2008Journal of BiogeographyOpen access

A discussion of different types of glacial refugia used in mountain biogeography and phylogeography

Rolf Holderegger, Conny Thiel‐Egenter

Open full text 181 citations

Abstract

Abstract With the recent rise of phylogeography, the biogeography of mountain species (species with their current main distribution above timber line), especially their glacial history, has attracted renewed interest. In particular, the question of where mountain species survived the ice ages has been approached in many phylogeographical studies. The terminology of glacial refugia of mountain species is often confusing, contradictory or counter‐intuitive. Our aim is to clarify and simplify this terminology. First, we offer a general definition of the term glacial refugium for mountain species. Then, we discuss three main types of glacial refugia of mountain species, i.e. nunatak, peripheral and lowland refugia. We believe that the discrimination of these three types of glacial refugia is sufficient to describe the glacial survival of (most) mountain species. Finally, we argue that the terms in situ survival and ex situ survival and the term periglacial refugium should only be used to describe specific cases of glacial history. No simple classification system can adequately describe every kind of glacial refugium, but we propose that authors should focus on providing comprehensive descriptions of particular refugial situations instead of introducing new terminology.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract With the recent rise of phylogeography, the biogeography of mountain species (species with their current main distribution above timber line), especially their glacial history, has attracted renewed interest. In particular, the question of where mountain species survived the ice ages has been approached in many phylogeographical studies. The terminology of glacial refugia of mountain species is often confusing, contradictory or counter‐intuitive. Our aim is to clarify and simplify this terminology. First, we offer a general definition of the term glacial refugium for mountain species. Then, we discuss three main types of glacial refugia of mountain species, i.e. nunatak, peripheral and lowland refugia. We believe that the discrimination of these three types of glacial refugia is sufficient to describe the glacial survival of (most) mountain species. Finally, we argue that the terms in situ survival and ex situ survival and the term periglacial refugium should only be used to describe specific cases of glacial history. No simple classification system can adequately describe every kind of glacial refugium, but we propose that authors should focus on providing comprehensive descriptions of particular refugial situations instead of introducing new terminology.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 181 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract With the recent rise of phylogeography, the biogeography of mountain species (species with their current main distribution above timber line), especially their glacial history, has attracted renewed interest. In particular, the question of where mountain species survived the ice ages has been approached in many phylogeographical studies. The terminology of glacial refugia of mountain species is often confusing, contradictory or counter‐intuitive. Our aim is to clarify and simplify this terminology. First, we offer a general definition of the term glacial refugium for mountain species. Then, we discuss three main types of glacial refugia of mountain species, i.e. nunatak, peripheral and lowland refugia. We believe that the discrimination of these three types of glacial refugia is sufficient to describe the glacial survival of (most) mountain species. Finally, we argue that the terms in situ survival and ex situ survival and the term periglacial refugium should only be used to describe specific cases of glacial history. No simple classification system can adequately describe every kind of glacial refugium, but we propose that authors should focus on providing comprehensive descriptions of particular refugial situations instead of introducing new terminology.

Key concepts: Glacial period, Refugium (fishkeeping), Phylogeography, Biogeography, Ecology, Terminology, Ice age, Geography

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A discussion of different types of glacial refugia used in mountain biogeography and phylogeography — Research Paper | ScholarLens