4.8 Article

Asymmetric biotic interchange across the Bering land bridge between Eurasia and North America

期刊

NATIONAL SCIENCE REVIEW
卷 6, 期 4, 页码 739-745

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nsr/nwz035

关键词

multiple taxa; biogeography; Bering land bridge; Cenozoic

资金

  1. Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) [XDB31000000]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31722049, 31772434]
  3. Key Research Program of Frontier Sciences, CAS [QYZDB-SSW-SMC058]
  4. CAS 'Light of West China' Program [2018XBZG JCTD 001]
  5. Youth Innovation Promotion Association of CAS [2014338]
  6. German Research Foundation [KL2378/2-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The exchange of biotas between Eurasia and North America across the Bering land bridge had a major impact on ecosystems of both continents throughout the Cenozoic. This exchange has received particular attention regarding placental mammals dispersing into the Americas, including humans after the last glacial period, and also as an explanation for the disjunct distribution of related seed plants in eastern Asia and eastern North America. Here, we investigate bi-directional dispersal across the Bering land bridge from estimates of dispersal events based on time-calibrated phylogenies of a broad range of plant, fungus and animal taxa. We reveal a long-lasting phase of asymmetrical biotic interchange, with a peak of dispersal from Asia into North America during the late Oligocene warming (26-24 Ma), when dispersal in the opposite direction was greatly decreased. Influx from North America into Asia was lower than in the opposite direction throughout the Cenozoic, but with peak rates of dispersal at the end of the Eocene (40-34 Ma) and again in the early to middle Miocene (16-14 Ma). The strong association between dispersal patterns and environmental changes suggests that plants, fungi and animals have likely dispersed from stable to perturbed environments of North America and Eurasia throughout the Cenozoic.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据