An official website of the United States government
Abstract Whether cities are more or less diverse than surrounding environments, and the extent to which non‐native species in cities impact regional species pools, remain two fundamental yet unanswered questions in urban ecology. Here we offer a unifying framework for understanding the mechanisms that generate biodiversity patterns across taxonomic groups and spatial scales in urban systems. One commonality between existing frameworks is the collective recognition that species co‐occurrence locally is not simply a function of natural colonization and extinction processes. Instead, it is largely a consequence of human actions that are governed by a myriad of social processes occurring across groups, institutions, and stakeholders. Rather than challenging these frameworks, we expand upon them to explicitly consider how human and non‐human mechanisms interact to control urban biodiversity and influence species composition over space and time. We present a comprehensive theory of the processes that drive biodiversity within cities, between cities and surrounding non‐urbanized areas and across cities, using the general perspective of metacommunity ecology. Armed with this approach, we embrace the fact that humans substantially influence β‐diversity by creating a variety of different habitats in urban areas, and by influencing dispersal processes and rates, and suggest ways how these influences can be accommodated to existing metacommunity paradigms. Since patterns in urban biodiversity have been extensively described at the local or regional scale, we argue that the basic premises of the theory can be validated by studying the β‐diversity across spatial scales within and across urban areas. By explicitly integrating the myriad of processes that drive native and non‐native urban species co‐occurrence, the proposed theory not only helps reconcile contrasting views on whether urban ecosystems are biodiversity hotspots or biodiversity sinks, but also provides a mechanistic understanding to better predict when and why alternative biodiversity patterns might emerge.
more »
« less
Emergence and Dynamics of Regional Species Pools
ABSTRACT The Importance of the Regional Species PoolThe regional species pool—the set of species capable of entering a local community—is a foundational concept for understanding ecological processes that occur between local and extensive (biogeographic) spatial scales. However, the lack of precise definitions for the regional species pool, coupled with limited research into the dynamics of regional biodiversity, has impeded the development of a comprehensive framework to explain the mechanisms shaping these pools. Processes Governing Regional Species PoolsAlthough ecological processes at local and extensive scales are relatively well understood, the mechanisms shaping regional biota remain less clear. Regional species pools are likely shaped by a unique set of processes that often overlap minimally with those operating at local or extensive scales. Despite their significance, our understanding of the specific mechanisms driving the dynamics of regional species pools remains incomplete. The Need for a Theory of Regional Species PoolsWe argue that it is essential to prioritise the study of the regional species pool for two reasons. First, the regional species pool bridges spatial and temporal scales from ecological dynamics in landscapes to the long‐term processes shaping the biotas of entire biogeographic provinces. As such, understanding the dynamics of species pools addresses fundamental questions about the origin, maintenance, and dynamics of biodiversity. Second, effective biodiversity conservation in the Anthropocene hinges on understanding the processes that operate at regional scales.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2135502
- PAR ID:
- 10593258
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Global Ecology and Biogeography
- Volume:
- 34
- Issue:
- 5
- ISSN:
- 1466-822X
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract AimWe examined tree beta diversity in four biogeographical regions with contrasting environmental conditions, latitude, and diversity. We tested: (a) the influence of the species pool on beta diversity; (b) the relative contribution of niche‐based and dispersal‐based assembly to beta diversity; and (c) differences in the importance of these two assembly mechanisms in regions with differing productivity and species richness. LocationLowland and montane tropical forests in the Madidi region (Bolivia), lowland temperate forests in the Ozarks (USA), and montane temperate forests in the Cantabrian Mountains (Spain). MethodsWe surveyed woody plants with a diameter ≥2.5 cm following a standardized protocol in 236 0.1‐ha forest plots in four different biogeographical regions. We estimated the species pool at each region and used it to recreate null communities determined entirely by the species pool. Observed patterns of beta diversity smaller or greater than the null‐expected patterns of beta diversity implies the presence of local assembly mechanisms beyond the influence of the species pool. We used variation‐partitioning analyses to compare the contribution of niche‐based and dispersal‐based assembly to patterns of observed beta diversity and their deviations from null models among the four regions. Results(a) Differences in species pools alone did not explain observed differences in beta diversity among biogeographic regions. (b) In 3/4 regions, the environment explained more of the variation in beta diversity than spatial variables. (c) Spatial variables explained more of the beta diversity in more diverse and more productive regions with more rare species (tropical and lower‐elevation regions) compared to less diverse and less productive regions (temperate and higher‐elevation regions). (d) Greater alpha or gamma diversity did not result in higher beta diversity or stronger correlations with the environment. ConclusionOverall, the observed differences in beta diversity are better explained by differences in community assembly mechanism than by biogeographical processes that shaped the species pool.more » « less
-
Abstract AimThe interaction of land use with local versus regional processes driving biological homogenization (β‐diversity loss) is poorly understood. We explored: (a) stream β‐diversity responses to land cover (forest versus agriculture) in terms of physicochemistry and physicochemical heterogeneity; (b) whether these responses were constrained by the regional species pool, i.e. γ‐diversity, or local assembly processes through local (α) diversity; (c) whether local assembly operated through the regional species abundance distribution (SAD) or intraspecific spatial aggregation; and (d) the dependence on body size, dispersal capacity and trophic level (producer versus consumer). LocationUSA, Canada and France. Time period1993–2012. Major taxa studiedStream diatoms, insects and fish. MethodsWe analysed six datasets totalling 1,225 stream samples. We compared diversity responses to eutrophication and physicochemical heterogeneity in forested versus agricultural streams with regression methods. Null models quantified the contribution of local assembly to β‐diversity (β‐deviance, βDEV) for both types of land covers and partitioned it into fractions explained by the regional SAD (βSAD) versus aggregation (βAGG). ResultsEutrophication explained homogenization and more uneven regional SADs across groups, but local and regional biodiversity responses differed across taxa. The βDEVwas insensitive to land use. The βSADlargely exceeded βAGGand was higher in agriculture. Main conclusionsEutrophication but not physicochemical heterogeneity of agricultural streams underlay β‐diversity loss in diatoms, insects and fish. Agriculture did not constrain the magnitude of local versus regional effects on β‐diversity but controlled the local assembly mechanisms. Although the SAD fraction dominated in both land covers, it increased further in agriculture at the expense of aggregation. Notably, the regional SADs were more uneven in agriculture, exhibiting excess common species or stronger dominance. Diatoms and insects diverged from fish in terms of biodiversity, SAD shape and βDEVpatterns, suggesting an overriding role of body size and/or dispersal capacity compared with trophic position.more » « less
-
Abstract Despite the well known scale‐dependency of ecological interactions, relatively little attention has been paid to understanding the dynamic interplay between various spatial scales. This is especially notable in metacommunity theory, where births and deaths dominate dynamics within patches (the local scale), and dispersal and environmental stochasticity dominate dynamics between patches (the regional scale). By considering the interplay of local and regional scales in metacommunities, the fundamental processes of community ecology—selection, drift, and dispersal—can be unified into a single theoretical framework. Here, we analyze three related spatial models that build on the classic two‐species Lotka–Volterra competition model. Two open‐system models focus on a single patch coupled to a larger fixed landscape by dispersal. The first is deterministic, while the second adds demographic stochasticity to allow ecological drift. Finally, the third model is a true metacommunity model with dispersal between a large number of local patches, which allows feedback between local and regional scales and captures the well studied metacommunity paradigms as special cases. Unlike previous simulation models, our metacommunity model allows the numerical calculation of equilibria and invasion criteria to precisely determine the outcome of competition at the regional scale. We show that both dispersal and stochasticity can lead to regional outcomes that are different than predicted by the classic Lotka–Volterra competition model. Regional exclusion can occur when the nonspatial model predicts coexistence or founder control, due to ecological drift or asymmetric stochastic switching between basins of attraction, respectively. Regional coexistence can result from local coexistence mechanisms or through competition‐colonization or successional‐niche trade‐offs. Larger dispersal rates are typically competitively advantageous, except in the case of local founder control, which can favor intermediate dispersal rates. Broadly, our models demonstrate the importance of feedback between local and regional scales in competitive metacommunities and provide a unifying framework for understanding how selection, drift, and dispersal jointly shape ecological communities.more » « less
-
Abstract AimEcological niches shape species commonness and rarity, yet, the relative importance of different niche mechanisms within and across ecosystems remains unresolved. We tested the influence of niche breadth (range of environmental conditions where species occur) and niche position (marginality of a species’ environmental distribution relative to the mean environmental conditions of a region) on tree‐species abundance and occupancy across three biogeographic regions. LocationArgentinian Andes; Bolivian Amazon; Missouri Ozarks. Time period2002–2010. Major taxa studiedTrees. MethodsWe calculated abiotic‐niche breadths and abiotic‐niche positions using 16 climate, soil and topographic variables. For each region, we used model selection to test the relative influence of niche breadth and niche position on local abundance and occupancy in regional‐scale networks of 0.1‐ha forest plots. To account for species–environment associations caused by other mechanisms (e.g., dispersal), we used null models that randomized associations between species occurrences and environmental variables. ResultsWe found strong support for the niche‐position hypothesis. In all regions, species with higher local abundance and occupancy occurred in non‐marginal environments. Observed relationships between occupancy and niche position also differed from random species–environment associations in all regions. Surprisingly, we found little support for the niche‐breadth hypothesis. Observed relationships between both local abundance and niche breadth, and occupancy and niche breadth, did not differ from random species–environment associations. Main conclusionNiche position was more important than niche breadth in shaping species commonness and rarity across temperate, sub‐tropical and tropical forests. In all forests, tree species with widespread geographic distributions were associated with environmental conditions commonly found throughout the region, suggesting that niche position has similar effects on species occupancy across contrasting biogeographic regions. Our findings imply that conservation efforts aimed at protecting populations of common and rare tree species should prioritize conservation of both common and rare habitats.more » « less
