New challenges in biogeography

Abstract

Biogeography is a science with a long and distinguished history (Lomolino etal. 2004), which was inspired as a discipline by the voyages of biological discovery in the eighteenth century. The origins of biogeography precede this, however, and lie deep within the related sciences of geography, biology, and geology (Cox and Moore 2005). Traditionally, biogeography has been defined as the study of the distribution of living things over time and space, with the major themes of biogeographical study incorporating aspects of evolutionary biology (e.g. diversity), ecology (e.g. ecophysiology) and physical geography (e.g. continental drift). Biogeographers have often arranged themselves into ecological and historical tribes, with the former focusing on shortterm, local studies of living species and the latter concerned with long-term, evolutionary periods of time at large scales and extinct taxa (Cox and Moore 2005). Until recently, biogeography in Great Britain was recognised as a core sub-discipline within physical geography (Agnew and Spencer 1999) but a review of British geographical research in the late 1990s prompted Gregory etal. (2002) to assert that biogeography had largely been 'captured by other disciplines'. This may be because, as Whittaker and Sax (2003) argue, other, younger natural science disciplines, such as ecology, have shown a greater ability to organise themselves than biogeography. In Britain particularly, biogeography has become fragmented, with traditional research fields dispersed within related subjects such as biology (e.g. evolution), geography (e.g. palaeoecology), ecology (e.g. landscape ecology), environmental sciences (e.g. climate), or geology (e.g. soils). Biogeographical sub-disciplines have consequently proliferated and diversified, such that Brown and Lomolino (1998) suggested that it was impossible for one person to be familiar with, and understand, all aspects of the field. Biogeographers now tend to work in disparate academic departments (e.g. geography, evolutionary biology, environmental sciences) while biogeographical research is concentrated in biology departments and ecological research centres (Gregory etal. 2002). There is therefore a danger that most contemporary biogeographers have become isolated from each other and do not recognise a shared, cognate science built upon a considerable lineage of conceptual achievements. This is ironic, given that there is a greater need than ever to be able to solve complex, large-scale environmental problems that would benefit from biogeographical approaches. There are encouraging signs, however, that biogeographers are rising to the challenge of forging a new profile and applying their research to the environmental problems facing society by developing their traditional inter-disciplinary strengths and taking advantage of a suite of powerful new tools. There is a growing realisation that the environmental problems that characterise the new millennium require interdisciplinary solutions (Holt and Webb 2007) and that scientists need to engage with users and society in general to transfer knowledge and achieve effective environmental policies. The present generation of British biogeographers can act as a focal point to facilitate and deliver solutions, partly due to their experience of working at interdisciplinary boundaries (often out of necessity), and partly because many of the most pressing issues facing the burgeoning human population are inherently biogeographical. There are indications that British biogeography is engaging more than ever with societal concerns and that biogeographers welcome