Hostname: page-component-7b9c58cd5d-hpxsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-15T13:34:46.049Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Diversity patterns of lizard assemblages from a protected habitat mosaic in the Brazilian Cerrado savanna

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2022

Rafael Assis Barros*
Affiliation:
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Conservação da Biodiversidade, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso, Avenida Fernando Corrêa da Costa, n° 2367, 78060-900 Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, Brazil
Tainá Figueras Dorado-Rodrigues
Affiliation:
Laboratório de Herpetologia, Centro de Referência da Biodiversidade Regional, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso, Avenida Fernando Corrêa da Costa, n° 2367, 78060-900 Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, Brazil
Rafael Martins Valadão
Affiliation:
Centro Nacional de Pesquisa e Conservação de Répteis e Anfíbios, Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade, Rua 229, n° 95, 74605-090 Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil
Christine Strüssmann
Affiliation:
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Conservação da Biodiversidade, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso, Avenida Fernando Corrêa da Costa, n° 2367, 78060-900 Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, Brazil
*
Author for correspondence: Rafael Assis Barros, Email: rafaelbarros.ecol@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Differences in habitat complexity and structure can directly influence the composition, diversity, and structure of species assemblages. Measurements of functional and phylogenetic diversity complement the commonly used measurements of taxonomic diversity, elucidating the relationships between species, their traits, and their evolutionary history. In this study, we evaluated how the mosaic of open and forested formations in a federal conservation unit in the western portion of the Brazilian Cerrado savanna influences the taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic structure of lizard assemblages. Lizards were sampled for 15 months using pitfall traps set in open and forested formations. We recorded 292 lizards distributed among 16 species from eight families, with species composition differing among the formations. Richness was greater in the assemblages from open formations, while functional diversity and phylogenetic variability were greater in those of forested formations. Lizard assemblages in open formations were functionally and phylogenetically clustered, probably as a result of environmental filters acting on species, while the assemblages from forested formations were randomly structured. Different environmental and historical mechanisms have apparently shaped the current diversity of lizards in the region. This study shows that Cerrado vegetation mosaics can promote wide variation in different aspects of the taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic structure from the lizard assemblages.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Introduction

The physical structure of the habitat is an important factor that determines the quality and attractiveness of a territory (Jensen et al. Reference Jensen, Gray and Hurst2005). Habitats of higher structural complexity (i.e., greater availability of microhabitats and other resources) can support greater species richness (MacArthur & MacArthur 1961). This global pattern (Tews et al. Reference Tews, Brose, Grimm, Tielbörger, Wichmann, Schwager and Jeltsch2004) can be observed in a variety of organisms (e.g., marine invertebrates, Bracewell et al. Reference Bracewell, Clark and Johnston2018; lizards, birds, and small mammals, Scott et al. Reference Scott, Brown, Mahood, Denton, Silburn and Rakotondraparany2006; fish, Willis et al. Reference Willis, Winemiller and Lopez-Fernandez2005). Functional and phylogenetic diversity can also be strongly influenced by habitat type and structure (Klingbeil & Willig Reference Klingbeil and Willig2016, Sobral & Cianciaruso Reference Sobral and Cianciaruso2016, Stark et al. Reference Stark, Lehman, Crawford, Enquist and Blonder2017).

Habitat structure also influences the composition and diversity of the lizard assemblages (e.g., Garda et al. Reference Garda, Wiederhecker, Gainsbury, Costa, Pyron, Vieira, Werneck and Colli2013, Jellinek et al. Reference Jellinek, Driscoll and Kirkpatrick2004, Palmeirim et al. Reference Palmeirim, Farneda, Vieira and Peres2021, Pianka Reference Pianka1966). These organisms are important components of ecosystems in arid and tropical regions of the planet, where they present high taxonomic and functional diversity (Pianka et al. Reference Pianka, Vitt, Pelegrin, Fitzgerald and Winemiller2017, Ramm et al. Reference Ramm, Cantalapiedra, Wagner, Penner, Rödel and Müller2018, Vidan et al. Reference Vidan, Novosolov, Bauer, Herrera, Chirio, Nogueira, Doan, Lewin, Meirte, Nagy, Pincheira-Donoso, Tallowin, Torres-Carvajal, Uetz, Wagner, Wang, Belmaker and Meiri2019). Lizards act in different ecosystem processes, such as seed dispersal and insect population control, and serve as prey for other species (Cortês-Gomez et al. Reference Cortês-Gomez, Ruiz-Agudelo, Valencia-Aguilar and Ladle2015, Ortega-Olivencia et al. Reference Ortega-Olivencia, Rodríguez-Riaño, Pérez-Bote, López, Mayo, Valtueña and Navarro-Pérez2012, Valencia-Aguilar et al. Reference Valencia-Aguilar, Cortés-Gómez and Ruiz-Agudelo2013). Their evolutionary history is directly related to niche partitioning among the species that make up phylogenetically diverse assemblages distributed throughout the world (Vitt & Pianka Reference Vitt and Pianka2005).

The taxonomic diversity of lizard assemblages has been extensively studied in savannas worldwide (e.g., Lewin et al. Reference Lewin, Feldman, Bauer, Belmaker, Broadley, Chirio, Itescu, Lebreton, Maza, Meirte, Nagy, Novosolov, Roll, Tallowin, Trape, Vidan and Meiri2016, Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Colli and Martins2009, Pianka Reference Pianka1973, Powney et al. Reference Powney, Grenyer, Orme, Owens and Meiri2010, Santos et al. Reference Santos, Oliveira and Tozetti2012, Vitt Reference Vitt1991). More recently, some of these studies have included analyses on the mechanisms that determine the functional diversity (e.g., Pianka et al. Reference Pianka, Vitt, Pelegrin, Fitzgerald and Winemiller2017, Ramm et al. Reference Ramm, Cantalapiedra, Wagner, Penner, Rödel and Müller2018, Skeels et al. Reference Skeels, Esquerré and Cardillo2019, Vidan et al. Reference Vidan, Novosolov, Bauer, Herrera, Chirio, Nogueira, Doan, Lewin, Meirte, Nagy, Pincheira-Donoso, Tallowin, Torres-Carvajal, Uetz, Wagner, Wang, Belmaker and Meiri2019) and phylogenetic diversity (e.g., Escoriza Reference Escoriza2018, Ramm et al. Reference Ramm, Cantalapiedra, Wagner, Penner, Rödel and Müller2018, Šmíd et al. Reference Šmíd, Sindaco, Shobrak, Busais, Tamar, Aghová, Simó-Riudalbas, Tarroso, Geniez, Crochet, Els, Burriel-Carranza, Tejero-Cicuéndez and Carranza2021) of these assemblages, some of them referring to lizards from Neotropical savannas (e.g., Gainsbury & Colli Reference Gainsbury and Colli2019, Fenker et al. Reference Fenker, Domingos, Tedeschi, Rosauer, Werneck, Colli, Ledo, Fonseca, Garda, Tucker, Sites, Breitman, Soares, Giugliano and Moritz2020, Lanna et al. Reference Lanna, Colli, Burbrink and Carstens2021).

The Cerrado corresponds to the largest savanna region in South America, covering about two million square kilometres and encompassing a mosaic of different types of open and forested vegetation (Ratter et al. Reference Ratter, Bridgewater and Ribeiro2003, Ribeiro & Walter Reference Ribeiro, Walter, Sano, Almeida and Ribeiro2008). This stratification favours the occurrence of species with different ecological characteristics (Colli et al. Reference Colli, Bastos, Araujo, Oliveira and Marquis2002, Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Valdujo and França2005, Reference Nogueira, Colli and Martins2009), usually associated with specific types of habitats and microhabitats (Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Colli and Martins2009, Vitt et al. Reference Vitt, Colli, Caldwell, Mesquita, Garda and França2007). The extensive contact of the Cerrado with other ecoregions (see Olson et al. Reference Olson, Dinerstein, Wikramanayake, Burgess, Powell, Underwood, D’Amico, Itoua, Strand, Morrison, Loucks, Allnutt, Ricketts, Kura, Lamoreux, Wettengel, Hedao and Kassem2001) also contributes to the taxonomic and ecological variation of the regional lizard fauna (Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Colli and Martins2009, Vitt Reference Vitt1991), comprising at least 57 species (Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Colli and Martins2009). Regional variation of lizard communities across the Cerrado has been little explored (but see Fenker et al. Reference Fenker, Domingos, Tedeschi, Rosauer, Werneck, Colli, Ledo, Fonseca, Garda, Tucker, Sites, Breitman, Soares, Giugliano and Moritz2020) and the use of different measures of diversity can provide more complete information about their structure.

The simplest and most frequently used descriptors to characterise biological communities are taxonomic (e.g., richness, composition, and species diversity; Magurran Reference Magurran2004, Morris et al. Reference Morris, Caruso, Buscot, Fischer, Hancock, Maier, Meiners, Müller, Obermaier, Prati, Socher, Sonnemann, Wäschke, Wubet, Wurst and Rillig2014), with species richness be the most practical and most objective measure. The inclusion of measurements of functional and phylogenetic diversity enables a complementary interpretation of the relationships between communities and the functioning of ecosystems (see Sobral & Cianciaruso Reference Sobral and Cianciaruso2016). Based on such measurements, one can evaluate how species affect specific ecosystem functions and how they respond to environmental variations (Cadotte et al. Reference Cadotte, Dinnage and Tilman2012, Hooper et al. Reference Hooper, Solan, Symstad, Gessner, Buchmann, Degrange, Grime, Hulot, Mermillod-Blondin, Roy, Spehn, Van Peer, Loreau, Naeem and Inchausti2002) and to habitat structure (e.g., Batalha et al. Reference Batalha, Cianciaruso and Motta-Junior2010, Berriozabal-Islas et al. Reference Berriozabal-Islas, Badillo-Saldaña, Ramírez-Bautista and Moreno2017, Sitters et al. Reference Sitters, York, Swan, Christie and Di Stefano2016).

In this study, we propose to analyse how structurally distinct environments influence different aspects of the taxonomic (species richness and composition), functional (diversity), and phylogenetic (richness and variability) structures of lizard assemblages at a site in the western portion of the Brazilian Cerrado, in contact with neighbouring ecoregions. Our general hypothesis is that these measurements are strongly influenced by structural differences between open and forested formations. We expect a distinct species composition in open and forested formations, mainly due to habitat specialisation (Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Colli and Martins2009, Vitt et al. Reference Vitt, Colli, Caldwell, Mesquita, Garda and França2007). Because open formations are predominant throughout Cerrado (Klink et al. Reference Klink, Sato, Cordeiro and Ramos2020, Ratter et al. Reference Ratter, Ribeiro and Bridgewater1997) and present greater climatic stability over evolutionary time (Werneck et al. Reference Werneck, Nogueira, Colli, Sites and Costa2012) – which can favour the diversification of higher number of lizard species (Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Colli and Martins2009, Reference Nogueira, Ribeiro, Costa and Colli2011) – we expect to find greater phylogenetic and species richness in these habitats. In contrast, we expect greater functional diversity in the assemblages from forested formations. The higher heterogeneity in such habitats (Ferreira et al. Reference Ferreira, Machado, Silva-Neto, Júnior, Medeiros, Gonzaga, Solórzano, Venturoli and Fagg2017, Pinheiro & Durigan Reference Pinheiro and Durigan2012) can enhance ecological niche partitioning between species (Bazzaz Reference Bazzaz1975), resulting in increased functional diversity among the lizards (Palmeirim et al. Reference Palmeirim, Farneda, Vieira and Peres2021, Peña-Joya et al. Reference Peña-Joya, Cupul-Magaña, Rodríguez-Zaragoza, Moreno and Téllez-López2020).

We also expect to find greater phylogenetic variability in forested formations, mainly due to the higher faunal interchange resulting from current and/or past connections of the Cerrado with surrounding forested phytogeographic units (namely, the Amazonia, the Atlantic Forest, and Seasonally Dry Tropical Forest; Antonelli et al. Reference Antonelli, Zizka, Carvalho, Scharn, Bacon, Silvestro and Condamine2018). Finally, we expect that lizard assemblages from open formations will be functionally and phylogenetically clustered, mainly due to the action of environmental filtering mechanisms on species (e.g. high temperatures, natural fires; Furley Reference Furley1999, Ratter et al. Reference Ratter, Ribeiro and Bridgewater1997).

Material and Methods

Study area

The study was carried out at the Serra das Araras Ecological Station (SAES), a federal conservation unit covering 28,700 hectares located in the southwest of the Brazilian state of Mato Grosso, in portions of the municipalities of Cáceres and Porto Estrela (15°33 – 57°03 N; 15°39 – 57°19 E; Figure 1). The station is situated in an area of transition between the western portions of the Cerrado and the southern Amazon rainforest, and local vegetation comprises a mosaic of vegetation types (Gonçalves & Gregorin Reference Gonçalves and Gregorin2004, Valadão Reference Valadão2012; see also Marques et al. Reference Marques, Marimon-Junior, Marimon, Matricardi, Mews and Colli2020).

Figure 1. Location of the study site at Serra das Araras Ecological Station (SAES), state of Mato Grosso, Brazil.

The region’s tropical climate is markedly seasonal, of the Aw type according to the Köppen classification (Álvares et al. Reference Álvares, Stape, Sentelhas, Gonçalves and Sparovek2013), with well-defined dry winter (from May to October) and rainy summer (November to April) (Ross Reference Ross1991). The average annual rainfall is 1265 mm and the minimum and maximum temperatures are 18ºC and 33ºC, respectively (Dallacort et al. Reference Dallacort, Neves and Nunes2015).

Lizard specimens were collected in five vegetation types – defined and characterised according to Ribeiro & Walter (Reference Ribeiro, Walter, Sano, Almeida and Ribeiro2008) – two of which are considered here as open formations (cerrado sensu stricto and cerrado parkland) and three considered forested formations (riparian forest, semi-deciduous dry forest, and cerrado woodland, known in Brazil as “cerradão”).

Among open formations, cerrado sensu stricto is a savanna physiognomy, characterised by the presence of small tortuous trees with irregular twisted branches (Ribeiro & Walter Reference Ribeiro, Walter, Sano, Almeida and Ribeiro2008). Termite mounds and piles of debris serve as shelters and spawning sites for lizards (Colli et al. Reference Colli, Bastos, Araujo, Oliveira and Marquis2002, Moreira et al. Reference Moreira, Lúcio, Silva and Jorge2009, Vitt et al. Reference Vitt, Colli, Caldwell, Mesquita, Garda and França2007). Cerrado parkland is characterised by the presence of sparse low trees, grouped on small land elevations, with 5% to 20% tree cover (Ribeiro & Walter Reference Ribeiro, Walter, Sano, Almeida and Ribeiro2008).

Among forested formations, riparian forest is composed of dense vegetation (with trees varying from 20 to 25 m in height), bordered by cerrado woodland or by semi-deciduous dry forest. The latter has an arboreal stratum varying between 15 and 30 m in height, which is fairly dense (approximately 90%) in the rainy season. During the dry season, with the fall of leaves of deciduous plant species, the tree cover drops to 50%. Cerrado woodland is a type of forested formation characterised by shrubby/herbaceous stratum with sparse grasses and a patchwork of plant species from the cerrado sensu stricto, semi-deciduous dry forest, and riparian forest. The trees vary from 8 to 15 m in height, providing conditions for luminosity.

Data collection

The data were collected between April 2009 and April 2010, and also in June and September 2010 at 10 sample points spaced at least 200 m apart and distributed among the five vegetation types (two sampling points in each vegetation type, totaling four sampling points in open formations and six in forested formations). At each sampling point, we installed sets of pitfall traps (Cechin & Martins Reference Cechin and Martins2000), each consisting of ten 60-liter plastic containers (buckets) buried and arranged in a straight line seven meters apart. The upper openings of the containers were interconnected by a drift fence made of plastic mosquito netting, partially buried (ca. 10 cm in the ground), the remaining part forming a barrier 0.5 m high. The containers were left open and checked daily, in the morning, for 4–9 consecutive days each month, making a total of 105 non-consecutive sampling days. When not in use, the containers remained covered. The total sampling effort was 7320 buckets day-1.

Functional traits

We used 14 functional traits to characterise the lizard species (Table 1; Appendix A), including continuous and categorical variables (Petchey & Gaston 2006). Some of the categories of traits in which these variables are included were previously used in studies on the functional diversity of lizards, such as snout-vent length (SVL), tail length (TL), body mass, habit, reproductive strategy, and type of foraging (Lanna et al. Reference Lanna, Colli, Burbrink and Carstens2021, Leavitt & Schalk Reference Leavitt and Schalk2018, Pelegrin et al. Reference Pelegrin, Winemiller, Vitt, Fitzgerald and Pianka2021, Pianka et al. Reference Pianka, Vitt, Pelegrin, Fitzgerald and Winemiller2017).

Table 1. Functional traits used in the quantification of functional diversity in lizard assemblages recorded in open and forested formations at a location in the Brazilian Cerrado.

Morphometric traits were measured only in adult individuals, using a digital caliper (0.5 mm precision). Body mass was measured to the nearest 0.1 g using spring scales. In the analyses, we used the average value of each morphometric trait.

As for the type of foraging, species that hunt visually and that capture moving prey were classified as sit-and-wait foragers (ambush predation). Species that actively hunt their prey or are able to distinguish them based on chemical senses were classified as active foragers (Vitt et al. Reference Vitt, Magnusson, Ávila-Pires and Lima2008). Those that can make use of both types of foraging were classified as mixed foraging species. Regarding microhabitat use, we classified the species as arboreal, cryptozoic (species found under leaf litter and upper soil layers; Greer & Shea 2004, Ibargüengoytía et al. 2004), terrestrial, or semiarboreal.

Because they are ectotherms, lizards are directly affected by thermal gradients (Pianka et al. Reference Pianka, Vitt, Pelegrin, Fitzgerald and Winemiller2017, Smith & Ballinger Reference Smith and Ballinger2001). Thus, the thermoregulatory behaviour of the species was also characterised, as follows: thermoregulators (or heliothermic – species that actively maintain body temperature within a restricted range of temperatures by basking in the sun, or by contact with warm surfaces; Pough & Gans Reference Pough, Gans, Gans and Pough1982) and thermoconformers (or non-heliothermic – species that do not actively thermoregulate, so their body temperature fluctuates according to the environmental temperature; Huey & Slatkin Reference Huey and Slatkin1976, Huey Reference Huey, Gans and Pough1982). We categorised thermoregulatory behaviour of each species based on our own field observations.

Data analysis

Species composition and richness were used to assess the taxonomic diversity of lizard assemblages. The Mantel test (with 1000 randomisations), relating the distance between the points to differences in species composition at each point, was used to determine the existence of spatial autocorrelations between sampling points. In addition, the significance of the results was tested considering a p-value of < 0.05. The geographical distance between sampling points did not affect the composition of lizard species (R-Mantel = 0.044; p = 0.335).

The variation of species composition between open and forested formations was analysed based on a permutational multivariate analysis of variance (PERMANOVA) with 1000 randomisations. This analysis describes space partitioning according to a measure of dissimilarity, with significance values obtained (p-values) by the permutation technique (Anderson Reference Anderson2017). We used Principal Coordinate Analysis (PCoA) to visualise the dissimilarity in species composition. This analysis allows to position objects in a space with reduced dimensionality, while preserving their distance relationships (Legendre & Legendre Reference Legendre, Legendre, Legendre and Legendre2012).

Functional diversity was assessed using a matrix with functional traits, which was converted into a dissimilarity matrix using Gower’s distance measure (Pavoine et al. Reference Pavoine, Vallet, Dufour, Gachet and Daniel2009). The functional dendrogram was produced using the UPGMA (unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean) clustering method. The values of functional diversity (FD) – the sum of the branches of the functional dendrogram (Petchey & Gaston Reference Petchey and Gaston2002) – were calculated using the “pd” function of the FD package (Laliberté & Legendre Reference Laliberté and Legendre2010). The FD index is generally influenced by species richness (Mouchet et al. Reference Mouchet, Villéger, Mason and Mouillot2010). To eliminate this influence, we used a null model (Gotelli Reference Gotelli2000). The null model maintains the species richness in each assemblage, but randomises the functional traits of these species (Schleuter et al. Reference Schleuter, Daufresne, Massol and Argillier2010, Swenson Reference Swenson2014).

Using the results of the null model, we calculated the standardised effect size (SES) of FD, using the SES.FD formula = (Meanobs- Meannull)/sdnull, where Meanobs is the observed value of FD, Meannull is the average generated after 999 randomisations over the null model, and sdnull is the standard deviation of 999 randomisations. The SES.FD formula enables one to compare the FD of communities, eliminating the bias associated with differences in species richness (Mouillot et al. Reference Mouillot, Albouy, Guilhaumon, Lasram, Coll, Devictor, Meynard, Pauly, Tomasini, Troussellier, Velez, Watson, Douzery and Mouquet2011, Swenson Reference Swenson2014). Positive values of SES.FD indicate functional overdispersion, while negative values indicate functional clustering (Sobral & Cianciaruso Reference Sobral and Cianciaruso2016).

The phylogenetic diversity of lizard assemblages at the Serra das Araras Ecological Station was analysed using a phylogenetic tree containing all the species sampled, extracted from Tonini et al. (Reference Tonini, Beard, Ferreira, Jetz and Pyron2016). The species Cercosaura parkeri (Ruibal, 1952) and Stenocercus sinesaccus Torres-Carvajal 2005 are not included in the Squamata phylogeny presented by these authors and were therefore replaced by Cercosaura schreibersii Wiegmann 1834 and Stenocercus caducus (Cope, 1862). Given that evolutionary changes generally occur in deep nodes (Mesquita et al. Reference Mesquita, Colli, Pantoja, Shepard, Vieira and Vitt2015), we assume that this substitution should not substantially affect the results. Differences in the phylogenetic diversity of assemblages were then calculated based on two indices: phylogenetic species variability (PSV) – which quantifies the variance in phylogenetic relationships between species in a community, and phylogenetic species richness (PSR) – a measure of species richness multiplied by PSV, to penalise strongly related species within the community (Helmus et al. Reference Helmus, Bland, Williams and Ives2007). Subsequently, differences in species richness, standardised functional diversity (SES.FD), PSR, and PSV between open and forested formations were analysed using Student’s t test for each of the measurements, after making sure the data met the normality requirements.

To analyse the functional structure and the presence of non-random patterns in the assemblages, we calculated three indices: functional diversity (FD) (Petchey & Gaston Reference Petchey and Gaston2002, 2006), mean pairwise distance (MPD), and mean nearest taxon distance (MNTD) (Webb Reference Webb2000, Webb et al. Reference Webb, Ackerly, Mcpeek and Donoghue2002). To evaluate the phylogenetic structure of the assemblages, we calculated three indices: phylogenetic diversity – PD (Faith Reference Faith1992), MPD, and MNTD. These latter ones are calculated using distance measures (Webb Reference Webb2000, Webb et al. Reference Webb, Ackerly, Mcpeek and Donoghue2002), allowing to quantify both the ecological and evolutionary distance between species (Pavoine & Bonsall Reference Pavoine and Bonsall2011). We analysed the significance of our results based on comparisons with a null distribution of the values generated by randomisation of the species in the traits matrix and in the phylogeny (10,000 times). For all indices, positive values and high quantiles (P > 0.95) indicate functional or phylogenetic overdispersion in assemblages, while negative values and low quantiles (P < 0.05) indicate functional or phylogenetic clustering. Communities that do not exhibit functional or phylogenetic structure possess random structure (Kraft et al. Reference Kraft, Cornwell, Webb and Ackerly2007).

The functional and phylogenetic parameters were calculated using the packages ape (Paradis et al. Reference Paradis, Claude and Strimmer2004), FD (Laliberté & Legendre Reference Laliberté and Legendre2010), picante (Kembel et al. Reference Kembel, Cowan, Helmus, Cornwell, Morlon, Ackerly, Blomberg and Webb2010), and SYNCSA (Debastiani & Pilar Reference Debastiani and Pillar2012). The other analyses were performed using the vegan package (Oksanen et al. Reference Oksanen, Blanchet, Friendly, Kindt, Legendre, Mcglinn, Minchin, O’hara, Simpson, Solymos, Henry, Szoecs and Wagner2018). All statistical analyses were performed in the R 3.6.0 programming environment (R Development Core Team 2019).

Results

A total of 292 lizards from 16 species and eight families were recorded (Table 2). The species accumulation curve stabilised after 18 days of sampling (Appendix B), with estimated richness (Jack 1– 16.99 ± 0.99) being similar to observed richness (n = 16), indicating that the effort sampling was satisfactory.

Table 2. Lizard species composition was sampled using pitfall traps with drift fences in open (CS – cerrado sensu stricto; CP – cerrado parkland) and forested formations (CW – cerrado woodland; DF – semi-deciduous dry forest; RF – riparian forest) in a location in the Brazilian Cerrado.

The species composition differed between open and forested formations (PERMANOVA: F = 28.595, p = 0.005). The first two axes of the PCoA explained 87.24% of total variability in species composition among habitats (Figure 2). The species richness was greater in the lizard assemblages from open formations (t = 4.338, df = 8, P = 0.002; Figure 3a), while the functional diversity was greater among lizards of forested formations (t = -4.652, df = 8, p = 0.001; Figure 3b).

Figure 2. Principal Coordinate Analysis (PCoA) graph of the composition of lizards in open (white dots) and forested (black dots) formations at a location in the Brazilian Cerrado.

Figure 3. Parameters of lizard diversity recorded in open and forested formations at a location in the Brazilian Cerrado: (a) species richness; (b) functional diversity; (c) phylogenetic variability; and (d) phylogenetic richness. The dark strip in the middle of each box plot represents the median; regions below and above it represent the first and third quartiles, and the bars below and above represent the minimum and maximum values, respectively.

The phylogenetic variability was greater among lizards of forested formations (t = -5.298, df = 8, p < 0.001; Figure 3c). However, the phylogenetic richness did not differ between assemblages (t = 1.698, df = 8, P = 0.127; Figure 3d). The lizard assemblages were functional and phylogenetically clustered in open formations (Table 3), but were randomly structured in the forested formations (Table 3).

Table 3. Values summarising the functional and phylogenetic structures of the lizard assemblages of the Serra das Araras Ecological Station, Mato Grosso, Brazil. Values of Z and P are based on 10,000 randomizations of the taxa in the functional dendrogram or phylogenies. Values in bold type indicate the presence of a significant functional or phylogenetic effect. Legends: Species Richness (SR), Functional Diversity (FD), Phylogenetic Diversity (PD), Mean Pairwise Distance (MPD), Mean Nearest Taxon Distance (MNTD).

Discussion

Our findings indicate distinct taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic patterns (except for phylogenetic richness) in the lizard assemblages from open and forested formations. Assemblages from open formations presented greater species richness, while assemblages from forested formations presented greater functional diversity and phylogenetic variability. Additionally, lizard assemblages from open formations were functionally and phylogenetically clustered. In other lizard assemblages studied around the world, the differences in patterns of taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity were attributed, alternatively, to variations in habitat structure (Berriozabal-Islas et al. Reference Berriozabal-Islas, Badillo-Saldaña, Ramírez-Bautista and Moreno2017, Gainsbury & Colli Reference Gainsbury and Colli2019, Peña-Joya et al. Reference Peña-Joya, Cupul-Magaña, Rodríguez-Zaragoza, Moreno and Téllez-López2020), influence of environmental factors (Palmeirim et al. Reference Palmeirim, Farneda, Vieira and Peres2021, Pelegrin et al. Reference Pelegrin, Winemiller, Vitt, Fitzgerald and Pianka2021, Ramm et al. Reference Ramm, Cantalapiedra, Wagner, Penner, Rödel and Müller2018), and also historical and biogeographical processes (Escoriza Reference Escoriza2018, Fenker et al. Reference Fenker, Domingos, Tedeschi, Rosauer, Werneck, Colli, Ledo, Fonseca, Garda, Tucker, Sites, Breitman, Soares, Giugliano and Moritz2020).

The lizard assemblages from open and forested formations also differed in species composition. Many species of Cerrado lizards are associated with specific types of habitats and microhabitats (Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Colli and Martins2009, Vitt et al. Reference Vitt, Colli, Caldwell, Mesquita, Garda and França2007), which leads to less overlap between the set of species of each of these environments. For example, Manciola guaporicola and Polychrus acutirostris were only found in the open formations (cerrado parkland and cerrado sensu stricto, respectively), while Copeoglossum nigropunctatum and Hoplocercus spinosus were restricted to the forested formations. Variations in species composition reflect the significant structural dissimilarity between these environments, which can therefore act as a dispersal barrier to some species (Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Colli and Martins2009, Reference Nogueira, Colli, Costa, Machado, Diniz, Marinho-Filho, Machado and Cavalcanti2010).

The greater species richness found in the lizard assemblages from open formations corroborates previous studies on the same organisms in the Cerrado (Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Valdujo and França2005, Reference Nogueira, Colli and Martins2009). In this ecoregion, open formations occupy a much larger area than forested ones (Klink et al. Reference Klink, Sato, Cordeiro and Ramos2020, Ratter et al. Reference Ratter, Ribeiro and Bridgewater1997) and present greater climatic stability over evolutionary time (Werneck et al. Reference Werneck, Nogueira, Colli, Sites and Costa2012). These same factors probably contributed to the presence of many endemic species among the lizard fauna of the Cerrado’s open formations (Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Ribeiro, Costa and Colli2011). Large-scale studies in deserts and savannas worldwide have also revealed high species richness (Lewin et al. Reference Lewin, Feldman, Bauer, Belmaker, Broadley, Chirio, Itescu, Lebreton, Maza, Meirte, Nagy, Novosolov, Roll, Tallowin, Trape, Vidan and Meiri2016, Powney et al. Reference Powney, Grenyer, Orme, Owens and Meiri2010, Ramm et al. Reference Ramm, Cantalapiedra, Wagner, Penner, Rödel and Müller2018, Roll et al. Reference Roll, Feldman, Novosolov, Allison, Bauer, Bernard, Böhm, Castro-Herrera, Chirio, Collen, Colli, Dabool, Das, Doan, Grismer, Hoogmoed, Itescu, Kraus, Lebreton, Lewin, Martins, Maza, Meirte, Nagy, Nogueira, Pauwels, Pincheira-Donoso, Powney, Sindaco, Tallowin, Torres-Carvajal, Trape, Vidan, Uetz, Wagner, Wang, Orme, Grenyer and Meiri2017). The observed pattern for lizard species richness in these studies and in the present one might be related to both environmental (Powney et al. Reference Powney, Grenyer, Orme, Owens and Meiri2010, Šmíd et al. Reference Šmíd, Sindaco, Shobrak, Busais, Tamar, Aghová, Simó-Riudalbas, Tarroso, Geniez, Crochet, Els, Burriel-Carranza, Tejero-Cicuéndez and Carranza2021, Tejero-Cicuéndez et al. Reference Tejero-Cicuéndez, Tarroso, Carranza and Rabosky2022), spatial, historical, and biogeographical processes (Lewin et al. Reference Lewin, Feldman, Bauer, Belmaker, Broadley, Chirio, Itescu, Lebreton, Maza, Meirte, Nagy, Novosolov, Roll, Tallowin, Trape, Vidan and Meiri2016, Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Ribeiro, Costa and Colli2011, Ramm et al. Reference Ramm, Cantalapiedra, Wagner, Penner, Rödel and Müller2018).

The greater functional diversity in the lizard assemblages from forested formations probably reflects the greater vegetation heterogeneity found in these habitats, in comparison with open formations (Ferreira et al. Reference Ferreira, Machado, Silva-Neto, Júnior, Medeiros, Gonzaga, Solórzano, Venturoli and Fagg2017, Pinheiro & Durigan Reference Pinheiro and Durigan2012). Heterogeneous habitats present a wide diversity of micro-habitats, and therefore allow diverse opportunities for niche partitioning (Bazzaz Reference Bazzaz1975, Londe et al. Reference Londe, Elmore, Davis, Fuhlendorf, Luttbeg and Hovick2020, MacArthur & MacArthur 1961; Šmíd et al. Reference Šmíd, Sindaco, Shobrak, Busais, Tamar, Aghová, Simó-Riudalbas, Tarroso, Geniez, Crochet, Els, Burriel-Carranza, Tejero-Cicuéndez and Carranza2021) and for diversification of species traits (Bergholz et al. Reference Bergholz, May, Giladi, Ristow, Ziv and Jeltsch2017, Chergui et al. Reference Chergui, Pleguezuelos, Fahd and Santos2020, Cursach et al. Reference Cursach, Rita, Gómez-Martínez, Cardona, Capó and Lázaro2020). A global study on the distribution of functional groups of lizards (Vidan et al. Reference Vidan, Novosolov, Bauer, Herrera, Chirio, Nogueira, Doan, Lewin, Meirte, Nagy, Pincheira-Donoso, Tallowin, Torres-Carvajal, Uetz, Wagner, Wang, Belmaker and Meiri2019), for example, demonstrated a high functional diversity in the Amazonia (a structurally heterogeneous region). Similarly, lizard functional diversity was found to be greater in the tropical semi-deciduous forest areas in western Mexico, when compared to more homogeneous habitats in the same region (Peña-Joya et al. Reference Peña-Joya, Cupul-Magaña, Rodríguez-Zaragoza, Moreno and Téllez-López2020).

The higher phylogenetic variability in the lizard assemblages from forested formations indicates that despite the lower species richness, the variability of lineages is greater than in assemblages from open formations. For different biological groups (e.g., plants, arthropods, and vertebrates), fossil records and analyses of species diversification rates have concurrently shown that tropical forests and their associated biological lineages are older than those found in the Cerrado savannas (Antonelli et al. Reference Antonelli, Zizka, Carvalho, Scharn, Bacon, Silvestro and Condamine2018, Azevedo et al. Reference Azevedo, Collevatti, Jaramillo, Strömberg, Guedes, Matos-Maraví, Bacon, Carillo, Faurby, Antonelli, Rull and Carnaval2020). Evidence for that also includes data for lizards (Lanna et al. Reference Lanna, Colli, Burbrink and Carstens2021, Sheu et al. Reference Sheu, Ribeiro-junior, Miguel, Guarino and Werneck2020). The Amazon region has a lizard fauna with one of the greatest values of phylogenetic diversity in the world (Gumbs et al. Reference Gumbs, Gray, Böhm, Hoffmann, Grenyer, Jetz, Meiri, Roll, Owen and Rosindell2020). The connection and faunal exchange between the Amazonia and Cerrado forested formations (Antonelli et al. Reference Antonelli, Zizka, Carvalho, Scharn, Bacon, Silvestro and Condamine2018, Ledo et al. Reference Ledo, Domingos, Giugliano, Sites, Werneck and Colli2020) probably also contributes to the greater phylogenetic variability found among lizards of these latter.

In spite of the marked differences in the species richness reported herein, lizard assemblages from open and forested formations presented similar values of phylogenetic richness. Previously, the equilibrium of phylogenetic diversity values between assemblages with lower and higher species richness was observed among Squamates from xeric habitats in the Arabian (Šmíd et al. Reference Šmíd, Sindaco, Shobrak, Busais, Tamar, Aghová, Simó-Riudalbas, Tarroso, Geniez, Crochet, Els, Burriel-Carranza, Tejero-Cicuéndez and Carranza2021). More recently, it was also observed among lizard assemblages from open and forested habitats studied in another region of the Brazilian savanna (Barros et al. Reference Barros, Dorado-Rodrigue and Strüssmann2022, in press). Together with our results, the above-mentioned studies reinforce that even spatially more restricted or fragmented habitats – such as the forested formations along the Cerrado – can be equally important to maintaining lizard evolutionary history in this primarily open ecoregion.

Both the functional and phylogenetic clustering found among lizards from open formations probably result from environmental filtering mechanisms acting on local species (Emerson & Gillespie Reference Emerson and Gillespie2008, Webb et al. Reference Webb, Ackerly, Mcpeek and Donoghue2002). High temperatures, low moisture, and sporadic wildfires, among other factors, are considered to be responsible for limiting the occupation of savanna landscapes by those lizard species less tolerant to environmental variations (Escoriza Reference Escoriza2018, Gainsbury & Colli Reference Gainsbury and Colli2019, Leavitt & Schalk Reference Leavitt and Schalk2018, Ramm et al. Reference Ramm, Cantalapiedra, Wagner, Penner, Rödel and Müller2018). The action of such environmental filtering mechanisms leads to a higher redundancy in species traits as observed here and in other lizard assemblages from xeric regions (Melville et al. Reference Melville, Harmon and Losos2006, Skeels et al. Reference Skeels, Esquerré and Cardillo2019), which can confer greater resistance and resilience against disturbances to these assemblages (Carmona et al. Reference Carmona, Tamme, Pärtel, De Bello, Brosse, Capdevila, González, González-Suárez, Salguero-Gómez, Vásquez-Valderrama and Toussaint2021, Maure et al. Reference Maure, Rodrigues, Alcântara, Adorno, Santos, Abreu, Tanaka, Gonçalves and Hasui2018).

By isolating particular lineages in the open formations (Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Ribeiro, Costa and Colli2011), historical and biogeographical processes can also have contributed to the local functional and phylogenetic clustering, as observed among squamate reptiles from savanna enclaves within the Amazonia (Gainsbury & Colli Reference Gainsbury and Colli2003, Mesquita et al. Reference Mesquita, Colli, França and Vitt2006, Mesquita & Vitt 2007). Among the species we recorded in the open formations, 77% belong to the Gymnophthalmidae, Scincidae, and Teiidae families that make up the Autarchoglossa clade. Autarchoglossa lizards have been more successful in occupying open environments around the world (Vitt et al. Reference Vitt, Pianka, Cooper and Schwenk2003). In the Cerrado, they also dominate open formations, while species from Iguania and Gekkota clades are more diverse in forested formations (Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Colli and Martins2009).

On a finer scale, our findings reveal that although open formations present greater species richness, the assemblages from forested formations present greater functional diversity and phylogenetic variability, a pattern that can be tested further and on a wider scale. The entire Cerrado has been under strong anthropic pressure, with massive habitat loss (Klink & Machado Reference Klink and Machado2005, Klink & Moreira Reference Klink, Moreira, Oliveira and Marquis2002, Strassburg et al. Reference Strassburg, Brooks, Feltran-Barbieri, Iribarrem, Crouzeilles, Loyola, Latawiec, Oliveira-Filho, Scaramuzza, Scarano, Soares-Filho and Balmford2017, Velazco et al. Reference Velazco, Villalobos, Galvão and De Marco-Júnior2019). Besides, some of the areas subject to higher deforestation rates along the ecoregion (De Mello et al. Reference De Mello, Machado and Nogueira2015) harbour higher levels of Squamate endemism, particularly in the south and southwestern Cerrado (Azevedo et al. Reference Azevedo, Valdujo and Nogueira2016, Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Ribeiro, Costa and Colli2011). Changes in the “Brazilian Forest Code” that reduce the extension of “Permanent Preservation Areas” (those aiming to protect areas environmentally significant to the maintenance of water resources, such as the riparian forests) – also put at risk the maintenance of several lizard species from these Cerrado habitats (Ledo & Colli Reference Ledo and Colli2016). All these factors can lead to the local extinction of species with unique functional traits (e.g., Batalha et al. Reference Batalha, Cianciaruso and Motta-Junior2010, Carmona et al. Reference Carmona, Tamme, Pärtel, De Bello, Brosse, Capdevila, González, González-Suárez, Salguero-Gómez, Vásquez-Valderrama and Toussaint2021, Mouillot et al. Reference Mouillot, Bellwood, Baraloto, Chave, Galzin, Harmelin-Vivien, Kulbicki, Lavergne, Lavorel, Mouquet, Paine, Renaud and Thuiller2013), thereby affecting ecosystem processes (Bogoni et al. Reference Bogoni, Peres and Ferraz2020, Carmona et al. Reference Carmona, Tamme, Pärtel, De Bello, Brosse, Capdevila, González, González-Suárez, Salguero-Gómez, Vásquez-Valderrama and Toussaint2021, Neghme et al. Reference Neghme, Santamaría and Calviño-Cancela2017).

Despite the robustness and relevance of our results, there is a possibility that sampling a greater number of habitats and localities along the Cerrado would lead to different results, based on the recognised faunal peculiarities and different biogeographical histories of local lizard assemblages (Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Ribeiro, Costa and Colli2011, Werneck & Colli Reference Werneck and Colli2006). Other limitations of our study include the sampling method considered. The richness reported herein for five vegetation types of the Serra das Araras Ecological Station – based on pitfall traps data only – represents 61% of the 26 species listed by Nogueira et al. (Reference Nogueira, Colli and Martins2009), which employed additional sampling methodologies. These included active searches (which evidently allow to record a higher number of arboreal species) and historical records (some of them, for localities situated outside the limits of the ecological station; C. Nogueira, pers. comm.). Besides, the non-use of individual markings made it impossible to evaluate functional indices based on the variation in species abundance (e.g., functional evenness, divergence, and redundancy functional).

Previously, the influence of the mosaic of open and forested formations on the structure of Cerrado lizard assemblages has been evaluated based on parameters involving taxonomic diversity only (e.g., Nogueira et al. Reference Nogueira, Colli and Martins2009, Reference Nogueira, Colli, Costa, Machado, Diniz, Marinho-Filho, Machado and Cavalcanti2010, Vitt et al. Reference Vitt, Colli, Caldwell, Mesquita, Garda and França2007). Our study was the first to reveal that this mosaic also determines the structure and both the functional and phylogenetic diversity of these assemblages. These results reinforce the importance of using different diversity indices to better understand the processes that shape biological communities.

Studies that use functional and phylogenetic metrics (instead of only taxonomic ones) allow the assessment of the effects of the physical structure of the habitat and the availability of climatic niches on the ecological functions and evolutionary history of biological communities. At different scales, these studies may provide a better understanding on how the loss of specific habitat elements can impact the maintenance of ecosystem functions and biodiversity in different regions of the Cerrado.

Conclusion

This study highlights the importance of vegetation mosaics in shaping the diversity patterns of lizard assemblages in the Brazilian Cerrado. The taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic descriptors of the evaluated lizard assemblages differed between the open and forested formations. The results suggest that these assemblages have been shaped by different processes, which have influenced not only the species richness and compositions, but also the diversity of ecological traits and lineages represented in each formation. These findings may assist in the establishment of future local conservation initiatives aimed at preserving not only a greater number of species, but also functionally and phylogenetically more diverse lizard assemblages.

Acknowledgments

We thank the many field assistants that helped us in the field, including André Pansonato, Derek Ito, Érika Rodrigues, Gisele Ferreira, Helder Faria, Karla Calcanhoto, Luciana Valério, Marina M.Santos, Miquéias Silva Jr., Tami Mott, Thais Almeida, and the staff from the Estação Ecológica Serra das Araras – Carolina Castro and Vanílio Marques; Felipe Curcio for allowing access to material under his care at the Coleção Zoológica de Vertebrados from the Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso; Leonardo Moreira for fruitful discussions; Beatrice Allain and John Karpinski for English translation.

Financial support

Data collecting was funded by the Programa Cognitus of the Instituto Internacional de Educação do Brasil—IEB and Conservação Internacional do Brasil—CI-Brasil (C.S., Chamada 001/2008). Further financial support was provided by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior—CAPES and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Mato Grosso—FAPEMAT (R.A.B., 88882.167007/2018-01), and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico—CNPq (C.S., 3123038/2018-1).

Conflict of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

Ethical statement

The Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade (ICMBio-SISBIO n° 19518-1) provided collecting and research permits.

References

Álvares, CA, Stape, JL, Sentelhas, PC, Gonçalves, JLM and Sparovek, G (2013) Köppen’s climate classification map for Brazil. Meteorologische Zeitschrift 22, 711728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, MJ (2017) Permutational Multivariate Analysis of Variance (PERMANOVA). Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online 115.Google Scholar
Antonelli, A, Zizka, A, Carvalho, FA, Scharn, R, Bacon, CD, Silvestro, D and Condamine, FL (2018) Amazonia is the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 115, 60346039.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Azevedo, JAR, Collevatti, RG, Jaramillo, CA, Strömberg, CAE, Guedes, TB, Matos-Maraví, P, Bacon, CD, Carillo, JD, Faurby, S and Antonelli, A (2020) On the young savannas in the land of ancient forests. In Rull, V and Carnaval, AC (eds), Neotropical Diversification: Patterns and Processes. Cham: Springer, pp. 271298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azevedo, JAR, Valdujo, PH and Nogueira, CC (2016) Biogeography of anurans and squamates in the Cerrado hotspot: coincident endemism patterns in the richest and most impacted savanna on the globe. Journal of Biogeography 43, 24542464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barros, RA, Dorado-Rodrigue, TF and Strüssmann, C (2022) Taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversity of lizard assemblages across habitats and seasons in a Brazilian Cerrado area. Austral Ecology, in press. https://doi.org/10.1111/aec.13181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batalha, MA, Cianciaruso, MV and Motta-Junior, JC (2010) Consequences of simulated loss of open Cerrado areas to bird functional diversity. Natureza & Conservação 8, 3440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bazzaz, FA (1975) Plant species diversity in old-field successional ecosystems in Southern Illinois. Ecology 56, 485488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergholz, K, May, F, Giladi, I, Ristow, M, Ziv, Y and Jeltsch, F (2017) Environmental heterogeneity drives fine-scale species assembly and functional diversity of annual plants in a semi-arid environment. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 24, 138146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berriozabal-Islas, C, Badillo-Saldaña, LM, Ramírez-Bautista, A and Moreno, CE (2017) Effects of habitat disturbance on lizard functional diversity in a tropical dry forest of the pacific coast of Mexico. Tropical Conservation Science 10, 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogoni, JA, Peres, CA and Ferraz, KMPMB (2020) Effects of mammal defaunation on natural ecosystem services and human well being throughout the entire Neotropical realm. Ecosystem Services 45, 101173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bracewell, SA, Clark, GF and Johnston, EL (2018) Habitat complexity effects on diversity and abundance differ with latitude: an experimental study over 20 degrees. Ecology 99, 19641974.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cadotte, MW, Dinnage, R and Tilman, D (2012) Phylogenetic diversity promotes ecosystem stability. Ecology 93, 223233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carmona, CP, Tamme, R, Pärtel, M, De Bello, F, Brosse, S, Capdevila, P, González, RM, González-Suárez, M, Salguero-Gómez, R, Vásquez-Valderrama, M and Toussaint, A (2021) Erosion of global functional diversity across the tree of life. Science Advances 7, 113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cechin, SZ and Martins, M (2000) Eficiência de armadilhas de queda (pitfall traps) na amostragem de anfíbios e répteis no Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Zoologia 17, 729740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chergui, B, Pleguezuelos, JM, Fahd, S and Santos, X (2020) Modelling functional response of reptiles to fire in two Mediterranean forest types. Science of the Total Environment 732, 139205.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Colli, GR, Bastos, RP and Araujo, AFB (2002) The character and dynamics of the cerrado herpetofauna. In Oliveira, PS and Marquis, RJ (eds), The Cerrados of Brazil: Ecology and Natural History of a Neotropical Savanna. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 223241.Google Scholar
Cortês-Gomez, AM, Ruiz-Agudelo, CA, Valencia-Aguilar, A and Ladle, RJ (2015) Ecological functions of neotropical amphibians and reptiles: a review. Universitas Scientiarum 20, 229245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cursach, J, Rita, J, Gómez-Martínez, C, Cardona, C, Capó, M and Lázaro, A (2020) The role of landscape composition and heterogeneity on the taxonomical and functional diversity of Mediterranean plant communities in agricultural landscapes. PLoS ONE 15, 118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dallacort, R, Neves, SMAS and Nunes, MCM (2015) Variabilidade da temperatura e das chuvas de Cáceres/Pantanal Mato-Grossense – Brasil. Geografia 23, 2133.Google Scholar
De Mello, PLH, Machado, RB and Nogueira, CC (2015) Conserving biogeography: habitat loss and vicariant patterns in endemic Squamates of the Cerrado hotspot. PLoS One 10, 116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Debastiani, VJ and Pillar, VD (2012) Syncsa-R tool for analysis of metacommunities based on functional traits and phylogeny of the community components. Bioinformatics 28, 20672068.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emerson, BC and Gillespie, RG (2008) Phylogenetic analysis of community assembly and structure over space and time. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 23, 619630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Escoriza, D (2018) Patterns of alpha diversity among Tunisian lizards (Lacertidae). Journal of Arid Environments 151, 2330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faith, DP (1992) Conservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity. Biological Conservation 61, 110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fenker, J, Domingos, FMCB, Tedeschi, LG, Rosauer, DF, Werneck, FP, Colli, GR, Ledo, RMD, Fonseca, EM, Garda, AA, Tucker, D, Sites, JW, Breitman, MF, Soares, F, Giugliano, LG and Moritz, C (2020) Evolutionary history of Neotropical savannas geographically concentrates species, phylogenetic and functional diversity of lizards. Journal of Biogeography 47, 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, FG, Machado, ELM, Silva-Neto, CME, Júnior, MCS, Medeiros, MM, Gonzaga, APD, Solórzano, A, Venturoli, F and Fagg, JMF (2017) Diversity and indicator species in the Cerrado biome, Brazil. Australian Journal of Crop Science 11, 10421050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furley, PA (1999) The nature and diversity of Neotropical savanna vegetation with particular reference to the Brazilian cerrados. Global Ecology Biogeography 8, 223241.Google Scholar
Gainsbury, AM and Colli, GR (2003) Lizard assemblages from natural Cerrado enclaves in Southwestern Amazonia: the role of stochastic extinctions and isolation. Biotropica 35, 503519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gainsbury, AM and Colli, GR (2019) Phylogenetic community structure as an ecological indicator of anthropogenic disturbance for endemic lizards in a biodiversity hotspot. Ecological Indicators 103, 766773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garda, AA, Wiederhecker, HC, Gainsbury, AM, Costa, GC, Pyron, RA, Vieira, GHC, Werneck, FP and Colli, GR (2013) Microhabitat variation explains local-scale distribution of terrestrial amazonian lizards in Rondônia, Western Brazil. Biotropica 45, 245252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonçalves, E and Gregorin, R (2004) Quirópteros da Estação Ecológica da Serra das Araras, Mato Grosso, Brasil, com o primeiro registro de Artibeus gnomus e A. anderseni para o Cerrado. Lundiana 5,143149.Google Scholar
Gotelli, NJ (2000) Null model analysis of species co-occurrence patterns. Ecology 81, 26062621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greer, AE and Shea, G (2004) A new character within the taxonomically difficult Sphenomorphus group of Lygosomine skinks, with a description of a new species from new guinea viviparous lizards from Patagonia, Argentina: reproductive. Journal of Herpetology 38, 7987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gumbs, R, Gray, CL, Böhm, M, Hoffmann, M, Grenyer, R, Jetz, W, Meiri, S, Roll, U, Owen, NR and Rosindell, J (2020) Global priorities for conservation of reptilian phylogenetic diversity in the face of human impacts. Nature Communications 11, 113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Helmus, MR, Bland, TJ, Williams, CK and Ives, AR (2007) Phylogenetic measures of biodiversity. The American Naturalist 169, 6883.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hooper, DU, Solan, M, Symstad, A, Gessner, N, Buchmann, V, Degrange, P, Grime, P, Hulot, F, Mermillod-Blondin, F, Roy, J, Spehn, E and Van Peer, L (2002) Species diversity, functional diversity, and ecosystem functioning. In Loreau, M Naeem, S and Inchausti, P (eds), Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning: Synthesis and Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 195–208.Google Scholar
Huey, RB (1982) Temperature, physiology and the ecology of reptiles. In Gans, C and Pough, FH (eds), Biology of the Reptilia. New York: Academic Press, pp. 2591.Google Scholar
Huey, RB and Slatkin, M (1976) Cost and benefits of lizard thermoregulation. The Quarterly Review of Biology 51, 363384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ibargüengoytía, NR (2004) Prolonged cycles as a common reproductive pattern in viviparous lizards from Patagonia, Argentina: reproductive cycle of Phymaturus patagonicus . Journal of Herpetology 38, 7379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jellinek, S, Driscoll, DA and Kirkpatrick, JB (2004) Environmental and vegetation variables have a greater influence than habitat fragmentation in structuring lizard communities in remnant urban bushland. Austral Ecology 29, 294304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, SP, Gray, SJ and Hurst, JL (2005) Excluding neighbours from territories: effects of habitat structure and resource distribution. Animal Behaviour 69, 785795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kembel, SW, Cowan, PD, Helmus, MR, Cornwell, WK, Morlon, H, Ackerly, DD, Blomberg, SP and Webb, CO (2010) Picante: R tools for integrating phylogenies and ecology. Bioinformatics 26, 14631464.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klingbeil, BT and Willig, MR (2016) Matrix composition and landscape heterogeneity structure multiple dimensions of biodiversity in temperate forest birds. Biodiversity and Conservation 25, 26872708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klink, CA and Machado, RB (2005) Conservation of the Brazilian Cerrado. Conservation Biology 19, 707713 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klink, CA and Moreira, AG (2002) Past and current human occupation, and land use. In Oliveira, PS and Marquis, RJ (eds), The Cerrados of Brazil: Ecology and Natural History of a Neotropical Savanna. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 6988.Google Scholar
Klink, CA, Sato, MN, Cordeiro, GG and Ramos, MIM (2020) The role of vegetation on the dynamics of water and fire in the Cerrado ecosystems: implications for management and conservation. Plants 9, 127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kraft, NJB, Cornwell, WK, Webb, CO and Ackerly, DD (2007) Trait evolution, community assembly, and the phylogenetic structure of ecological communities. The American Naturalist 170, 271283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laliberté, E and Legendre, P (2010) A distance-based framework for measuring functional diversity from multiple traits. Ecology 91, 299305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lanna, FM, Colli, GR, Burbrink, FT and Carstens, BC (2021) Identifying traits that enable lizard adaptation to different habitats. Journal of Biogeography 49, 113.Google Scholar
Leavitt, DJ and Schalk, CM (2018) Functional perspectives on the dynamics of desert lizard assemblages. Journal of Arid Environments 150, 3441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ledo, RMD and Colli, GR (2016) Silent death: the new Brazilian forest code does not protect lizard assemblages in cerrado riparian forests. South American Journal of Herpetology 11, 98109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ledo, RMD, Domingos, FMCB, Giugliano, LG, Sites, JW, Werneck, FP and Colli, GR (2020) Pleistocene expansion and connectivity of mesic forests inside the South American dry diagonal supported by the phylogeography of a small lizard. Evolution 74, 19882004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Legendre, P and Legendre, L (2012) Ordination in reduced space. In Legendre, P and Legendre, L (eds), Numerical Ecology. Oxford: Elsevier, pp. 387–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewin, A, Feldman, A, Bauer, AM, Belmaker, J, Broadley, DG, Chirio, L, Itescu, Y, Lebreton, M, Maza, E, Meirte, D, Nagy, ZT, Novosolov, M, Roll, U, Tallowin, O, Trape, JF, Vidan, E and Meiri, S (2016) Patterns of species richness, endemism and environmental gradients of African reptiles. Journal of Biogeography 43, 23802390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Londe, DW, Elmore, RD, Davis, CA, Fuhlendorf, SD, Luttbeg, B and Hovick, TJ (2020) Structural and compositional heterogeneity influences the thermal environment across multiple scales. Ecosphere 11, e03290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macarthur, RH and Macarthur, JW (1961) On bird species diversity. Ecology 42, 594598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magurran, AE (2004) Measuring Biological Diversity. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. pp. 256.Google Scholar
Marques, EQ, Marimon-Junior, BH, Marimon, BS, Matricardi, EAT, Mews, HA and Colli, GR (2020) Redefining the Cerrado-Amazonia transition: implications for conservation. Biodiversity and Conservation 29, 15011517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maure, LA, Rodrigues, RC, Alcântara, ÂV, Adorno, BFCB, Santos, DL, Abreu, EL, Tanaka, RM, Gonçalves, RM and Hasui, E (2018) Functional redundancy in bird community decreases with riparian forest width reduction. Ecology and Evolution 8, 1039510408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Melville, J, Harmon, LJ and Losos, JB (2006) Intercontinental community convergence of ecology and morphology in desert lizards. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 273, 557563.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mesquita, DO, Colli, GR, França, FGR and Vitt, LJ (2006) Ecology of a Cerrado lizard assemblage in the Jalapão region of Brazil. Copeia 2006, 460471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mesquita, DO, Colli, GR, Pantoja, DL, Shepard, DB, Vieira, GHC and Vitt, LJ (2015) Juxtaposition and disturbance: disentangling the determinants of lizard community structure. Biotropica 47, 595605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mesquita, DO, Colli, GR and Vitt, LJ (2007) Ecological release in lizard assemblages of neotropical savannas. Oecologia 153, 185195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moreira, LA, Lúcio, H, Silva, R and Jorge, N (2009) A preliminary list of the Herpetofauna from termite mounds of the Cerrado in the Upper Tocantins river valley. Papéis Avulsos de Zoologia 49, 183189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, EK, Caruso, T, Buscot, F, Fischer, M, Hancock, C, Maier, TS, Meiners, T, Müller, C, Obermaier, E, Prati, D, Socher, SA, Sonnemann, I, Wäschke, N, Wubet, T, Wurst, S and Rillig, MC (2014) Choosing and using diversity indices: insights for ecological applications from the German biodiversity exploratories. Ecology and Evolution 4, 35143524.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mouchet, MA, Villéger, S, Mason, NWH and Mouillot, D (2010) Functional diversity measures: an overview of their redundancy and their ability to discriminate community assembly rules. Functional Ecology 24, 867876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mouillot, D, Albouy, C, Guilhaumon, F, Lasram, FBR, Coll, M, Devictor, V, Meynard, CN, Pauly, D, Tomasini, JA, Troussellier, M, Velez, L, Watson, R, Douzery, EJP and Mouquet, N (2011) Protected and threatened components of fish biodiversity in the Mediterranean sea. Current Biology 21, 10441050.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mouillot, D, Bellwood, DR, Baraloto, C, Chave, J, Galzin, R, Harmelin-Vivien, M, Kulbicki, M, Lavergne, S, Lavorel, S, Mouquet, N, Paine, CET, Renaud, J and Thuiller, W (2013) Rare species support vulnerable functions in high-diversity ecosystems. PLoS Biology 11, e1001569.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neghme, C, Santamaría, L and Calviño-Cancela, M (2017) Strong dependence of a pioneer shrub on seed dispersal services provided by an endemic endangered lizard in a Mediterranean island ecosystem. Plos ONE 12, e0183072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nogueira, C, Colli, GR, Costa, GC and Machado, RB (2010) Diversidade de répteis Squamata e evolução do conhecimento faunístico no Cerrado. In Diniz, IR, Marinho-Filho, J, Machado, RB and Cavalcanti, RB (eds), Cerrado: Conhecimento Científico Quantitativo como Subsídio para Ações de Conservação. Brasília: Editora UnB, pp. 333375.Google Scholar
Nogueira, C, Colli, GR and Martins, M (2009) Local richness and distribution of the lizard fauna in natural habitat mosaics of the Brazilian Cerrado. Austral Ecology 34, 8396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nogueira, C, Ribeiro, S, Costa, GC and Colli, GR (2011) Vicariance and endemism in a Neotropical savanna hotspot: distribution patterns of Cerrado squamate reptiles. Journal of Biogeography 38, 19071922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nogueira, C, Valdujo, PH and França, FGR (2005) Habitat variation and lizard diversity in a Cerrado area of Central Brazil. Studies on Neotropical Fauna and Environment 40, 105112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oksanen, J, Blanchet, FG, Friendly, M, Kindt, R, Legendre, P, Mcglinn, D, Minchin, PR, O’hara, RB, Simpson, GL, Solymos, P, Henry, MSH, Szoecs, E and Wagner, H (2018) Vegan: community ecology package. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan (accessed on 19 February 2020).Google Scholar
Olson, DM, Dinerstein, E, Wikramanayake, ED, Burgess, ND, Powell, GVN, Underwood, EC, D’Amico, JA, Itoua, I, Strand, HE, Morrison, JC, Loucks, CJ, Allnutt, TF, Ricketts, TH, Kura, Y, Lamoreux, JF, Wettengel, WW, Hedao, P and Kassem, KR (2001) Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on earth. BioScience 51, 933938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortega-Olivencia, A, Rodríguez-Riaño, T, Pérez-Bote, JL, López, J, Mayo, C, Valtueña, FJ and Navarro-Pérez, M (2012) Insects, birds and lizards as pollinators of the largest-flowered Scrophularia of Europe and Macaronesia. Annals of Botany 109, 153167.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Palmeirim, AF, Farneda, FZ, Vieira, MV and Peres, CA (2021) Forest area predicts all dimensions of small mammal and lizard diversity in Amazonian insular forest fragments. Landscape Ecology 36, 34013418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, E, Claude, J and Strimmer, K (2004) APE: analyses of phylogenetics and evolution in R language. Bioinformatics 20, 289290.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pavoine, S and Bonsall, MB (2011) Measuring biodiversity to explain community assembly: a unified approach. Biological Reviews 86, 792812.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pavoine, S, Vallet, J, Dufour, AB, Gachet, S and Daniel, H (2009) On the challenge of treating various types of variables: application for improving the measurement of functional diversity. Oikos 118, 391402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pelegrin, N, Winemiller, KO, Vitt, LJ, Fitzgerald, DB and Pianka, ER (2021) How do lizard niches conserve, diverge or converge? Further exploration of saurian evolutionary ecology. BMC Ecology and Evolution 21, 113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peña-Joya, KE, Cupul-Magaña, FG, Rodríguez-Zaragoza, FA, Moreno, CE and Téllez-López, J (2020) Spatio-temporal discrepancies in lizard species and functional diversity. Community Ecology 21, 112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petchey, OL and Gaston, KJ (2006) Functional diversity: back to basics and looking forward. Ecology Letters 9, 741758.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petchey, OL and Gaston, KJ (2002) Functional diversity (FD), species richness and community composition. Ecology Letters 5, 402411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pianka, ER (1966) Convexity, desert lizards, and spatial heterogeneity. Ecology 47, 10551059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pianka, ER (1973) The structure of lizard communities. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4, 5374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pianka, ER, Vitt, LJ, Pelegrin, N, Fitzgerald, DB and Winemiller, KO (2017) Toward a periodic table of niches, or exploring the lizard niche hypervolume. The American Naturalist 190, 116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinheiro, ES and Durigan, G (2012) Floristic and structural differences among cerrado phytophysiognomies in Assis, SP, Brazil. Revista Árvore 36, 181193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pough, FH and Gans, C (1982) The vocabulary of reptilian thermoregulation. In Gans, C and Pough, FH (eds), Biology of the Reptilia. New York: Academic Press, pp. 2591.Google Scholar
Powney, GD, Grenyer, R, Orme, CDL, Owens, IPF and Meiri, S (2010) Hot, dry and different: Australian lizard richness is unlike that of mammals, amphibians and birds. Global Ecology and Biogeography 19, 386396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramm, T, Cantalapiedra, JL, Wagner, P, Penner, J, Rödel, MO and Müller, J (2018) Divergent trends in functional and phylogenetic structure in reptile communities across Africa. Nature Communications 9, 110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ratter, JA, Bridgewater, S and Ribeiro, JF (2003) Analysis of the floristic composition of the Brazilian Cerrado vegetation III: comparison of the woody vegetation of 376 areas. Edinburgh Journal of Botany 60, 57109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ratter, JA, Ribeiro, JF and Bridgewater, S (1997) The Brazilian cerrado vegetation and threats to its biodiversity. Annals of Botany 80, 223230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Development Core Team (2019) R: a Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Viena: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/ (accessed on 20 April 2020).Google Scholar
Ribeiro, JF and Walter, BMT (2008) As principais fitofisionomias do Bioma Cerrado. In Sano, SM Almeida, SP and Ribeiro, JF (eds), Cerrado: Ecologia e flora. Planaltina: Embrapa Cerrados, pp. 151–212.Google Scholar
Roll, U, Feldman, A, Novosolov, M, Allison, A, Bauer, AM, Bernard, R, Böhm, M, Castro-Herrera, F, Chirio, L, Collen, B, Colli, GR, Dabool, L, Das, I, Doan, TM, Grismer, LL, Hoogmoed, M, Itescu, Y, Kraus, F, Lebreton, M, Lewin, A, Martins, M, Maza, E, Meirte, D, Nagy, ZT, Nogueira, CDC, Pauwels, OSG, Pincheira-Donoso, D, Powney, GD, Sindaco, R, Tallowin, OJS, Torres-Carvajal, O, Trape, JF, Vidan, E, Uetz, P, Wagner, P, Wang, Y, Orme, CDL, Grenyer, R and Meiri, S (2017) The global distribution of tetrapods reveals a need for targeted reptile conservation. Nature Ecology and Evolution 1, 16771682.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross, JLS (1991) O contexto geotectônico e a morfogênese da Província Serrana de Mato Grosso. Revista do Instituto Geológico 12, 2137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santos, MB, Oliveira, MCLM and Tozetti, AM (2012) Diversity and habitat use by snakes and lizards in coastal environments of southernmost Brazil. Biota Neotropica 12, 7887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schleuter, D, Daufresne, M, Massol, F and Argillier, C (2010) A user’s guide to functional diversity indices. Ecological Monographs 80, 469484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, DM, Brown, D, Mahood, S, Denton, B, Silburn, A and Rakotondraparany, F (2006) The impacts of forest clearance on lizard, small mammal and bird communities in the arid spiny forest, southern Madagascar. Biological Conservation 127, 7287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheu, Y, Ribeiro-junior, JPZMA, Miguel, TCÁ, Guarino, TR and Werneck, FP (2020) The combined role of dispersal and niche evolution in the diversification of Neotropical lizards. Ecology and Evolution 10, 118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sitters, H, York, A, Swan, M, Christie, F and Di Stefano, J (2016) Opposing responses of bird functional diversity to vegetation structural diversity in wet and dry forest. PLoS ONE 11, 118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skeels, A, Esquerré, D and Cardillo, M (2019) Alternative pathways to diversity across ecologically distinct lizard radiations. Global Ecology and Biogeography 29, 454469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Šmíd, J, Sindaco, R, Shobrak, M, Busais, S, Tamar, K, Aghová, T, Simó-Riudalbas, M, Tarroso, P, Geniez, P, Crochet, PA, Els, J, Burriel-Carranza, B, Tejero-Cicuéndez, H and Carranza, S (2021) Diversity patterns and evolutionary history of Arabian squamates. Journal of Biogeography 48, 11831199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, GR and Ballinger, RE (2001) The ecological consequences of habitat and microhabitat use in lizards: a review. Contemporary Herpetology 2001, 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sobral, FL and Cianciaruso, MV (2016) Functional and phylogenetic structure of forest and savanna bird assemblages across spatial scales. Ecography 39, 533541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stark, J, Lehman, R, Crawford, L, Enquist, BJ and Blonder, B (2017) Does environmental heterogeneity drive functional trait variation? A test in montane and alpine meadows. Oikos 126, 16501659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strassburg, BBN, Brooks, T, Feltran-Barbieri, R, Iribarrem, A, Crouzeilles, R, Loyola, R, Latawiec, AE, Oliveira-Filho, FJB, Scaramuzza, CAM, Scarano, FR, Soares-Filho, B and Balmford, A (2017) Moment of truth for the Cerrado hotspot. Nature Ecology and Evolution 1, 13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swenson, NG (2014) Functional and Phylogenetic Ecology in R. New York: Springer, pp. 217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tejero-Cicuéndez, H, Tarroso, P, Carranza, S and Rabosky, D (2022) Desert lizard diversity worldwide: effects of environment, time, and evolutionary rate. Global Ecology and Biogeography 31, 776790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tews, J, Brose, U, Grimm, V, Tielbörger, K, Wichmann, MC, Schwager, M and Jeltsch, F (2004) Animal species diversity driven by habitat heterogeneity/diversity: the importance of keystone structures. Journal of Biogeography 31, 7992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tonini, JFR, Beard, KH, Ferreira, RB, Jetz, W and Pyron, RA (2016) Fully-Sampled phylogenies of squamates reveal evolutionary patterns in threat status. Biological Conservation 204, 2331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valadão, RM (2012) As aves da Estação Ecológica Serra das Araras, Mato Grosso, Brasil. Biota Neotropica 12, 263281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valencia-Aguilar, A, Cortés-Gómez, AM and Ruiz-Agudelo, CA (2013) Ecosystem services provided by amphibians and reptiles in Neotropical ecosystems. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services and Management 9, 257272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velazco, SJE, Villalobos, F, Galvão, F and De Marco-Júnior, P (2019) A dark scenario for Cerrado plant species: effects of future climate, land use and protected areas ineffectiveness. Diversity and Distributions 25, 660673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vidan, E, Novosolov, M, Bauer, AM, Herrera, FC, Chirio, L, Nogueira, CC, Doan, TM, Lewin, A, Meirte, D, Nagy, ZT, Pincheira-Donoso, D, Tallowin, OJS, Torres-Carvajal, O, Uetz, P, Wagner, P, Wang, Y, Belmaker, J and Meiri, S (2019) The global biogeography of lizard functional groups. Journal of Biogeography 46, 21472158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vitt, L, Magnusson, WE, Ávila-Pires, TC and Lima, AP (2008) Guia de lagartos da Reserva Adolpho Ducke, Amazônia Central. Manaus: Áttema, pp. 175.Google Scholar
Vitt, LJ (1991) Introduction to the ecology of Cerrado lizards. Journal of Herpetology 25, 7990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vitt, LJ, Colli, GR, Caldwell, JP, Mesquita, DO, Garda, AA and França, FGR (2007) Detecting variation in microhabitat use in low-diversity lizard assemblages across small-scale habitat gradients. Journal of Herpetology 41, 654663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vitt, LJ and Pianka, ER (2005) Deep history impacts present-day ecology and biodiversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102, 78777881.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vitt, LJ, Pianka, ER, Cooper, WE & Schwenk, K (2003) History and the global ecology of squamate reptiles. American Naturalist 162, 4460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Webb, CO (2000) Exploring the phylogenetic structure of ecological communities: an example for rain forest trees. The American Naturalist 156, 145155.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Webb, CO, Ackerly, DD, Mcpeek, MA and Donoghue, MJ (2002) Phylogenies and community ecology. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 33, 475505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werneck, FP and Colli, GR (2006) The lizard assemblage from seasonally dry tropical forest enclaves in the Cerrado biome, Brazil, and its association with the Pleistocenic Arc. Journal of Biogeography 33, 19831992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werneck, FP, Nogueira, C, Colli, GR, Sites, JW and Costa, GC (2012) Climatic stability in the Brazilian Cerrado: implications for biogeographical connections of South American savannas, species richness and conservation in a biodiversity hotspot. Journal of Biogeography 39, 16951706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willis, SC, Winemiller, KO and Lopez-Fernandez, H (2005) Habitat structural complexity and morphological diversity of fish assemblages in a Neotropical floodplain river. Oecologia 142, 284295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 1. Location of the study site at Serra das Araras Ecological Station (SAES), state of Mato Grosso, Brazil.

Figure 1

Table 1. Functional traits used in the quantification of functional diversity in lizard assemblages recorded in open and forested formations at a location in the Brazilian Cerrado.

Figure 2

Table 2. Lizard species composition was sampled using pitfall traps with drift fences in open (CS – cerrado sensu stricto; CP – cerrado parkland) and forested formations (CW – cerrado woodland; DF – semi-deciduous dry forest; RF – riparian forest) in a location in the Brazilian Cerrado.

Figure 3

Figure 2. Principal Coordinate Analysis (PCoA) graph of the composition of lizards in open (white dots) and forested (black dots) formations at a location in the Brazilian Cerrado.

Figure 4

Figure 3. Parameters of lizard diversity recorded in open and forested formations at a location in the Brazilian Cerrado: (a) species richness; (b) functional diversity; (c) phylogenetic variability; and (d) phylogenetic richness. The dark strip in the middle of each box plot represents the median; regions below and above it represent the first and third quartiles, and the bars below and above represent the minimum and maximum values, respectively.

Figure 5

Table 3. Values summarising the functional and phylogenetic structures of the lizard assemblages of the Serra das Araras Ecological Station, Mato Grosso, Brazil. Values of Z and P are based on 10,000 randomizations of the taxa in the functional dendrogram or phylogenies. Values in bold type indicate the presence of a significant functional or phylogenetic effect. Legends: Species Richness (SR), Functional Diversity (FD), Phylogenetic Diversity (PD), Mean Pairwise Distance (MPD), Mean Nearest Taxon Distance (MNTD).