Splanchnic Artery Stenosis and Abdominal Complaints: Clinical History Is of Limited Value in Detection of Gastrointestinal Ischemia

BACKGROUND: Splanchnic artery stenosis is common and mostly asymptomatic and may lead to gastrointestinal ischemia (chronic splanchnic syndrome, CSS). This study was designed to assess risk factors for CSS in the medical history of patients with splanchnic artery stenosis and whether these risk factors can be used to identify patients with high and low risk of CSS. METHODS: All patients referred for suspected CSS underwent a standardized workup, including a medical history with questionnaire, duplex ultrasound, gastrointestinal tonometry, and angiography. Definitive diagnosis and treatment advice was made in a multidisciplinary team. Patients with confirmed CSS were compared with no-CSS patients. RESULTS: A total of 270 patients (102 M, 168 F; mean age, 53 years) with splanchnic artery stenosis were analyzed, of whom 109 (40%) had CSS and 161 no CSS. CSS-patients more often reported postprandial pain (87% vs. 72%, p = 0.007), weight loss (85% vs. 70%, p = 0.006), adapted eating pattern (90% vs. 79%, p = 0.005) and diarrhea (35% vs. 22%, p = 0.023). If none of these risk factors were present, the probability of CSS was 13%; if all were present, the probability was 60%. Adapted eating pattern (odds ratio (OR) 3.1; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-8.88) and diarrhea (OR 2.6; 95% CI 1.31-5.3) were statistically significant in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with splanchnic artery stenosis, the clinical history is of limited value for detection of CSS. A diagnostic test to detect ischemia is indispensable for proper selection of patients with splanchnic artery stenosis who might benefit from treatment

Consistent, small effects of treefall disturbances on the composition and diversity of four Amazonian forests

Summary 1. Understanding the resilience of moist tropical forests to treefall disturbance events is important for understanding the mechanisms that underlie species coexistence and for predicting the future composition of these ecosystems. Here, we test whether variation in the functional composition of Amazonian forests determines their resilience to disturbance. 2. We studied the legacy of natural treefall disturbance events in four forests across Amazonia that differ substantially in functional composition. We compared the composition and diversity of all free-standing woody stems 2-10 cm diameter in previously disturbed and undisturbed 20 9 20 m subplots within 55, one-hectare, long-term forest inventory plots. 3. Overall, stem number increased following disturbance, and species and functional composition shifted to favour light-wooded, small-seeded taxa. Alpha-diversity increased, but beta-diversity was unaffected by disturbance, in all four forests. 4. Changes in response to disturbance in both functional composition and alpha-diversity were, however, small (2 -4% depending on the parameter) and similar among forests. 5. Synthesis. This study demonstrates that variation in the functional composition of Amazonian forests does not lead to large differences in the response of these forests to treefall disturbances, and overall, these events have a minor role in maintaining the diversity of these ecosystems

Fast demographic traits promote high diversification rates of Amazonian trees.

The Amazon rain forest sustains the world's highest tree diversity, but it remains unclear why some clades of trees are hyperdiverse, whereas others are not. Using dated phylogenies, estimates of current species richness and trait and demographic data from a large network of forest plots, we show that fast demographic traits ? short turnover times ? are associated with high diversification rates across 51 clades of canopy trees. This relationship is robust to assuming that diversification rates are either constant or decline over time, and occurs in a wide range of Neotropical tree lineages. This finding reveals the crucial role of intrinsic, ecological variation among clades for understanding the origin of the remarkable diversity of Amazonian trees and forests

Rarity of monodominance in hyperdiverse Amazonian forests.

Tropical forests are known for their high diversity. Yet, forest patches do occur in the tropics where a single tree species is dominant. Such "monodominant" forests are known from all of the main tropical regions. For Amazonia, we sampled the occurrence of monodominance in a massive, basin-wide database of forest-inventory plots from the Amazon Tree Diversity Network (ATDN). Utilizing a simple defining metric of at least half of the trees ≥ 10 cm diameter belonging to one species, we found only a few occurrences of monodominance in Amazonia, and the phenomenon was not significantly linked to previously hypothesized life history traits such wood density, seed mass, ectomycorrhizal associations, or Rhizobium nodulation. In our analysis, coppicing (the formation of sprouts at the base of the tree or on roots) was the only trait significantly linked to monodominance. While at specific locales coppicing or ectomycorrhizal associations may confer a considerable advantage to a tree species and lead to its monodominance, very few species have these traits. Mining of the ATDN dataset suggests that monodominance is quite rare in Amazonia, and may be linked primarily to edaphic factors

Biogeographic distributions of neotropical trees reflect their directly measured drought tolerances

High levels of species diversity hamper current understanding of how tropical forests may respond to environmental change. In the tropics, water availability is a leading driver of the diversity and distribution of tree species, suggesting that many tropical taxa may be physiologically incapable of tolerating dry conditions, and that their distributions along moisture gradients can be used to predict their drought tolerance. While this hypothesis has been explored at local and regional scales, large continental-scale tests are lacking. We investigate whether the relationship between drought-induced mortality and distributions holds continentally by relating experimental and observational data of drought-induced mortality across the Neotropics to the large-scale bioclimatic distributions of 115 tree genera. Across the different experiments, genera affiliated to wetter climatic regimes show higher drought-induced mortality than dry-affiliated ones, even after controlling for phylogenetic relationships. This pattern is stronger for adult trees than for saplings or seedlings, suggesting that the environmental filters exerted by drought impact adult tree survival most strongly. Overall, our analysis of experimental, observational, and bioclimatic data across neotropical forests suggests that increasing moisture-stress is indeed likely to drive significant changes in floristic composition

Persistent effects of pre-Columbian plant domestication on Amazonian forest composition

The extent to which pre-Columbian societies altered Amazonian landscapes is hotly debated. We performed a basin-wide analysis of pre-Columbian impacts on Amazonian forests by overlaying known archaeological sites in Amazonia with the distributions and abundances of 85 woody species domesticated by pre-Columbian peoples. Domesticated species are five times more likely to be hyperdominant than non-domesticated species. Across the basin the relative abundance and richness of domesticated species increases in forests on and around archaeological sites. In southwestern and eastern Amazonia distance to archaeological sites strongly influences the relative abundance and richness of domesticated species. Our analyses indicate that modern tree communities in Amazonia are structured to an important extent by a long history of plant domestication by Amazonian peoples

Phylogenetic diversity of Amazonian tree communities

This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Honorio Coronado, E. N., Dexter, K. G., Pennington, R. T., Chave, J., Lewis, S. L., Alexiades, M. N., Alvarez, E., Alves de Oliveira, A., Amaral, I. L., Araujo-Murakami, A., Arets, E. J. M. M., Aymard, G. A., Baraloto, C., Bonal, D., Brienen, R., Cerón, C., Cornejo Valverde, F., Di Fiore, A., Farfan-Rios, W., Feldpausch, T. R., Higuchi, N., Huamantupa-Chuquimaco, I., Laurance, S. G., Laurance, W. F., López-Gonzalez, G., Marimon, B. S., Marimon-Junior, B. H., Monteagudo Mendoza, A., Neill, D., Palacios Cuenca, W., Peñuela Mora, M. C., Pitman, N. C. A., Prieto, A., Quesada, C. A., Ramirez Angulo, H., Rudas, A., Ruschel, A. R., Salinas Revilla, N., Salomão, R. P., Segalin de Andrade, A., Silman, M. R., Spironello, W., ter Steege, H., Terborgh, J., Toledo, M., Valenzuela Gamarra, L., Vieira, I. C. G., Vilanova Torre, E., Vos, V., Phillips, O. L. (2015), Phylogenetic diversity of Amazonian tree communities. Diversity and Distributions, 21: 1295–1307. doi: 10.1111/ddi.12357, which has been published in final form at 10.1111/ddi.12357Aim: To examine variation in the phylogenetic diversity (PD) of tree communities across geographical and environmental gradients in Amazonia. Location: Two hundred and eighty-three c. 1 ha forest inventory plots from across Amazonia. Methods: We evaluated PD as the total phylogenetic branch length across species in each plot (PDss), the mean pairwise phylogenetic distance between species (MPD), the mean nearest taxon distance (MNTD) and their equivalents standardized for species richness (ses.PDss, ses.MPD, ses.MNTD). We compared PD of tree communities growing (1) on substrates of varying geological age; and (2) in environments with varying ecophysiological barriers to growth and survival. Results: PDss is strongly positively correlated with species richness (SR), whereas MNTD has a negative correlation. Communities on geologically young- and intermediate-aged substrates (western and central Amazonia respectively) have the highest SR, and therefore the highest PDss and the lowest MNTD. We find that the youngest and oldest substrates (the latter on the Brazilian and Guiana Shields) have the highest ses.PDss and ses.MNTD. MPD and ses.MPD are strongly correlated with how evenly taxa are distributed among the three principal angiosperm clades and are both highest in western Amazonia. Meanwhile, seasonally dry tropical forest (SDTF) and forests on white sands have low PD, as evaluated by any metric. Main conclusions: High ses.PDss and ses.MNTD reflect greater lineage diversity in communities. We suggest that high ses.PDss and ses.MNTD in western Amazonia results from its favourable, easy-to-colonize environment, whereas high values in the Brazilian and Guianan Shields may be due to accumulation of lineages over a longer period of time. White-sand forests and SDTF are dominated by close relatives from fewer lineages, perhaps reflecting ecophysiological barriers that are difficult to surmount evolutionarily. Because MPD and ses.MPD do not reflect lineage diversity per se, we suggest that PDss, ses.PDss and ses.MNTD may be the most useful diversity metrics for setting large-scale conservation priorities.FINCyT - PhD studentshipSchool of Geography of the University of LeedsRoyal Botanic Garden EdinburghNatural Environment Research Council (NERC)Gordon and Betty Moore FoundationEuropean Union's Seventh Framework ProgrammeERCCNPq/PELDNSF - Fellowshi

Co-limitation towards lower latitudes shapes global forest diversity gradients

Funding Information: The team collaboration and manuscript development are supported by the web-based team science platform: science-i.org, with the project number 202205GFB2. We thank the following initiatives, agencies, teams and individuals for data collection and other technical support: the Global Forest Biodiversity Initiative (GFBI) for establishing the data standards and collaborative framework; United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) Program; University of Alaska Fairbanks; the SODEFOR, Ivory Coast; University Félix Houphouët-Boigny (UFHB, Ivory Coast); the Queensland Herbarium and past Queensland Government Forestry and Natural Resource Management departments and staff for data collection for over seven decades; and the National Forestry Commission of Mexico (CONAFOR). We thank M. Baker (Carbon Tanzania), together with a team of field assistants (Valentine and Lawrence); all persons who made the Third Spanish Forest Inventory possible, especially the main coordinator, J. A. Villanueva (IFN3); the French National Forest Inventory (NFI campaigns (raw data 2005 and following annual surveys, were downloaded by GFBI at https://inventaire-forestier.ign.fr/spip.php?rubrique159 ; site accessed on 1 January 2015)); the Italian Forest Inventory (NFI campaigns raw data 2005 and following surveys were downloaded by GFBI at https://inventarioforestale.org/ ; site accessed on 27 April 2019); Swiss National Forest Inventory, Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL and Federal Office for the Environment FOEN, Switzerland; the Swedish NFI, Department of Forest Resource Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences SLU; the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa (89967 and 109244) and the South African Research Chair Initiative; the Danish National Forestry, Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, UCPH; Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel of Brazil (CAPES, grant number 88881.064976/2014-01); R. Ávila and S. van Tuylen, Instituto Nacional de Bosques (INAB), Guatemala, for facilitating Guatemalan data; the National Focal Center for Forest condition monitoring of Serbia (NFC), Institute of Forestry, Belgrade, Serbia; the Thünen Institute of Forest Ecosystems (Germany) for providing National Forest Inventory data; the FAO and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) for undertaking the SAFE (Safe Access to Fuel and Energy) and CBIT-Forest projects; and the Amazon Forest Inventory Network (RAINFOR), the African Tropical Rainforest Observation Network (AfriTRON) and the ForestPlots.net initiative for their contributions from Amazonian and African forests. The Natural Forest plot data collected between January 2009 and March 2014 by the LUCAS programme for the New Zealand Ministry for the Environment are provided by the New Zealand National Vegetation Survey Databank https://nvs.landcareresearch.co.nz/. We thank the International Boreal Forest Research Association (IBFRA); the Forestry Corporation of New South Wales, Australia; the National Forest Directory of the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development of the Argentine Republic (MAyDS) for the plot data of the Second National Forest Inventory (INBN2); the National Forestry Authority and Ministry of Water and Environment of Uganda for their National Biomass Survey (NBS) dataset; and the Sabah Biodiversity Council and the staff from Sabah Forest Research Centre. All TEAM data are provided by the Tropical Ecology Assessment and Monitoring (TEAM) Network, a collaboration between Conservation International, the Missouri Botanical Garden, the Smithsonian Institution and the Wildlife Conservation Society, and partially funded by these institutions, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and other donors, with thanks to all current and previous TEAM site manager and other collaborators that helped collect data. We thank the people of the Redidoti, Pierrekondre and Cassipora village who were instrumental in assisting with the collection of data and sharing local knowledge of their forest and the dedicated members of the field crew of Kabo 2012 census. We are also thankful to FAPESC, SFB, FAO and IMA/SC for supporting the IFFSC. This research was supported in part through computational resources provided by Information Technology at Purdue, West Lafayette, Indiana.This work is supported in part by the NASA grant number 12000401 ‘Multi-sensor biodiversity framework developed from bioacoustic and space based sensor platforms’ (J. Liang, B.P.); the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture McIntire Stennis projects 1017711 (J. Liang) and 1016676 (M.Z.); the US National Science Foundation Biological Integration Institutes grant NSF‐DBI‐2021898 (P.B.R.); the funding by H2020 VERIFY (contract 776810) and H2020 Resonate (contract 101000574) (G.-J.N.); the TEAM project in Uganda supported by the Moore foundation and Buffett Foundation through Conservation International (CI) and Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS); the Danish Council for Independent Research | Natural Sciences (TREECHANGE, grant 6108-00078B) and VILLUM FONDEN grant number 16549 (J.-C.S.); the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK (NERC) project NE/T011084/1 awarded to J.A.-G. and NE/ S011811/1; ERC Advanced Grant 291585 (‘T-FORCES’) and a Royal Society-Wolfson Research Merit Award (O.L.P.); RAINFOR plots supported by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the UK Natural Environment Research Council, notably NERC Consortium Grants ‘AMAZONICA’ (NE/F005806/1), ‘TROBIT’ (NE/D005590/1) and ‘BIO-RED’ (NE/N012542/1); CIFOR’s Global Comparative Study on REDD+ funded by the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation, the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the European Union, the International Climate Initiative (IKI) of the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety and the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (CRP-FTA) and donors to the CGIAR Fund; AfriTRON network plots funded by the local communities and NERC, ERC, European Union, Royal Society and Leverhume Trust; a grant from the Royal Society and the Natural Environment Research Council, UK (S.L.L.); National Science Foundation CIF21 DIBBs: EI: number 1724728 (A.C.C.); National Natural Science Foundation of China (31800374) and Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation (ZR2019BC083) (H.L.). UK NERC Independent Research Fellowship (grant code: NE/S01537X/1) (T.J.); a Serra-Húnter Fellowship provided by the Government of Catalonia (Spain) (S.d.-M.); the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq, grant 442640/2018-8, CNPq/Prevfogo-Ibama number 33/2018) (C.A.S.); a grant from the Franklinia Foundation (D.A.C.); Russian Science Foundation project number 19-77-300-12 (R.V.); the Takenaka Scholarship Foundation (A.O.A.); the German Research Foundation (DFG), grant number Am 149/16-4 (C.A.); the Romania National Council for Higher Education Funding, CNFIS, project number CNFIS-FDI-2022-0259 (O.B.); Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (RGPIN-2019-05109 and STPGP506284) and the Canadian Foundation for Innovation (36014) (H.Y.H.C.); the project SustES—Adaptation strategies for sustainable ecosystem services and food security under adverse environmental conditions (CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_019/0000797) (E.C.); Consejo de Ciencia y Tecnología del estado de Durango (2019-01-155) (J.J.C.-R.); Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB), New Delhi, Government of India (file number PDF/2015/000447)—‘Assessing the carbon sequestration potential of different forest types in Central India in response to climate change ’ (J.A.D.); Investissement d’avenir grant of the ANR (CEBA: ANR-10-LABEX-0025) (G.D.); National Foundation for Science & Technology Development of Vietnam, 106-NN.06-2013.01 (T.V.D.); Queensland government, Department of Environment and Science (T.J.E.); a Czech Science Foundation Standard grant (19-14620S) (T.M.F.); European Union Seventh Framework Program (FP7/2007–2013) under grant agreement number 265171 (L. Finer, M. Pollastrini, F. Selvi); grants from the Swedish National Forest Inventory, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (J.F.); CNPq productivity grant number 311303/2020-0 (A.L.d.G.); DFG grant HE 2719/11-1,2,3; HE 2719/14-1 (A. Hemp); European Union’s Horizon Europe research project OpenEarthMonitor grant number 101059548, CGIAR Fund INIT-32-MItigation and Transformation Initiative for GHG reductions of Agrifood systems RelaTed Emissions (MITIGATE+) (M.H.); General Directorate of the State Forests, Poland (1/07; OR-2717/3/11; OR.271.3.3.2017) and the National Centre for Research and Development, Poland (BIOSTRATEG1/267755/4/NCBR/2015) (A.M.J.); Czech Science Foundation 18-10781 S (S.J.); Danish of Ministry of Environment, the Danish Environmental Protection Agency, Integrated Forest Monitoring Program—NFI (V.K.J.); State of São Paulo Research Foundation/FAPESP as part of the BIOTA/FAPESP Program Project Functional Gradient-PELD/BIOTA-ECOFOR 2003/12595-7 & 2012/51872-5 (C.A.J.); Danish Council for Independent Research—social sciences—grant DFF 6109–00296 (G.A.K.); Russian Science Foundation project 21-46-07002 for the plot data collected in the Krasnoyarsk region (V.K.); BOLFOR (D.K.K.); Department of Biotechnology, New Delhi, Government of India (grant number BT/PR7928/NDB/52/9/2006, dated 29 September 2006) (M.L.K.); grant from Kenya Coastal Development Project (KCDP), which was funded by World Bank (J.N.K.); Korea Forest Service (2018113A00-1820-BB01, 2013069A00-1819-AA03, and 2020185D10-2022-AA02) and Seoul National University Big Data Institute through the Data Science Research Project 2016 (H.S.K.); the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq, grant 442640/2018-8, CNPq/Prevfogo-Ibama number 33/2018) (C.K.); CSIR, New Delhi, government of India (grant number 38(1318)12/EMR-II, dated: 3 April 2012) (S.K.); Department of Biotechnology, New Delhi, government of India (grant number BT/ PR12899/ NDB/39/506/2015 dated 20 June 2017) (A.K.); Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) #88887.463733/2019-00 (R.V.L.); National Natural Science Foundation of China (31800374) (H.L.); project of CEPF RAS ‘Methodological approaches to assessing the structural organization and functioning of forest ecosystems’ (AAAA-A18-118052590019-7) funded by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Russia (N.V.L.); Leverhulme Trust grant to Andrew Balmford, Simon Lewis and Jon Lovett (A.R.M.); Russian Science Foundation, project 19-77-30015 for European Russia data processing (O.M.); grant from Kenya Coastal Development Project (KCDP), which was funded by World Bank (M.T.E.M.); the National Centre for Research and Development, Poland (BIOSTRATEG1/267755/4/NCBR/2015) (S.M.); the Secretariat for Universities and of the Ministry of Business and Knowledge of the Government of Catalonia and the European Social Fund (A. Morera); Queensland government, Department of Environment and Science (V.J.N.); Pinnacle Group Cameroon PLC (L.N.N.); Queensland government, Department of Environment and Science (M.R.N.); the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (RGPIN-2018-05201) (A.P.); the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project number 20-05-00540 (E.I.P.); European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement number 778322 (H.P.); Science and Engineering Research Board, New Delhi, government of India (grant number YSS/2015/000479, dated 12 January 2016) (P.S.); the Chilean Government research grants Fondecyt number 1191816 and FONDEF number ID19 10421 (C.S.-E.); the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) Priority Program 1374 Biodiversity Exploratories (P.S.); European Space Agency projects IFBN (4000114425/15/NL/FF/gp) and CCI Biomass (4000123662/18/I-NB) (D. Schepaschenko); FunDivEUROPE, European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013) under grant agreement number 265171 (M.S.-L.); APVV 20-0168 from the Slovak Research and Development Agency (V.S.); Manchester Metropolitan University’s Environmental Science Research Centre (G.S.); the project ‘LIFE+ ForBioSensing PL Comprehensive monitoring of stand dynamics in Białowieża Forest supported with remote sensing techniques’ which is co-funded by the EU Life Plus programme (contract number LIFE13 ENV/PL/000048) and the National Fund for Environmental Protection and Water Management in Poland (contract number 485/2014/WN10/OP-NM-LF/D) (K.J.S.); Global Challenges Research Fund (QR allocation, MMU) (M.J.P.S.); Czech Science Foundation project 21-27454S (M.S.); the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project number 20-05-00540 (N. Tchebakova); Botanical Research Fund, Coalbourn Trust, Bentham Moxon Trust, Emily Holmes scholarship (L.A.T.); the programmes of the current scientific research of the Botanical Garden of the Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences (V.A.U.); FCT—Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology—Project UIDB/04033/2020. Inventário Florestal Nacional—ICNF (H. Viana); Grant from Kenya Coastal Development Project (KCDP), which was funded by World Bank (C.W.); grants from the Swedish National Forest Inventory, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (B.W.); ATTO project (grant number MCTI-FINEP 1759/10 and BMBF 01LB1001A, 01LK1602F) (F.W.); ReVaTene/PReSeD-CI 2 is funded by the Education and Research Ministry of Côte d’Ivoire, as part of the Debt Reduction-Development Contracts (C2Ds) managed by IRD (I.C.Z.-B.); the National Research Foundation of South Africa (NRF, grant 89967) (C.H.). The Tropical Plant Exploration Group 70 1 ha plots in Continental Cameroon Mountains are supported by Rufford Small Grant Foundation, UK and 4 ha in Sierra Leone are supported by the Global Challenge Research Fund through Manchester Metropolitan University, UK; the National Geographic Explorer Grant, NGS-53344R-18 (A.C.-S.); University of KwaZulu-Natal Research Office grant (M.J.L.); Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Dirección General de Asuntos de Personal Académico, Grant PAPIIT IN-217620 (J.A.M.). Czech Science Foundation project 21-24186M (R.T., S. Delabye). Czech Science Foundation project 20-05840Y, the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (LTAUSA19137) and the long-term research development project of the Czech Academy of Sciences no. RVO 67985939 (J.A.). The American Society of Primatologists, the Duke University Graduate School, the L.S.B. Leakey Foundation, the National Science Foundation (grant number 0452995) and the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research (grant number 7330) (M.B.). Research grants from Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnologico (CNPq, Brazil) (309764/2019; 311303/2020) (A.C.V., A.L.G.). The Project of Sanya Yazhou Bay Science and Technology City (grant number CKJ-JYRC-2022-83) (H.-F.W.). The Ugandan NBS was supported with funds from the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF), the Austrian Development Agency (ADC) and FAO. FAO’s UN-REDD Program, together with the project on ‘Native Forests and Community’ Loan BIRF number 8493-AR UNDP ARG/15/004 and the National Program for the Protection of Native Forests under UNDP funded Argentina’s INBN2. Publisher Copyright: © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.Peer reviewedPostprin

Geography and ecology shape the phylogenetic composition of Amazonian tree communities.

Aim Amazonia hosts more tree species from numerous evolutionary lineages, both young and ancient, than any other biogeographic region. Previous studies have shown that tree lineages colonized multiple edaphic environments and dispersed widely across Amazonia, leading to a hypothesis, which we test, that lineages should not be strongly associated with either geographic regions or edaphic forest types. Location Amazonia. Taxon Angiosperms (Magnoliids; Monocots; Eudicots). Methods Data for the abundance of 5082 tree species in 1989 plots were combined with a mega-phylogeny. We applied evolutionary ordination to assess how phylogenetic composition varies across Amazonia. We used variation partitioning and Moran's eigenvector maps (MEM) to test and quantify the separate and joint contributions of spatial and environmental variables to explain the phylogenetic composition of plots. We tested the indicator value of lineages for geographic regions and edaphic forest types and mapped associations onto the phylogeny. Results In the terra firme and várzea forest types, the phylogenetic composition varies by geographic region, but the igapó and white-sand forest types retain a unique evolutionary signature regardless of region. Overall, we find that soil chemistry, climate and topography explain 24% of the variation in phylogenetic composition, with 79% of that variation being spatially structured (R2 = 19% overall for combined spatial/environmental effects). The phylogenetic composition also shows substantial spatial patterns not related to the environmental variables we quantified (R2 = 28%). A greater number of lineages were significant indicators of geographic regions than forest types. Main Conclusion Numerous tree lineages, including some ancient ones (>66 Ma), show strong associations with geographic regions and edaphic forest types of Amazonia. This shows that specialization in specific edaphic environments has played a long-standing role in the evolutionary assembly of Amazonian forests. Furthermore, many lineages, even those that have dispersed across Amazonia, dominate within a specific region, likely because of phylogenetically conserved niches for environmental conditions that are prevalent within regions.Na publicação: Joice Ferreira