Heat tolerance is more variable than cold tolerance across species of Iberian lizards after controlling for intraspecific variation

The widespread observation that heat tolerance is less variable than cold tolerance (‘cold‐tolerance asymmetry’) leads to the prediction that species exposed to temperatures near their thermal maxima should have reduced evolutionary potential for adapting to climate warming. However, the prediction...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Functional ecology 2020-03, Vol.34 (3), p.631-645
Main Authors: Herrando‐Pérez, Salvador, Monasterio, Camila, Beukema, Wouter, Gomes, Verónica, Ferri‐Yáñez, Francisco, Vieites, David R., Buckley, Lauren B., Araújo, Miguel B., Clusella Trullas, Susana
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Asymmetry
Biological evolution
Climate change
Clines
Cold
Cold tolerance
CTmax
CTmin
ecophysiology
ectotherm
Global warming
Heat tolerance
Lizards
macroecology
Physiological effects
Physiological responses
Physiology
plasticity
Population
Population studies
Populations
resampling
Sampling
Species
Variance
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The widespread observation that heat tolerance is less variable than cold tolerance (‘cold‐tolerance asymmetry’) leads to the prediction that species exposed to temperatures near their thermal maxima should have reduced evolutionary potential for adapting to climate warming. However, the prediction is largely supported by species‐level global studies based on single estimates of both physiological metrics per taxon. We ask whether cold‐tolerance asymmetry holds for Iberian lizards after accounting for intraspecific variation in critical thermal maxima (CTmax) and minima (CTmin). To do so, we quantified CTmax and CTmin for 58 populations of 15 Iberian lizard species (299 individuals). Then, we randomly selected one population from each study species (population sample = 15 CTmax and CTmin values), tested for differences between the variance of both thermal metrics across species, and repeated the test for thousands of population samples as if we had undertaken the same study thousands of times, each time sampling one different population per species (as implemented in global studies). The ratio of variances in CTmax to CTmin across species varied up to 16‐fold depending on the populations chosen. Variance ratios show how much CTmax departs from the cross‐species mean compared to CTmin, with a unitary ratio indicating equal variance of both thermal limits. Sampling one population per species was six times more likely to result in the observation of greater CTmax variance (‘heat‐tolerance asymmetry’) than cold‐tolerance asymmetry. The probability of obtaining the data (given the null hypothesis of equal variance being true) was twice as likely for cases of cold‐tolerance asymmetry than for the opposite scenario. Range‐wide, population‐level studies that quantify heat and cold tolerance of individual species are urgently needed to ascertain the global prevalence of cold‐tolerance asymmetry. While broad latitudinal clines of cold tolerance have been strongly supported, heat tolerance might respond to smaller‐scale climatic and habitat factors hence go unnoticed in global studies. Studies investigating physiological responses to climate change should incorporate the extent to which thermal traits are characteristic of individuals, populations and/or species. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.
ISSN:0269-8463
1365-2435
DOI:10.1111/1365-2435.13507