Latitudinal comparison of the thermal biology in the endemic lizard Liolaemus multimaculatus

Thermoregulation in ectotherms may be modulated by climatic variability across geographic gradients. Environmental temperature varies along latitudinal clines resulting in heterogeneous thermal resource availability, which generally induces ectotherms to use compensatory mechanisms to thermoregulate. Lizards can accommodate to ambient temperature changes through a combination of adaptive evolution and behavioral and physiological plasticity. We studied the thermal ecology of the endangered endemic lizard Liolaemus multimaculatus at six different sites distributed from the northern to southern areas of the distribution (700 km) in the Atlantic dune barriers of Argentina, and even including the borders areas of the distribution range. Environmental temperatures and relative humidity showed a strong contrast between northern and southern limits of the distribution range. The northern localities had operative temperatures (Te) above the range of preferred temperatures (Tset), instead, the southern localities had large proportion of Tes within the Tset. Although these different climatic conditions may constrain the thermal biology of L. multimaculatus, individuals from all localities maintained relatively similar field body temperatures (XTb = 34.07 ± 3.02 °C), suggesting that this parameter is conservative. Thermal preference partially reflected latitudinal temperature gradient, since lizards from the two southernmost localities showed the lowest Tsel and Tset. Thermoregulatory efficiency differed among localities, since E values in the northern localities (E = 0.53–0.69) showed less variability than those of southern localities (E = 0.14–0.67). Although L. multimaculatus employed a strategy of having a conservative Tb and being able to acclimatize the thermal preference to copes with latitudinal changes in the thermal environment, other local factors, such as ecological interactions, may also impose limitations to thermoregulation and this may interfered in the interpretation of results at wider spatial scale.Fil: Stellatelli, Oscar Aníbal. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras; ArgentinaFil: Vega, Laura Estela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras; ArgentinaFil: Block, Carolina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras; ArgentinaFil: Rocca, Camila. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras; ArgentinaFil: Bellagamba, Patricio Juan. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Municipalidad de General Pueyrredon; ArgentinaFil: Cruz, Felix Benjamin. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universidad Bariloche. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente; Argentin