Table 6. Summary of all results.
| Species pair | Phylogenetic relatedness | Ecological niche 1 | Distribution pattern 2 | Competition |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NKA—NKB | sister | 5 | small spatial overlap | strong |
| NSA—NSB | sister | 2 | small spatial overlap | unlikely |
| NKA—NSA | non- sister | 1 | strong spatial overlap | strong |
| NKB—NSB | non- sister | 6 | strong spatial overlap | strong |
| NKA—NSB | non- sister | 3 | small spatial overlap | strong |
| NKB—NSA | non- sister | 4 | small spatial overlap | ? |
1 Numbers rang species pairs according to the similarity of the species ecological niche: 1- little difference, 6—maximum differences.
2 All species exhibit a clumped distribution (see Table 4).