@article{fdi:010065361,
  title = {{M}ammalian phylogenetic diversity-area relationships at a continental scale},
  author = {{M}azel, {F}. and {R}enaud, {J}. and {G}uilhaumon, {F}ran{\c{c}}ois and {M}ouillot, {D}. and {G}ravel, {D}. and {T}huiller, {W}.},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{I}n analogy to the species-area relationship ({SAR}), one of the few laws in ecology, the phylogenetic diversity-area relationship ({PDAR}) describes the tendency of phylogenetic diversity ({PD}) to increase with area. {A}lthough investigating {PDAR} has the potential to unravel the underlying processes shaping assemblages across spatial scales and to predict {PD} loss through habitat reduction, it has been little investigated so far. {F}ocusing on {PD} has noticeable advantages compared to species richness ({SR}), since {PD} also gives insights on processes such as speciation/extinction, assembly rules and ecosystem functioning. {H}ere we investigate the universality and pervasiveness of the {PDAR} at continental scale using terrestrial mammals as study case. {W}e define the relative robustness of {PD} (compared to {SR}) to habitat loss as the area between the standardized {PDAR} and standardized {SAR} (i.e., standardized by the diversity of the largest spatial window) divided by the area under the standardized {SAR} only. {T}his metric quantifies the relative increase of {PD} robustness compared to {SR} robustness. {W}e show that {PD} robustness is higher than {SR} robustness but that it varies among continents. {W}e further use a null model approach to disentangle the relative effect of phylogenetic tree shape and nonrandom spatial distribution of evolutionary history on the {PDAR}. {W}e find that, for most spatial scales and for all continents except {E}urasia, {PDAR}s are not different from expected by a model using only the observed {SAR} and the shape of the phylogenetic tree at continental scale. {I}nterestingly, we detect a strong phylogenetic structure of the {E}urasian {PDAR} that can be predicted by a model that specifically account for a finer biogeographical delineation of this continent. {I}n conclusion, the relative robustness of {PD} to habitat loss compared to species richness is determined by the phylogenetic tree shape but also depends on the spatial structure of {PD}.},
  keywords = {conservation biogeography ; habitat loss ; null models ; phylogenetic ; diversity ; species-area relationship ; strict nested design},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{E}cology},
  volume = {96},
  numero = {10},
  pages = {2814--2822},
  ISSN = {0012-9658},
  year = {2015},
  DOI = {10.1890/14-1858.1.sm},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010065361},
}