Abstract
We use data on the Pleistocene and modern range limits of Californian marine bivalves to show that species that shifted their geographical ranges in response to Pleistocene climatic fluctuations were preferentially drawn from the large end of the regional body size–frequency distributions. This difference is not due to phylogenetic effects (i.e. dominance of extralimital species by a few large‐bodied clades), differences among major ecological categories (burrowing versus surface‐dwelling, or suspension feeding versus non‐suspension feeding), or differences in modes of reproduction and larval development. In addition, we show that successful invasive species of bivalves in present‐day marine habitats also tend to be large‐bodied, despite the difference in mechanisms between present‐day and Pleistocene range expansions. These results indicate that range limits of large‐bodied bivalve species are more unstable than small‐bodied ones, and that body size and its correlates need to be considered when attempting to predict the responses of marine communities to climate change, biotic interchanges and human‐mediated invasions.