We recently had a discussion if in the face of climate change it would make sense to plant species from Southern Europe or South Germany in North Germany not being native there. The hypothesis was suggested that the greater the distance of the native range, the greater the probability and the magnitude of effects on ecosystems. This would mean, for example, that a species native to North America or central Asia would probably have a greater effect on German ecosystems than a species from Hungary or North Italy. However, I haven not found a paper which gives evidence on that hypothesis so far. Can anybody help?
This is not a paper but the reponse that appears right would be that the response is not distance but biogeographic region dependent. The history of lineages being concurrent is what I would expect we are looking for. In areas where there are strong geographic barriers, or abiotic differences, etc. you find strong differences in response also. Distance would correlate with such features so I worry about using distance to measure as it would not represent the causes.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Political Science