[Taxacom] Woodpeckers: If any got to Madagascar, they were probably too late

[Robin Leech]

Hi Dick,

We humans represent just one more animal species that moves around
and establishes pretty well anywhere it wants.  A difference is that we
humans can document some of the flora and fauna that have become part
of the human entourage.

Hold that thought - the thought that one species opens up the possible
enlarging and establishing of distributions of other species in previously
unoccupied lands.  We know and recognize some of the species that
have followed us, mainly because they have become pest species.

I don't think we have ever considered in our biogeographical theories that
until a particular non-hominid species X arrived at a new land mass (just 
for
the hell of it, let's say Madagascar), a whole coterie of other species had
landed on many occasions on Madagascar, but failed to establish.  Their
failure was because species X had not yet arrived and become established.

However, once species X arrived in Madagascar and established itself, then
the whole coterie of other species (which had been arriving for many years
but never became established) continues to arrive, only now because species
X is established there, the others can establish.

We always seem to study the invasions of new lands on a one-at-a-time
basis, and individual species success or failure, not a founder species 
success
with subsequent successes of the coteries.

We may recognize that species X, Y and Z are at these new lands, we know
that they came from a particular source area, but because these 3 species 
are
long-established in the source area, we do think to consider that there is 
an
obligate relationship on the parts of Y and Z, and that they depend on X for
survival.

Robin

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Jensen" <rjensen at saintmarys.edu>
To: <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 9:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Woodpeckers: If any got to Madagascar, they were 
probably too late


>
>
> On 5/19/2011 10:00 AM, Kenneth Kinman wrote:
>>        (3)  And as for macaques in New Guinea, they had the advantage of
>> exploiting human food supplies and crops.  Nothing very natural about
>> that.  Zebra mussels are spreading like weeds all over the place, but
>> that too is due to modern human activity.  Not much chance they would
>> have dispersed at all under natural conditions, unless they evolved the
>> ability to hitch a ride on marine mammals.
>>           -----------Ken
> Unless one views what humans do as natural.  I think this is an
> interesting question - are human influences natural or unnatural?  One
> could argue that what we humans do is a natural consequence of our
> innate abilities and qualities.  If so, then the spread of "weeds" is a
> natural process linked to the natural spread and activities of a
> particular species of primate.
>
> Dick J
>
> -- 
> Richard J. Jensen, Professor
> Department of Biology
> Saint Mary's College
> Notre Dame, IN 46556
> Tel: 574-284-4674
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of 
> these methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as: 
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>