PMCCPMCCPMCC

Search tips
Search criteria 

Advanced

 
Logo of procbThe Royal Society PublishingProceedings BAboutBrowse by SubjectAlertsFree Trial
 
Proc Biol Sci. 2003 September 7; 270(1526): 1801–1808.
PMCID: PMC1691447

Extrinsic versus intrinsic factors in the decline and extinction of Australian marsupials.

Abstract

Recent attempts to explain the susceptibility of vertebrates to declines worldwide have largely focused on intrinsic factors such as body size, reproductive potential, ecological specialization, geographical range and phylogenetic longevity. Here, we use a database of 145 Australian marsupial species to test the effects of both intrinsic and extrinsic factors in a multivariate comparative approach. We model five intrinsic (body size, habitat specialization, diet, reproductive rate and range size) and four extrinsic (climate and range overlap with introduced foxes, sheep and rabbits) factors. We use quantitative measures of geographical range contraction as indices of decline. We also develop a new modelling approach of phylogenetically independent contrasts combined with imputation of missing values to deal simultaneously with phylogenetic structuring and missing data. One extrinsic variable-geographical range overlap with sheep-was the only consistent predictor of declines. Habitat specialization was independently but less consistently associated with declines. This suggests that extrinsic factors largely determine interspecific variation in extinction risk among Australian marsupials, and that the intrinsic factors that are consistently associated with extinction risk in other vertebrates are less important in this group. We conclude that recent anthropogenic changes have been profound enough to affect species on a continent-wide scale, regardless of their intrinsic biology.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (94K).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Ackerly DD. Taxon sampling, correlated evolution, and independent contrasts. Evolution. 2000 Oct;54(5):1480–1492. [PubMed]
  • Schulkind MD, Hennis LK, Rubin DC. Music, emotion, and autobiographical memory: they're playing your song. Mem Cognit. 1999 Nov;27(6):948–955. [PubMed]
  • Bennett PM, Owens IPF. Variation in extinction risk among birds: chance or evolutionary predisposition? Proc Biol Sci. 1997 Mar 22;264(1380):401–408. [PMC free article]
  • Blomberg Simon P, Garland Theodore, Jr, Ives Anthony R. Testing for phylogenetic signal in comparative data: behavioral traits are more labile. Evolution. 2003 Apr;57(4):717–745. [PubMed]
  • Channell R, Lomolino MV. Dynamic biogeography and conservation of endangered species. Nature. 2000 Jan 6;403(6765):84–86. [PubMed]
  • Díaz-Uriarte R, Garland T., Jr Effects of branch length errors on the performance of phylogenetically independent contrasts. Syst Biol. 1998 Dec;47(4):654–672. [PubMed]
  • Purvis A, Gittleman JL, Cowlishaw G, Mace GM. Predicting extinction risk in declining species. Proc Biol Sci. 2000 Oct 7;267(1456):1947–1952. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society