W Laffan and M D Crisp ldquoAssessing endemism at multiplespatial scales with an example from the Australian vascularflorardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 30 no 4 pp 511ndash520 2003

[21] S Lavergne W Thuiller J Molina and M Debussche ldquoEnvi-ronmental and human factors influencing rare plant localoccurrence extinction and persistence a 115-year study in theMediterranean regionrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 32 no 5pp 799ndash811 2005

[22] C A Szumik F Cuezzo P A Goloboff and A E ChalupldquoAn optimality criterion to determine areas of endemismrdquoSystematic Biology vol 51 no 5 pp 806ndash816 2002

[23] S Fattorini ldquoLevels of endemism are not necessarily biased bythe co-presence of species with different range sizes a case studyof Vilenkin and Chikatunovrsquos modelsrdquo Journal of Biogeographyvol 34 no 6 pp 994ndash1007 2007

[24] M D Crisp S Laffan H P Linder and A Monro ldquoEndemismin the Australian florardquo Journal of Biogeography vol 28 no 2pp 183ndash198 2001

[25] S Anderson ldquoArea and endemismrdquo The Quarterly Review ofBiology vol 69 no 4 pp 451ndash471 1994

[26] J F Mota F J Perez-Garcıa M L Jimenez Sanchez J J Amateand J de Giles Penas ldquoPhytogeographical relationships amonghigh mountain areas in the baetic ranges (South Spain)rdquoGlobalEcology and Biogeography vol 11 no 6 pp 497ndash504 2002

[27] T Kull and M J Hutchings ldquoA comparative analysis of declinein the distribution ranges of orchid species in Estonia and theUnitedKingdomrdquoBiological Conservation vol 129 no 1 pp 31ndash39 2006

[28] A V Taglianti A Audisio M Biondi M Bologna GCarpaneto A De Biase et al ldquoA proposal for a chorotypeclassification of the Near East fauna in the framework of theWestern Palearctic regionrdquo Biogeographia vol 20 pp 31ndash591999

[29] H Turin L Penev and A CasaleTheGenus Carabus in EuropeA Synthesis Pensoft Sofia Bulgaria 2003

[30] R Pizzolotto and P Brandmayr ldquoAn index to evaluate landscapeconservation state based on land-use pattern analysis andgeographic information system techniquesrdquo Coenoses vol 11no 1 pp 37ndash44 1996

[31] L Xiu-zhen X Du-ning H Yuan-man and W Xian-li ldquoEffectof spatial pattern on nutrient reduction in the liaohe deltardquoJournal of Geographical Sciences vol 11 no 3 pp 336ndash349 2001

[32] F Catani B Lastrucci and S Moretti ldquoSustainability of waterand natural resources management an integrated approachrdquoProgress in Water Resources vol 8 pp 411ndash420 2003

[33] C Ricotta M Marignani F Campaiola G C Avena and CBlasi ldquoA partial order approach for summarizing landscapequalityrdquo Community Ecology vol 4 no 2 pp 121ndash127 2003

[34] C Blasi L Zavattero M Marignani et al ldquoThe concept of landecological network and its design using a land unit approachrdquoPlant Biosystems vol 142 no 3 pp 540ndash549 2008

[35] C Ferrari G Pezzi L Diani and M Corazza ldquoEvaluatinglandscape quality with vegetation naturalness maps an indexand some inferencesrdquo Applied Vegetation Science vol 11 no 2pp 243ndash250 2008

[36] C Guarino S Santoro and L De Simone ldquoAssessment ofvegetation and naturalness a study case in Southern ItalyrdquoiForest vol 1 pp 114ndash121 2008

[37] P Di Marzio P Di Martino L Mastronardi P Fortini CGiancola and V Viscosi ldquoAnalisi integrata socio-economica edi copertura del suolo in un paesaggio a prevalente matriceagricolardquo Italian Journal of Agronomy vol 3 pp 47ndash52 2009

[38] M Bodesmo L Pacicco B Romano and A Ranfa ldquoThe roleof environmental and socio-demographic indicators in theanalysis of land use changes in a protected area of the Natura2000 Network the case study of Lake Trasimeno UmbriaCentral Italyrdquo Environmental Monitoring and Assessment vol184 no 2 pp 831ndash843 2012

[39] W Schule ldquoMammals vegetation and the initial humansettlement of the Mediterranean islands a palaeoecologicalapproachrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 20 no 4 pp 399ndash4121993

[40] R Verlaque F Medail P Quezel and J Babinot ldquoEndemismevegetal et paleogeographie dans le Bassin MediterraneenrdquoGeobios vol 30 supplement 2 pp 159ndash166 1997

[41] F Medail and P Quezel ldquoHot-spots analysis for conservationof plant biodiversity in the Mediterranean Basinrdquo Annals of theMissouri Botanical Garden vol 84 no 1 pp 112ndash127 1997

[42] D T Bilton P M Mirol S Mascheretti K Fredga J Zima andJ B Searle ldquoMediterranean Europe as an area of endemism forsmall mammals rather than a source for northwards postglacialcolonizationrdquo Proceedings of the Royal Society B vol 265 no1402 pp 1219ndash1226 1998

[43] A Pons and P Quezel ldquoA propos de la mise en place du climatmediterraneenrdquo Comptes Rendus De LrsquoAcaDemie Des SciencesSeries IIA vol 327 no 11 pp 755ndash760 1998

[44] K J Willis and R J Whittaker ldquoThe refugial debaterdquo Sciencevol 287 no 5457 pp 1406ndash1407 2000

[45] R Pizzolotto P Brandmayr andAMazzei ldquoCarabid beetles in aMediterranean region biogeographical and ecological featuresrdquoReport of the Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences vol 114pp 243ndash254 2005

[46] M La Greca ldquoLrsquoorigine della fauna italianardquo Le Scienze vol 187pp 66ndash79 1984

[47] DMagri G G Vendramin B Comps et al ldquoA new scenario forthe quaternary history of European beech populations palaeob-otanical evidence and genetic consequencesrdquo New Phytologistvol 171 no 1 pp 199ndash221 2006

[48] J Blondel and J Vigne ldquoSpace time and man as determinantsof diversity of birds andmammals in theMediterranean regionrdquoin Species Diversity in Ecological Communities R E Ricklefsand D Schluter Eds pp 135ndash146 University of Chicago PressChicago Ill USA 1993

[49] R Grenyer C D L Orme S F Jackson et al ldquoGlobal distri-bution and conservation of rare and threatened vertebratesrdquoNature vol 444 no 7115 pp 93ndash96 2006

ISRN Ecology 9

[50] C D L Orme R G Davies V A Olson et al ldquoGlobal patternsof geographic range size in birdsrdquo PLoS Biology vol 4 no 7 pp1276ndash1283 2006

[51] G Casazza G Barberis and L Minuto ldquoEcological character-istics and rarity of endemic plants of the ItalianMaritime AlpsrdquoBiological Conservation vol 123 no 3 pp 361ndash371 2005

[52] J D Olden ldquoBiotic homogenization a new research agenda forconservation biogeographyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no12 pp 2027ndash2039 2006

[53] P Pysek V Jarosık J Mullerova J Pergl and J Wild ldquoCompar-ing the rate of invasion by heracleum mantegazzianum at con-tinental regional and local scalesrdquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 355ndash363 2008

[54] F Leprieur O Beauchard B Hugueny G Grenouillet and SBrosse ldquoNull model of biotic homogenization a test with theEuropean freshwater fish faunardquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 291ndash300 2008

[55] J H BrownG C Stevens andDMKaufman ldquoThe geographicrange size shape boundaries and internal structurerdquo AnnualReview of Ecology and Systematics vol 27 pp 597ndash623 1996

[56] C Parmesan T L Root and M R Willig ldquoImpacts ofextreme weather and climate on terrestrial biotardquo Bulletin ofthe American Meteorological Society vol 81 no 3 pp 443ndash4502000

[57] M Crisp ldquoBiome assembly what we know and what we needto knowrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no 8 pp 1332ndash13332006

[58] N Myers R A Mittermeler C G Mittermeler G A B DaFonseca and J Kent ldquoBiodiversity hotspots for conservationprioritiesrdquo Nature vol 403 no 6772 pp 853ndash858 2000

[59] G M Harris C N Jenkins and S L Pimm ldquoRefiningbiodiversity conservation prioritiesrdquo Conservation Biology vol19 no 6 pp 1957ndash1968 2005

[60] C Parmesan and G Yohe ldquoA globally coherent fingerprint ofclimate change impacts across natural systemsrdquoNature vol 421no 6918 pp 37ndash42 2003

[61] D F Sax and S D Gaines ldquoSpecies diversity from globaldecreases to local increasesrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 18 no 11 pp 561ndash566 2003

[62] J O Meynecke ldquoEffects of global climate change on geographicdistributions of vertebrates in North Queenslandrdquo EcologicalModelling vol 174 no 4 pp 347ndash357 2004

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental and Public Health

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcosystemsJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

MeteorologyAdvances in

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Marine BiologyJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

Advances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental Chemistry

Atmospheric SciencesInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Waste ManagementJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Geophysics

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Geological ResearchJournal of

EarthquakesJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

OceanographyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of Computational Environmental SciencesHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ClimatologyJournal of

ISRN Ecology 9

[50] C D L Orme R G Davies V A Olson et al ldquoGlobal patternsof geographic range size in birdsrdquo PLoS Biology vol 4 no 7 pp1276ndash1283 2006

[51] G Casazza G Barberis and L Minuto ldquoEcological character-istics and rarity of endemic plants of the ItalianMaritime AlpsrdquoBiological Conservation vol 123 no 3 pp 361ndash371 2005

[52] J D Olden ldquoBiotic homogenization a new research agenda forconservation biogeographyrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no12 pp 2027ndash2039 2006

[53] P Pysek V Jarosık J Mullerova J Pergl and J Wild ldquoCompar-ing the rate of invasion by heracleum mantegazzianum at con-tinental regional and local scalesrdquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 355ndash363 2008

[54] F Leprieur O Beauchard B Hugueny G Grenouillet and SBrosse ldquoNull model of biotic homogenization a test with theEuropean freshwater fish faunardquo Diversity and Distributionsvol 14 no 2 pp 291ndash300 2008

[55] J H BrownG C Stevens andDMKaufman ldquoThe geographicrange size shape boundaries and internal structurerdquo AnnualReview of Ecology and Systematics vol 27 pp 597ndash623 1996

[56] C Parmesan T L Root and M R Willig ldquoImpacts ofextreme weather and climate on terrestrial biotardquo Bulletin ofthe American Meteorological Society vol 81 no 3 pp 443ndash4502000

[57] M Crisp ldquoBiome assembly what we know and what we needto knowrdquo Journal of Biogeography vol 33 no 8 pp 1332ndash13332006

[58] N Myers R A Mittermeler C G Mittermeler G A B DaFonseca and J Kent ldquoBiodiversity hotspots for conservationprioritiesrdquo Nature vol 403 no 6772 pp 853ndash858 2000

[59] G M Harris C N Jenkins and S L Pimm ldquoRefiningbiodiversity conservation prioritiesrdquo Conservation Biology vol19 no 6 pp 1957ndash1968 2005

[60] C Parmesan and G Yohe ldquoA globally coherent fingerprint ofclimate change impacts across natural systemsrdquoNature vol 421no 6918 pp 37ndash42 2003

[61] D F Sax and S D Gaines ldquoSpecies diversity from globaldecreases to local increasesrdquo Trends in Ecology and Evolutionvol 18 no 11 pp 561ndash566 2003

[62] J O Meynecke ldquoEffects of global climate change on geographicdistributions of vertebrates in North Queenslandrdquo EcologicalModelling vol 174 no 4 pp 347ndash357 2004

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental and Public Health

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcosystemsJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

MeteorologyAdvances in

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Marine BiologyJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

Advances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental Chemistry

Atmospheric SciencesInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Waste ManagementJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Geophysics

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Geological ResearchJournal of

EarthquakesJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

OceanographyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of Computational Environmental SciencesHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ClimatologyJournal of

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental and Public Health

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcosystemsJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

MeteorologyAdvances in

EcologyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Marine BiologyJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

Advances in

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Environmental Chemistry

Atmospheric SciencesInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Waste ManagementJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

International Journal of

Geophysics

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Geological ResearchJournal of

EarthquakesJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

OceanographyInternational Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Journal of Computational Environmental SciencesHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

ClimatologyJournal of