An official website of the United States government
Abstract Anthropogenic environmental changes are known to affect the Earth's ecosystems. However, how these changes influence assembly trajectories of the impacted communities remains a largely open question.In this study, we investigated the effect of elevated nitrogen (N) deposition and increased precipitation on plant taxonomic and phylogenetic β‐diversity in a 9‐year field experiment in the temperate semi‐arid steppe of Inner Mongolia, China.We found that both N and water addition significantly increased taxonomic β‐diversity, whereas N, not water, addition significantly increased phylogenetic β‐diversity. After the differences in local species diversity were controlled using null models, the standard effect size of taxonomic β‐diversity still increased with both N and water addition, whereas water, not N, addition, significantly reduced the standard effect size of phylogenetic β‐diversity. The increased phylogenetic convergence observed in the water addition treatment was associated with colonizing species in each water addition plot being more closely related to species in other replicate plots of the same treatment. Species colonization in this treatment was found to be trait‐based, with leaf nitrogen concentration being the key functional trait.Synthesis.Our analyses demonstrate that anthropogenic environmental changes may affect the assembly trajectories of plant communities at both taxonomic and phylogenetic scales. Our results also suggest that while stochastic processes may cause communities to diverge in species composition, deterministic process could still drive communities to converge in phylogenetic community structure.
more »
« less
Multi‐species occupancy models as robust estimators of community richness
Abstract Understanding patterns of diversity is central to ecology and conservation, yet estimates of diversity are often biased by imperfect detection. In recent years, multi‐species occupancy models (MSOM) have been developed as a statistical tool to account for species‐specific heterogeneity in detection while estimating true measures of diversity. Although the power of these models has been tested in various ways, their ability to estimate gamma diversity—or true community size,Nis a largely unrecognized feature that needs rigorous evaluation.We use both simulations and an empirical dataset to evaluate the bias, precision, accuracy and coverage of estimates ofNfrom MSOM compared to the widely applied iChao2 non‐parametric estimator. We simulated 5,600 datasets across seven scenarios of varying average occupancy and detectability covariates, as well as varying numbers of sites, replicates and true community size. Additionally, we use a real dataset of surveys over 9 years (where species accumulation reached an asymptote, indicating trueN), to estimateNfrom each annual survey.Simulations showed that both MSOM and iChao2 estimators are generally accurate (i.e. unbiased and precise) except under unideal scenarios where mean species occupancy is low. In such scenarios, MSOM frequently overestimatedN. Across all scenarios, MSOM estimates were less certain than iChao2, but this led to over‐confident iChao2 estimates that showed poor coverage. Results from the real dataset largely confirmed the simulation findings, with MSOM estimates showing greater accuracy and coverage than iChao2.Community ecologists have a wide choice of analytical methods, and both iChao2 and MSOM estimates ofNare substantially preferable to raw species counts. The simplicity of non‐parametric estimators has obvious advantages, but our results show that in many cases, MSOM may provide superior estimates that also account more accurately for uncertainty. Both methods can show strong bias when average occupancy is very low, and practitioners should show caution when using estimates derived from either method under such conditions.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10456619
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Methods in Ecology and Evolution
- Volume:
- 11
- Issue:
- 5
- ISSN:
- 2041-210X
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- p. 633-642
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Environmental conditions are dynamic, and plants respond to those dynamics on multiple time scales. Disequilibrium occurs when a response occurs more slowly than the driving environmental changes. We review evidence regarding disequilibrium in plant distributions, including their responses to paleoclimate changes, recent climate change and new species introductions. There is strong evidence that plant species distributions are often in some disequilibrium with their environmental conditions.This disequilibrium poses a challenge when projecting future species distributions using species distribution models (SDMs). Classically, SDMs assume that the set of species occurrences is an unbiased sample of the suitable environmental conditions. However, a species in disequilibrium with the environment may have higher‐than‐expected occurrence probabilities (e.g. due to extinction debts) or lower‐than‐expected occurrence probabilities (e.g. due to dispersal limitation) in different areas. If unaccounted for, this will lead to biased estimates of the environmental suitability.We review methods for avoiding such biases in SDMs, ranging from simple thinning of the occurrence dataset to complex dynamic and process‐based models. Such models require large data inputs, natural history knowledge and technical expertise, so implementing them can be challenging. Despite this, we advocate for their increased use, since process‐based models provide the best potential to account for biases in model training data and to then represent the dynamics of species occupancy as ranges shift.Synthesis. Occurrence records for a species are often in disequilibrium with climate. SDMs trained on such data will produce biased estimates of a species' niche unless this disequilibrium is addressed in the modelling. A range of tools, spanning a wide gradient of complexity and realism, can resolve this bias.more » « less
-
Abstract Camera traps deployed in grids or stratified random designs are a well‐established survey tool for wildlife but there has been little evaluation of study design parameters.We used an empirical subsampling approach involving 2,225 camera deployments run at 41 study areas around the world to evaluate three aspects of camera trap study design (number of sites, duration and season of sampling) and their influence on the estimation of three ecological metrics (species richness, occupancy and detection rate) for mammals.We found that 25–35 camera sites were needed for precise estimates of species richness, depending on scale of the study. The precision of species‐level estimates of occupancy (ψ) was highly sensitive to occupancy level, with <20 camera sites needed for precise estimates of common (ψ > 0.75) species, but more than 150 camera sites likely needed for rare (ψ < 0.25) species. Species detection rates were more difficult to estimate precisely at the grid level due to spatial heterogeneity, presumably driven by unaccounted habitat variability factors within the study area. Running a camera at a site for 2 weeks was most efficient for detecting new species, but 3–4 weeks were needed for precise estimates of local detection rate, with no gains in precision observed after 1 month. Metrics for all mammal communities were sensitive to seasonality, with 37%–50% of the species at the sites we examined fluctuating significantly in their occupancy or detection rates over the year. This effect was more pronounced in temperate sites, where seasonally sensitive species varied in relative abundance by an average factor of 4–5, and some species were completely absent in one season due to hibernation or migration.We recommend the following guidelines to efficiently obtain precise estimates of species richness, occupancy and detection rates with camera trap arrays: run each camera for 3–5 weeks across 40–60 sites per array. We recommend comparisons of detection rates be model based and include local covariates to help account for small‐scale variation. Furthermore, comparisons across study areas or times must account for seasonality, which could have strong impacts on mammal communities in both tropical and temperate sites.more » « less
-
Abstract Site occupancy models (SOMs) are a common tool for studying the spatial ecology of wildlife. When observational data are collected using passive monitoring field methods, including camera traps or autonomous recorders, detections of animals may be temporally autocorrelated, leading to biased estimates and incorrectly quantified uncertainty. We presently lack clear guidance for understanding and mitigating the consequences of temporal autocorrelation when estimating occupancy models with camera trap data.We use simulations to explore when and how autocorrelation gives rise to biased or overconfident estimates of occupancy. We explore the impact of sampling design and biological conditions on model performance in the presence of autocorrelation, investigate the usefulness of several techniques for identifying and mitigating bias and compare performance of the SOM to a model that explicitly estimates autocorrelation. We also conduct a case study using detections of 22 North American mammals.We show that a join count goodness‐of‐fit test previously proposed for identifying clustered detections is effective for detecting autocorrelation across a range of conditions. We find that strong bias occurs in the estimated occupancy intercept when survey durations are short and detection rates are low. We provide a reference table for assessing the degree of bias to be expected under all conditions. We further find that discretizing data with larger windows decreases the magnitude of bias introduced by autocorrelation. In our case study, we find that detections of most species are autocorrelated and demonstrate how larger detection windows might mitigate the resulting bias.Our findings suggest that autocorrelation is likely widespread in camera trap data and that many previous studies of occupancy based on camera trap data may have systematically underestimated occupancy probabilities. Moving forward, we recommend that ecologists estimating occupancy from camera trap data use the join count goodness‐of‐fit test to determine whether autocorrelation is present in their data. If it is, SOMs should use large detection windows to mitigate bias and more accurately quantify uncertainty in occupancy model parameters. Ecologists should not use gaps between detection periods, which are ineffective at mitigating temporal structure in data and discard useful data.more » « less
-
Abstract Next‐Generation Sequencing (NGS) is a powerful tool that has been rapidly adopted by many ecologists studying microbial communities. Despite the exciting demonstration of NGS technology as a tool for ecological research, cryptic pitfalls inherent to its use can obscure correct interpretation of NGS data. Here, we provide an accessible overview of a NGS process that uses marker gene amplicon sequences (MGAS) that will allow scientists, particularly community ecologists, to make appropriate methodological choices and understand limits on inference about community composition and diversity that can be drawn from MGAS data.We describe the MGAS pipeline, focusing specifically on cryptic sources of variation that have received less emphasis in the ecological literature, but which may substantially impact inference about microbial community diversity and composition. By simulating communities from published microbiome data, we demonstrate how these sources of variation can generate inaccurate or misleading patterns.We specifically highlight sample dilution without researcher awareness and lane‐to‐lane variability, two cryptic sources of variation arising during the MGAS pipeline. These sources of variation affect estimates of species presence and relative abundance, particularly for species with moderate to low abundances. Each of these sources of bias can lead to errors in the estimation of both absolute and relative abundance within, and turnover among, microbial communities.Awareness and understanding of what happens and, specifically, why it happens during MGAS generation is key to generating a strong dataset and building a robust community matrix. Requesting sample dilution information from the sequencing centre, including technical replicates across sequencing lanes, and understanding how sampling intensity and community taxa distribution patterns shape the measurement of community richness, evenness and diversity are critical for drawing correct ecological inferences using MGAS data.more » « less
