[Taxacom] Origin of New Caledonian Biogeography

John Grehan jgrehan at sciencebuff.org
Tue Nov 18 06:55:32 CST 2008


Maybe, maybe, maybe. And maybe not. The point is that the disjunct
patterns in NC alternating across the fault also occur in New Guinea and
New Zealand. The opinions expressed are definitely opinions, and if they
are backed up by a comparable regional analysis they might be
interesting. Right now Heads has demonstrated a tectonic correlation -
and that is empirically real whether anyone believes it or not.

John Grehan



> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-
> bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Robert Huber
> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 6:34 AM
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Origin of New Caledonian Biogeography
> 
> Dear Robin,
> 
> I agree that the role of tectonics is overestimated in Head's paper.
In
> contrast, other factors  -such as climate! - which could explain such
> patterns much better are not discussed at all.
> This map for example (
> http://www.cartographie.ird.fr/images/caledonie/climat_11.gif) shows
rain
> fall distribution in New Caledonia. The rain rich area in the
southeastern
> part quite nicely matches the concentration of many litzard
species/clades
> here. And as you already mention soil chemistry might als be very
> important.
> 
> best regards,
> Robert
> 
> 2008/11/18 Robin Leech <releech at telusplanet.net>
> 
> > Dear All,
> >         Concerning the biological disjunction along the West
Caledonian
> >  fault, John Grehan says that  "It may have undergone 150-200 km of
> >  lateral movement and it is suggested that this has caused the
> biological
> >  disjunction by pulling populations apart."
> >        However, given the accretionary nature which he attributes to
> >  New Caledonia's geology, I would suggest that it is probably not
this
> >  "lateral movement" which has caused such biological disjunctions,
but
> >  rather differences in the ability of certain organisms to tolerate
> >  extremely ultramafic soils (often deadly to species not adapted to
> >  them).  The lateral movement itself is probably far too slow
> >  geologically to account for these distributions, while soil
chemistry
> >  differences would probably be a much greater factor.  In other
words,
> it
> >  is more ecological than geographical.   I wonder if Heads (and
Grehan)
> >  took this into account?                             ---------Ken
Kinman
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom mailing list
> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Dr. Robert Huber,
> 
> WDC-MARE / PANGAEA - www.pangaea.de
> Stratigraphy.net - www.stratigraphy.net
> _____________________________________________
> MARUM - Institute for Marine Environmental Sciences (location)
> University Bremen
> Leobener Strasse
> POP 330 440
> 28359 Bremen
> Phone ++49 421 218-65593, Fax ++49 421 218-65505
> e-mail rhuber at wdc-mare.org
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom mailing list
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom




More information about the Taxacom mailing list