SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION MODELLING OF Cynomys spp.: MODEL THE GENUS OR THE SPECIES?
Abstract
Few studies have focused on modeling the spatial distribution of the five Cynomys species, despite their recognized ecological role in soil composition, vegetation patterns, and biodiversity. Using Species Distribution Models (SDMs), integrated with field records and environmental variables, this study seeks to determine whether the concept of SDM transfer is feasible and to answer the question of whether modeling at the genus level is more effective than at the species level. The MaxEnt algorithm was used, correlating species presence with environmental factors across a vast area from Canada to Mexico. The results indicate considerable differences in spatial distribution among the species, with C. ludovicianus having the largest spatial distribution areas and C. parvidens the smallest, as well as low overlap. The results indicated that modeling each species individually is more effective than modeling the genus due to significant interspecific differences in environmental preferences and genetic and behavioral traits. The research highlights the unique ecological, physiological, and behavioral adaptations of each species, shaped by its specific environmental conditions and evolutionary history.
Downloads
-
Abstract44
-
PDF (Español (España))58
References
AIELLO-LAMMENS ME, BORIA RA, RADOSAVLJEVIC A, et al. (2015). spThin: an R package for spatial thinning of species occurrence records for use in ecological niche models. Ecography 38:541–545. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.01132
ÁlLVAREZ-CASTAÑEDA ST, LACHER TE, VÁZQUEZ E. (2019). Cynomys mexicanus. In: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2019: e.T6089A139607891. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-3.RLTS.T6089A139607891.en. Accessed 19 Jan 2024
ARCHER S, GARRETT MG, DETLING JK. (1987). Rates of vegetation change associated with prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicianus) grazing in North American mixed-grass prairie. Vegetatio, 72:159–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00039837
CARNEIRO LR DE A, LIMA AP, MACHADO RB, MAGNUSSON WE. (2016). Limitations to the Use of Species-Distribution Models for Environmental-Impact Assessments in the Amazon. PLOS ONE 11:e0146543. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146543
CASSOLA F. (2016a). Cynomys gunnisoni. In: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T42453A115189620.https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.20163.RLTS.T42453A22261232.en. Accessed 19 Jan 2024
CASSOLA F. (2016b). Cynomys ludovicianus. In: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016:e.T6091A115080297.https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.20163.RLTS.T6091A22261137.en. Accessed 19 Jan 2024
CASSOLA F. (2019). Cynomys leucurus. In: he IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T42454A22261371.https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.20162.RLTS.T42454A22261371.en. Accessed 19 Jan 2024
CASTELLANOS-MORALES G. (2015). Filogeografía y genética de la conservación de dos especies de perros de las praderas de cola negra (Cynomys ludovicianus y Cynomys mexicanus) con distribución en México. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
CEBALLOS G, MALLINK E, HANEBURY LR. (1993). Distribution and conservation status of prairie dogs Cynomys mexicanus and Cynomys ludovicianus in Mexico. Biological Conservation, 63:105–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-3207(93)90497-O
CEBALLOS G, PACHECO J, LIST R. (1999). Influence of prairie dogs (Cynomus ludovicianus) on habitat heterogeneity and mammalian diversity in Mexico. Journal of Arid Environments, 41:161–172
CHOI K. (2015). Exploration of the range overlap between Cynomys leucurus and Cynomys udovicianus. Honors Theses, Andrews University
CLARK WR y INNIS GS (1982). Forage interactions and Black-Tailed Jack Rabbit population dynamics: A simulation model. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 46:1018–1035. https://doi.org/10.2307/3808235
COMADRE Animal Matrix Database. (2024). COMADRE Animal Matrix Database. http://www.compadre-db.org/. Accessed 23 Dic 2024
CONABIO. (2024). Sistema Nacional de Información sobre Biodiversidad. Registros de ejemplares de Cynomys spp.
DEB JC, FORBES G, MACLEAN DA. (2020). Modelling the spatial distribution of selected North American woodland mammals under future climate scenarios. Mammal Review, 50:440–452. https://doi.org/10.1111/mam.12210
ENGLISH TE y STOREY KB. (2000). Enzymes of Adenylate Metabolism and Their Role in Hibernation of the White-Tailed Prairie Dog, Cynomys leucurus. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, 376:91–100. https://doi.org/10.1006/abbi.1999.1686
ESTRADA-CASTILLÓ ME, SCOTT-MORALES L, VILLARREAL-QUINTANILLA JA, et al. (2010). Clasificación de los pastizales halófilos del noreste de México asociados con perrito de las praderas (Cynomys mexicanus): diversidad y endemismo de especies. Revista mexicana de biodiversidad, 81:401–416
FARID RH, KARELUS DL, HULL V. (2022). Age- and sex-specific survival of the Gunnison’s prairie dog (Cynomys gunnisoni). Ecosphere ,13:e3937. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.3937
FICK SE y HIJMANS RJ. (2017). WorldClim 2: new 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Inrantional Journal of, Climatology 37:4302–4315. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5086
GBIF. (2024). GBIF: The Global Biodiversity Information Facility. In: GBIF: The Global Biodiversity Information Facility. https://www.gbif.org/what-is-gbif. Accessed 21 Dic 2024
GONZÁLEZ-URIBE DU, GARCÍA-ARANDA MA, Heredia-Pineda F, Uvalle-Sauceda JI. (2024) Distribución geográfica de Cynomys mexicanus. Ecosistemas y Recursos Agropecuarios 11(1): e3766, https://doi.org/10.19136/era.a11n1.3766
GORMLEY AM, FORSYTH DM, GRIFFIOEN P, et al. (2011). Using presence-only and presence–absence data to estimate the current and potential distributions of established invasive species. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48:25–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01911.x
GUERNSEY N, LENDRUM P, KRANK L, GRASSEL S (2023) Post‐translocation dynamics of black‐tailed prairie dogs (Cynomys ludovicianus): A successful conservation and human–wildlife conflict mitigation tool. Ecology and Evolution, 13:. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9738
HIJMANS RJ. (2023). Raster: Geographic Data Analysis and Modeling_
HOOGLAND JL, HALE SL, KIRK AD, SUI YD. (2013). Individual Variation In Vigilance Among White-Tailed Prairie Dogs (Cynomys leucurus). The Southwestern Naturalist, 58:279–285. https://doi.org/10.1894/0038-4909-58.3.279
JORDÁN F, KOVÁCS B, VERDOLIN JL. (2021). Resource availability influences global social network properties in Gunnison’s prairie dogs (Cynomys gunnisoni). Behavior, 159:321–338. https://doi.org/10.1163/1568539X-bja10118
KEINATH DA. (2004). Species assessment for white-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys leucurus) in Wyoming. Bureau of Land Management, Wyoming State Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming
LEHMER E, BIGGINS D, ANTOLIN M. (2006). Forage preferences in two species of prairie dog (Cynomys parvidens and Cynomus ludovicianus): Implications for hibernation and facultative heterothermy. Journal of Zoology, 269:249–259. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.2006.00085.x
LI B, YU D, CHENG H, et al. (2016). The complete mitochondrial genomes of Cynomys leucurus and C. ludovicianus (Rodentia: Sciuridae). Mitochondrial DNA Part A 27:3295–3296. https://doi.org/10.3109/19401736.2015.1015010
LISSOVSKY AA y DUDOV SV. (2021). Species-Distribution Modeling: Advantages and Limitations of Its Application. 2. MaxEnt. Biol Bull Rev, 11:265–275. https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079086421030087
LIU C, BERRY PM, DAWSON TP, PEARSON RG. (2005). Selecting thresholds of occurrence in the prediction of species distributions. Ecography, 28:385–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0906-7590.2005.03957.x
LIU C, WOLTER C, XIAN W, JESCHKE JM. (2020). Species distribution models have limited spatial transferability for invasive species. Ecology Letters, 23:1682–1692. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.13577
LOMOLINO MV y SMITH GA. (2001). Dynamic Biogeography of Prairie Dog (Cynomys ludovicianus) Towns Near the Edge of Their Range. Journal of Mammalogy, 82:937–945. https://doi.org/10.1644/1545-1542(2001)082<0937:DBOPDC>2.0.CO;2
LOMOLINO M y SMITH G. (2004). Terrestrial vertebrate communities at black-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicianus) towns. Biological Conservation, 115:89–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(03)00097-1
LÓPEZ-GONZÁLEZ C, SANDOVAL S, ESCOBAR-FLORES JG. (2023). An ecoregionalization of the Sierra Madre Occidental, México, based on non-volant, small mammal distributions. Écoscience, 30:65–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/11956860.2023.2207947
MAGLE S, ZHU J, CROOKS KR. (2005). Behavioral Responses to Repeated Human Intrusion by Black-Tailed Prairie Dogs (Cynomys ludovicianus). Journal of Mammalogy 86:524–530. https://doi.org/10.1644/1545-1542(2005)86[524:BRTRHI]2.0.CO;2
MANZOOR SA, GRIFFITHS G, LUKAC M. (2018). Species distribution model transferability and model grain size – finer may not always be better. Sci Rep 8:7168. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-25437-1
MORALES LS y COIFFER P. (2017). Modelos predictivos de distribución geográfica para Spizella wortheni, Cynomys mexicanus, Vulpes macrotis zinseri y Taxidea taxus berlandieri. Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León. Facultad de Ciencias Forestales. Informe final SNIB-CONABIO, México, D. F.
PAULI JN, BUSKIRK SW, WILLIAMS ES, EDWARDS WH. (2006). A plague epizotic in the black-tailed praire dog (Cynomys ludovicianus). Journal of Wildlife Diseases, 42:74–80. https://doi.org/10.7589/0090-3558-42.1.74
PHILLIPS SJ, ANDERSON RP, SCHAPIRE RE. (2006). Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecological Modelling, 190:231–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.03.026
PHILLIPS SJ y DUDÍK M. (2008). Modeling of species distributions with Maxent: new extensions and a comprehensive evaluation. Ecography, 31:161–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0906-7590.2008.5203.x
PIZZIMENTI JJ. (1976). Genetic divergence and morphological convergence in the prairie dogs Cynomys gunnisoni and Cynomys leucurus II. Genetic analyses. Evolution, 30:367–379. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1976.tb00914.x
PIZZIMENTI JJ y COLLIER GD. (1975). Cynomys parvidens. Mammalian Species, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.2307/3503977
PIZZIMENTI JJ y HOFFMANN RS. (1973). Cynomys gunnisoni. Mammalian Species, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.2307/3503995
PORFIRIO LL, HARRIS RMB, LEFROY EC, et al. (2014). Improving the Use of Species Distribution Models in Conservation Planning and Management under Climate Change. PLOS ONE, 9:e113749. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0113749
POSIT TEAM. (2024). RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R
QGIS.org. (2024). QGIS Geographic Information System
QIAO H, PETEERSON AT, JI L, HU J. (2017). Using data from related species to overcome spatial sampling bias and associated limitations in ecological niche modelling. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 8:1804–1812. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12832
R CORE TEAM. (2024). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
RADOSAVLJEVIC A y ANDERSON RP. (2014). Making better Maxent models of species distributions: complexity, overfitting and evaluation. Journal of Biogeography, 41:629–643. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbi.12227
RIOJA T, SCOTT-MORALES L, COTERA-CORREA M, ESTRADA E. (2009). Reproduction and Behavior of the Mexican Prairie Dog (Cynomys mexicanus). The Southwestern Naturalist ,53:520–523. https://doi.org/10.1894/ME-33.1
ROACH N. (2018). Cynomys parvidens. In: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018: e.T6090A22260975. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2018-2.RLTS.T6090A22260975.en. Accessed 19 Jan 2024
SACKETT LC, SEGLUND A, GURALNICK RP, et al. (2014). Evidence for two subspecies of Gunnison’s prairie dogs (Cynomys gunnisoni), and the general importance of the subspecies concept. Biological Conservation ,174:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.03.010
SCOTT-MORALES L, ESTRADA E, CHÁVEZ-RAMÍREZ F, COTERA M. (2004). Continued Decline in Geographic Distribution of the Mexican Prairie Dog (Cynomys mexicanus). Journal of Mammalogy, 85:1095–1101. https://doi.org/10.1644/BER-107.1
SCOTT-MORALES LM, GOTTSCHALK E, MÜLENBERG. (2005). Decline in the endemic Mexican prairie dog Cynomys mexicanus: what do we know about extinction risk? Oryx, 39:389–397. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605305001055
SHIPLEY BK, READING RP. (2006). A comparison of herpetofauna and small mammal diversity on black-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicianus) colonies and non-colonized grasslands in Colorado. Journal of Arid Environments, 66:27–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2005.10.013
SINGHURST JR, YOUNG JH, KAROUAC G, WHITLAW HA. (2010). Estimating black-tailed praire dog (Cynomys ludovicianus) distribution in Texas. The Texas Jornal of Science, 62: 9-17
STEPHENSON CM, MACKENZIE ML, EDWARDS C, TRAVIS JMJ. (2006). Modelling establishment probabilities of an exotic plant, Rhododendron ponticum, invading a heterogeneous, woodland landscape using logistic regression with spatial autocorrelation. Ecological Modelling, 193:747–758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.09.007
UTAH DIVISION OF WILFLIFE RESOURCES. (2023). Utah Prairie Dog (Cynomys parvidens) conservation strategy. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Salt Lake City, Utah
VERDOLIN. (2007). Resources, not male mating strategies, are a determinant of social structure in Gunnison’s prairie dogs (Cynomys gunnisoni). Behaviour, 144:1361–1382. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853907782418231
VERDOLIN J. (2009). Gunnison’s prairie dog (Cynomys gunnisoni): Testing the resource dispersion hypothesis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol, 63:789–799. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-009-0712-y
VERDOLIN, J., LEWIS, K., SLOBODCHIKOFF. C. (2009). Morphology of Burrow Systems: A Comparison of Gunnison’s (Cynomys gunnisoni), White-Tailed (C. leucurus), Black-Tailed (C. ludovicianus), and Utah (C. parvidens) Prairie Dogs. The Southwestern Naturalist, 53:201–207. https://doi.org/10.1894/0038-4909(2008)53[201:MOBSAC]2.0.CO;2
Copyright (c) 2025 Geography Papers
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The manuscripts published in Papeles de Geografía are subject to the following terms and conditions:
1. The publishing house of the University of Murcia (Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Murcia) keeps the copyright of the published manuscripts favouring and allowing the use and distribution of such works under the licence in 2 below.
© Servicio de Publicaciones, Universidad de Murcia, 2011
2. Manuscripts are published electronically under an Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives 3.0 Unported Creative Commons Licence Spain (Legal text). Readers are free to copy, use, share and redistribute the material in any medium or format as long as (i) appropriate credit is given to authors and original source (journal, publishing house and URL); (ii) the material is not used for commercial purposes and (iii) this licence and restrictions are stated.
3. Self-archive. Authors are allowed and encouraged to distribute pre-print versions (prior to evaluation) and/or post-print versions (after evaluation and accepted for publication) of their manuscripts. This favours the dissemination and early distribution of scientific knowledge and citing.
