Bioclimatic factors affecting the distribution of Quercus robur L. (pedunculate oak) subspecies in Turkey

Yıl 2016, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1, 31 - 39, 14.07.2016

Hatice Çınar Yılmaz , Osman Yalçın Yılmaz Hatice Yılmaz

https://doi.org/10.31195/ejejfs.258623

Cited By: 6

Öz

Understanding the distribution of individual species and the factors affecting their distribution is a key issue in biogeography, ecology and conservation. This study was carried out to determine bioclimatic factors affecting the two pedunculate oak subspecies (Quercus robur L. subsp. robur and Q. robur subsp. pedunculiflora (K.Koch) Menitsky ) of Turkey and their tolerances to these factors.

Mean Temperature of Coldest Quarter (Bio 11), Temperature of Coldest Month (Bio 6), Temperature Annual Range (Bio 7), Temperature Seasonality (Bio), Precipitation Seasonality (Bio 15), Isothermality (Bio 3), Annual Mean Temperature (Bio1) are highly correlated bioclimatic variables that effect the distribution of pedunculate oak subspecies. Multinominal logistic regression result showed that the Bio4 is the only factor explain most of the distribution of subspecies robur and subspecies pedunculiflora.

The results also indicate that subspecies pedunculiflora shows a greater tolerance for extreme variation such as more drought summer and colder winters extreme variations during hot summers whereas subspecies robur is more sensitive to these climate variables

Anahtar Kelimeler

bioclimatic tolerance range, pedunculate oak, subspecies, Turkey

Kaynakça

• Billings, D. (1952). The environmental complex in relation to plant growth and distribution. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 27, 251–265.
• Burnham, K.P., Anderson D.R. (2002). Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information theoretic approach. Springer, Berlin
• Curtu, A.L., Sofletea, N., Toader, A.V., Enescu, M.C. (2011). Leaf morphological and genetic differentiation between Quercus robur L. and its closest relative, the drought tolerant Quercus pedunculiflora K. Koch. Annals of Forest Science, 68, 1163-1172.
• Dormann, C.F., Elith, J., Bacher, S., Buchmann, C., Carl, G., Carre, G., Marquez, J.R.G., Gruber, B., Lafourcade, B., Leitao, P.J., Munkemuller, T., McClean, C., Osborne, P.E., Reineking, B., Schroder, B., Skidmore, A.K., Zurell, D., Lautenbach, S., (2013). Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study Ecography, 36 (1), 27–46. performance.
• Dufour-Dror, J.M., Ertaş, A. (2004). Bioclimatic perspectives in the distribution of Quercus ithaburensis Decne. subspecies in Turkey and in the Levant. J Biogeogr 31: 461-474.
• Govaerts, R., Frodin, D. G. (1998). World checklist and bibliography of Fagales.Royal Botanic Garden, Kew UK, pp. 407.
• Guisan, A., Thuiller, W. (2005). Predicting species distribution: offering more than simple habitat models. Ecology Letters, 8, 993– 1009.
• Hedge, I., Yaltırık F. (1982). Quercus L. In: Davis, P.H. (Ed.) Flora of Turkey and East Aegean Islands. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, Vol. 7, pp. 560-589.
• Hijmans, R.J., Cameron, S.E., Parra, J.L., Albert, D.L. (2005). Very High resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. International Journal of Climatology, 25, 1965-1978. Holt, R.D. consequences of climate change. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 5,311–315.
• Kargioglu, M., Senkul, C., Serteser, A., Konuk, M. (2009). An assessment on bioclimatic requirements of endemic Quercus vulcanica (Boiss. and Heldr) Kotschy communities living in different phytogeographic regions of Turkey. Polish Journal of Ecology, 57, 197-200.
• Kargioglu, M., Serteser, A., Senkul, C., Konuk, M. (2011). Bioclimatic characteristic of oak species Quercus macranthera subsp. syspirensis and Quercus petraea subsp. pinnatiloba in Turkey. Journal of Environmental Biology, 32, 127- 131.
• Kuhn, M., Johnson, K. (2013). Applied Predictive Modeling. Springer, New York, USA, pp. 600.
• Kumar, S., Spaulding, S.A., Stohlgren, T.J., Hermann, K.A., Schmidt, T.S., et al., (2009). Potential habitat distribution for the freshwater diatom Didymosphenia geminata in the continental US. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7 (8), 415–420.
• Melillo, J.M., Callaghan, T.V., Woodward, F.I, Salati, E.,Sinha, S.K. (1990). Effects on ecosystems. In: J.T. Houghton, G.J. Jenkins, J.J. Ephraums (Eds.), Climate Change: the IPCC Scientific Assessment, University Press, Cambridge, pp. 283–310
• Menitsky, Y.L. (2005). Oaks of Asia.Science Publishers, Enfield (NH), USA, pp. 549.
• Nix, H.A., 1986. A biogeogaphic analysis of Australian Elapid snakes. In: Longmore, R. (Ed.), Australian Flora and Fauna Series, 8. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, Australia, pp. 4–15.
• Pearson, R.G., Dawson, T.P. (2003). Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: Are bioclimate envelope models useful? Global Ecology and Biogeography, 12, 361–71
• QGIS Development Team (2015). QGIS Geographic Information System. Open Source Geospa- tial http://www.qgis.osgeo.org. date:10 /11/ 2015). Project. (Visited on database. http://www.worldclim.org 09/11/2015) Available at on (Visited
• Yılmaz, H. (2014). Quercus L. In: Akkemik Ü. Türkiye'nin Doğal-Egzotik Ağaç ve Çalıları I. Orman Genel Müdürlüğü Yayınları, Ankara, pp. 673-702.
• Submitted: 23.06.2016
• Accepted: 12.07.2016