Search

Aim Land-use change typically goes hand in hand with the introduction of exotic species, which mingle with indigenous species to form novel assemblages. Here, we compare the functional structure of indigenous and exotic elements of ground-dwelling arthropod assemblages across four land-uses of varying management intensity. Location Terceira Island (Azores, North Atlantic). Methods We used pitfall traps to sample arthropods in 36 sites across the four land-uses and collated traits related to dispersal ability, body size and resource use. For both indigenous and exotic species, we examined the impact of land-uses on trait diversity and tested for the existence of non-random assembly processes using null models. We analysed differences in trait composition among land-uses for both indigenous and exotic species with multivariate analyses. We used point-biserial correlations to identity traits significantly correlated with specific land-uses for each element. Results We recorded 86 indigenous and 116 exotic arthropod species. Under high-intensity land-use, both indigenous and exotic elements showed significant trait clustering. Trait composition strongly shifted across land-uses, with indigenous and exotic species being functionally dissimilar in all land-uses. Large-bodied herbivores dominated exotic elements in low-intensity land-uses, while small-bodied spiders dominated exotic elements in high-intensity land-uses. In contrast, with increasing land-use intensity, indigenous species changed from functionally diverse to being dominated by piercing and cutting herbivores. Main conclusions Our study revealed two main findings: first, in high-intensity land-uses, trait clustering characterized both indigenous and exotic elements; second, exotic species differed in their functional profile from indigenous species in all land-use types. Overall, our results provide new insights into the functional role of exotic species in a land-use context, suggesting that, in agricultural landscape, exotic species may contribute positively to the maintenance of some ecosystem functions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Species distribution models (SDMs) have emerged as essential tools in the equipment of many ecologists, useful to explore species distributions in space and time and answering an assortment of questions related to biogeography, climate change biology and conservation biology. Historically, most SDM research concentrated on well‐known organisms, especially vertebrates. In recent years, these tools are becoming increasingly important for predicting the distribution of understudied invertebrate taxa. Here, we reviewed the literature published on main terrestrial arthropod predators (ants, ground beetles and spiders) to explore some of the challenges and opportunities of species distribution modelling in mega‐diverse arthropod groups. Location: Global. Methods: Systematic mapping of the literature and bibliometric analysis. Results: Most SDM studies of animals to date have focused either on broad samples of vertebrates or on arthropod species that are charismatic (e.g. butterflies) or economically important (e.g. vectors of disease, crop pests and pollinators). We show that the use of SDMs to map the geography of terrestrial arthropod predators is a nascent phenomenon, with a near‐exponential growth in the number of studies over the past ten years and still limited collaborative networks among researchers. There is a bias in studies towards charismatic species and geographical areas that hold lower levels of diversity but greater availability of data, such as Europe and North America. Conclusions: Arthropods pose particular modelling challenges that add to the ones already present for vertebrates, but they should also offer opportunities for future SDM research as data and new methods are made available. To overcome data limitations, we illustrate the potential of modern data sources and new modelling approaches. We discuss areas of research where SDMs may be combined with dispersal models and increasingly available phylogenetic and functional data to understand evolutionary changes in ranges and range‐limiting traits over past and contemporary time‐scales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]