Search for: All records

Abstract Understanding how diversity is maintained in plant communities requires that we first understand the mechanisms of competition for limiting resources. In ecology, there is an underappreciated but fundamental distinction between systems in which the depletion of limiting resources reduces the growth rates of competitors and systems in which resource depletion reduces the time available for competitors to grow, a mechanism we call ‘competition for time’. Importantly, modern community ecology and our framing of the coexistence problem are built on the implicit assumption that competition reduces the growth rate. However, recent theoretical work suggests competition for time may be the predominant competitive mechanism in a broad array of natural communities, a significant advance given that when species compete for time, diversity‐maintaining trade‐offs emerge organically. In this study, we first introduce competition for time conceptually using a simple model of interacting species. Then, we perform an experiment in a Mediterranean annual grassland to determine whether competition for time is an important competitive mechanism in a field system. Indeed, we find that species respond to increased competition through reductions in their lifespan rather than their rate of growth. In total, our study suggests competition for time may be overlooked as a mechanism of biodiversity maintenance. 

A central assumption in most ecological models is that the interactions in a community operate only between pairs of species. However, two species may interactively affect the growth of a focal species. Although interactions among three or more species, called higher-order interactions, have the potential to modify our theoretical understanding of coexistence, ecologists lack clear expectations for how these interactions shape community structure. Here we analytically predict and numerically confirm how the variability and strength of higher-order interactions affect species coexistence. We found that as higher-order interaction strengths became more variable across species, fewer species could coexist, echoing the behavior of pairwise models. If interspecific higher-order interactions became too harmful relative to self-regulation, coexistence in diverse communities was destabilized, but coexistence was also lost when these interactions were too weak and mutualistic higher-order effects became prevalent. This behavior depended on the functional form of the interactions as the destabilizing effects of the mutualistic higher-order interactions were ameliorated when their strength saturated with species’ densities. Last, we showed that more species-rich communities structured by higher-order interactions lose species more readily than their species-poor counterparts, generalizing classic results for community stability. Our work provides needed theoretical expectations for how higher-order interactions impact species coexistence in diverse communities. 

Abstract Community ecology typically assumes that competitive exclusion and species coexistence are unaffected by evolution on the time scale of ecological dynamics. However, recent studies suggest that rapid evolution operating concurrently with competition may enable species coexistence. Such findings necessitate general theory that incorporates the coexistence contributions of eco‐evolutionary processes in parallel with purely ecological mechanisms and provides metrics for quantifying the role of evolution in shaping competitive outcomes in both modelling and empirical contexts. To foster the development of such theory, here we extend the interpretation of the two principal metrics of modern coexistence theory—niche and competitive ability differences—to systems where competitors evolve. We define eco‐evolutionary versions of these metrics by considering how invading and resident species adapt to conspecific and heterospecific competitors. We show that the eco‐evolutionary niche and competitive ability differences are sums of ecological and evolutionary processes, and that they accurately predict the potential for stable coexistence in previous theoretical studies of eco‐evolutionary dynamics. Finally, we show how this theory frames recent empirical assessments of rapid evolution effects on species coexistence, and how empirical work and theory on species coexistence and eco‐evolutionary dynamics can be further integrated. 

Although early theoretical work suggests that competition for light erodes successional diversity in forests, verbal models and recent numerical work with complex mechanistic forest simulators suggest that disturbance in such systems can maintain successional diversity. Nonetheless, if and how allocation tradeoffs between competitors interact with disturbance to maintain high diversity in successional systems remains poorly understood. Here, using mechanistic and analytically tractable models, we show that a theoretically unlimited number of coexisting species can be maintained by allocational tradeoffs such as investing in light-harvesting organs vs. height growth, investing in reproduction vs. growth or survival vs. growth. The models describe the successional dynamics of a forest composed of many patches subjected to random or periodic disturbance, and are consistent with physiologically mechanistic terrestrial ecosystem models, including the terrestrial components of recent Earth System Models. We show that coexistence arises in our models because species specialize in the successional time they best exploit the light environment and convert resources into seeds or contribute to advance regeneration. We also show that our results are relevant to non-forested ecosystems by demonstrating the emergence of similar dynamics in a mechanistic model of competition for light among annual plant species. Finally, we show that coexistence in our models is relatively robust to the introduction of intraspecific variability that weakens the competitive hierarchy caused by asymmetric competition for light. 

Sympatric large mammalian herbivore species differ in diet composition, both by eating different parts of the same plant and by eating different plant species. Various theories proposed to explain these differences are not mutually exclusive, but are difficult to reconcile and confront with data. Moreover, whereas several of these ideas were originally developed with reference to within-plant partitioning (i.e., consumption of different tissues), they may analogously apply to partitioning of plant species; this possibility has received little attention. Plant functional traits provide a novel window into herbivore diets and a means of testing multiple hypotheses in a unified framework. We used DNA metabarcoding to characterize the diets of 14 sympatric large-herbivore species in an African savanna and analyzed diet composition in light of 27 functional traits that we measured locally for 204 plant species. Plant traits associated with the deep phylogenetic split between grasses and eudicots formed the primary axis of resource partitioning, affirming the generality and importance of the grazer-browser spectrum. A secondary axis comprised plant traits relevant to herbivore body size. Plant taxa in the diets of large-bodied species were lower on average in digestible energy and protein, taller on average (especially among grazers), and tended to be higher in tensile strength, zinc, stem-specific density, and potassium (and lower in sodium, stem dry matter content, and copper). These results are consistent with longstanding hypotheses linking body size with forage quality and height, yet they also suggest the existence of undiscovered links between herbivore body size and a set of rarely considered food-plant traits. We also tested the novel hypothesis that the leaf economic spectrum (LES), a major focus in plant ecology, is an axis of resource partitioning in large-herbivore assemblages; we found that the LES was a minor axis of individual variation within a few species, but had little effect on interspecific dietary differentiation. Synthesis. These results identify key plant traits that underpin the partitioning of food-plant species in large-herbivore communities and suggest that accounting for multiple plant traits (and tradeoffs among them) will enable a deeper understanding of herbivore-plant interaction networks.