DOI: 10.5061/dryad.sf7m0cg2j
title: Scaling between macro- to microscale climatic data reveals strong phylogenetic inertia in niche evolution in plethodontid salamanders

description: Macroclimatic niches are indirect and potentially inadequate predictors of
 the realized environmental conditions that many species experience.
 Consequently, analyses of niche evolution based on macroclimatic data
 alone may incompletely represent the evolutionary dynamics of species
 niches. Yet, understanding how an organisms’ climatic (Grinnellian) niche
 responds to changing macroclimatic conditions is of vital importance for
 predicting their potential response to global change. In this study, we
 integrate microclimatic and macroclimatic data across 26 species of
 plethodontid salamanders to portray the relationship between microclimatic
 niche evolution in response to changing macroclimate. We demonstrate
 stronger phylogenetic signal in microclimatic niche variables than at the
 macroclimatic scale. Even so, we find that the microclimatic niche tracks
 climatic changes at the macroscale, but with a phylogenetic lag at
 million-year timescales. We hypothesize that behavioral tracking of the
 microclimatic niche over space and phenology generates the lag:
 salamanders preferentially select microclimates similar to their ancestral
 conditions rather than adapting with changes in physiology. We demonstrate
 that macroclimatic variables are weak predictors of niche evolution and
 that incorporating spatial scale into analyses of niche evolution is
 critical for predicting responses to climate change.
description: Two data files are included: 1) Includes mean
 and standard error values for 5 microclimatic conditions collected from 26
 species of Plethodontid salamanders, including leaf litter depth, soil
 moisture, soil temperature, air temperature at 1 meter, and relatvie
 humidity at 1 meter (and one for logit transformed values of relative
 humidity).  This data set also include mean and standard error values of
 temperature and precipitation macroclimatic data extracted from Wordclim
 Ver. 2.0 (March-July) for both the sampling locations of our study and
 museum records used by Kozak and Wiens 2010.  
   2) Includes direct measurements of 5
 microclimatic conditions collected during random habitat surveys including
 leaf litter depth, soil moisture, soil temperature, air temperature at 1
 meter, and relatvie humidity at 1 meter.  These habitat surveys were
 conducted in conjunction with time constraint surveys for salamander
 presence.  Each row contains the habitat measures for a single point
 (e.g., each row is for one single random habitat point and each survey had
 ~10 points) and identifying information about the survey along with the
 number of each of 26 species of salamanders found during that entire
 survey (I will mention it multiple times to be clear, the species counts
 in each row are for the individuals surveys (group of ~10 rows) and not
 indivudal habitat points (1 row). This is explained in more detail in the
 useage notes and in comments on the excel file itself. 
   All excel files include additional comments
 to help explain any aspects of the data set that may be
 confusing. 
description: <strong>For data set one, </strong>the data can
 easily be easily used to calculate half-life, lambda, and cont maps using
 trhe mean values and standard errors (when possible) using the functions
 and packages presented in the manuscript.  
 <strong>For data set two,</strong> additional
 processoing is required.  Each row contains data that pertains to both a
 specific random habitat point and the entire survey as a while (~10 random
 points per habitat survey).  Data in each row that pertains to the
 entirety of a survey includes the site identifier, the date and time of
 the survey, latitude and longitude in WGS84 for the survey, and the
 results of the time contraint survey for the ENTIRE survey.  The data thsi
 is for only one specific points incluides the 5 indvidual habitat
 measurements. I have included this as a comment in the
 excel file as well.   The number of salamanders
 captured (Columns L through AK) are NOT for an individual point, but
 rather the particular survey as a whole (each survey includes ~10 random
 points). For example for the Survey conducted at site
 HHM1 on 5/31/2014 at 10:19 PM there was 1 Plethodon cinereus encountered,
 but this is listed for each of the 10 random habitat points.
 As another example for the survey at site MLH4 on 7/11/2014 at
 8:39 PM there were 7 <em>Eurycea wilderae </em>and 1
 <em>Psuedotriton ruber</em> encountered, and again this is
 listed for each random point during this survey (denoted by the site id,
 date, and time). You can see in all cases, the number
 encountered is listed for each random point in the data set.  This was
 accounted for in our analyses as we were using the number encountered per
 survey or at a given site and not for each individual habitat  point. This
 was the easiest way to structure the data for all of our analyses.  Please
 contact me if you have further questions or want additional
 clarification.