update: Species–area curves and the estimation of extinction rates

Abstract

concentrated on coarser-scale species richness patterns (i.e., species richness of zoogeographic regions) as a function of area and productivity (or temperature). They avoided using co-linear productivity and temperature within the same model to prevent potential misinterpretation of modelled effects, but this also precluded accounting for the separate effects that these variables could have on extinction and speciation. The authors used their well-fitting model to make far-reaching predictions on future human-caused extinction rates under different magnitudes of human appropriation of both area and primary productivity (calling it an "evolutionary telescope"). They concluded that there may be more severe forthcoming extinction effects than earlier studies had estimated. These two studies, and their comparison, connect with other important frontiers in bio-geographic research. (1) Rosenzweig et al.'s (2012) "telescope view" into the future ties in with the recent debate on the predictability of extinction rates from area loss (Beck 2011, Storch et al. 2012). (2) Rosenzweig et al. (2012) argue that Jetz and Fine's (2012) integration of time and area to account for species richness inherently departs from the idea that regions attain a steady-state species richness (i.e., an equilibrium of speci-ation and extinction), but rather assumes continuous change of biodiversity with time. (3) Finally, both studies rely on defining regions of unique evolutionary history-one of biogeography's oldest patterns (i.e., Wallace 1876), yet still an active field of research (Kreft and Jetz