Vascular epiphytes contribute disproportionately to global centres of plant diversity

Amanda Taylor,Patrick Weigelt,Dirk Nikolaus Karger,Christian König,Gerhard Zotz,Lirong Cai,Holger Kreft,Renske E Onstein

doi:10.1111/geb.13411

Abstract

AbstractAimVascular epiphytes are ubiquitous components of wet tropical forests where they contribute substantially to local and regional plant diversity. While some basic epiphyte distribution patterns are relatively well studied, little effort has been made to understand the drivers responsible for constraining their global distribution. This study quantifies the substantial contribution of epiphytes to global gradients and centres of vascular plant diversity and explores whether epiphytes vary from terrestrial plants in relation to contemporary and historical environmental variables.LocationGlobal.Time periodPresent.Major taxa studiedTracheophyta.MethodsUsing a comprehensive epiphyte species list (EpiList 1.0), and distribution information for 27,850 epiphyte species derived from numerous literature sources, we describe the global biogeography of epiphytes. We use generalized linear mixed effects models to assess the relationship between epiphytic and terrestrial plant diversity, and contemporary and historical environmental predictors.ResultsEpiphytes substantially contribute to global centres of vascular plant diversity, accounting for up to 39% of the vascular flora in Neotropical regions. Epiphytes decrease in species numbers with increasing latitude at a rate three times faster than terrestrial plants, a trend that is driven mainly by the distribution of tropical forests and precipitation. Further, large regional differences emerge that are explained by several large endemic angiosperm families (e.g., Neotropical Bromeliaceae) that are absent in other tropical regions.Main conclusionsOur results show that epiphytes are disproportionately diverse in most global centres of plant diversity and play an important role in driving the global latitudinal diversity gradient for plants. The distribution of precipitation and tropical forest area emerge as major drivers of the latitudinal diversity gradient in epiphyte species richness. Finally, our findings demonstrate how epiphyte floras in different biogeographical realms are composed of different families and higher taxa, revealing an important signature of historical biogeography.

Highlights

Epiphytic vascular plants—defined as non-parasitic, vascular plants that germinate and are permanently structurally dependent on other plants—are one of the most prominent life-forms in tropical forest canopies (Zotz, 2013, hereafter referred to as ‘epiphytes’)
Using a comprehensive epiphyte species list (EpiList 1.0), and distribution information for 27,850 epiphyte species derived from numerous literature sources, we describe the global biogeography of epiphytes
Our results reveal that epiphytes, which account for 10% of the world's vascular flora, can comprise up to 39% of the flora of large botanical regions (e.g., Ecuador), and are highly diverse in all global centres of plant diversity, barring the Mediterranean biome

Summary

| INTRODUCTION

Epiphytic vascular plants—defined as non-parasitic, vascular plants that germinate and are permanently structurally dependent on other plants—are one of the most prominent life-forms in tropical forest canopies (Zotz, 2013, hereafter referred to as ‘epiphytes’). In humid tropical forests, epiphytes may locally account for up to 50% of the vascular flora (Kelly et al, 2004), while globally they constitute roughly 10% of the world's higher plant biodiversity (Zotz, Weigelt et al, 2021). We re-evaluate prominent hypotheses that have been proposed to explain epiphyte distribution patterns (Table 1), including both historical, for example, past distributions of forest biomes, glaciation events, past climatic conditions (Dawson, 1986; Gentry & Dodson, 1987; Zotz, 2005), and contemporary drivers, for example, current distribution of forest biomes, current climatic conditions, elevational range (Kreft et al, 2004; Krömer et al, 2005). | 65 and establish whether they differ in their responses to environmental conditions

| METHODS

Findings

| DISCUSSION