Search for: All records

Abstract There is considerable interest in understanding patterns of β‐diversity that measure the amount of change in species composition through space or time. Most hypotheses for β‐diversity evoke nonrandom processes that generate spatial and temporal within‐species aggregation; however, β‐diversity can also be driven by random sampling processes. Here, we describe a framework based on rarefaction curves that quantifies the nonrandom contribution of species compositional differences across samples to β‐diversity. We isolate the effect of within‐species spatial or temporal aggregation on beta‐diversity using a coverage standardized metric of β‐diversity (β_C). We demonstrate the utility of our framework using simulations and an empirical case study examining variation in avian species composition through space and time in engineered versus natural riparian areas. The primary strengths of our approach are that it provides an intuitive visual null model for expected patterns of biodiversity under random sampling that allows integrating analyses across α‐, γ‐, and β‐scales. Importantly, the method can accommodate comparisons between communities with different species pool sizes, and it can be used to examine species turnover both within and between meta‐communities. 

Abstract Biodiversity metrics often integrate data on the presence and abundance of multiple species. Yet our understanding of covariation between changes to the numbers of individuals, the evenness of species relative abundances, and the total number of species remains limited. Using individual‐based rarefaction curves, we show how expected positive relationships among changes in abundance, evenness and richness arise, and how they can break down. We then examined interdependencies between changes in abundance, evenness and richness in more than 1100 assemblages sampled either through time or across space. As predicted, richness changes were greatest when abundance and evenness changed in the same direction, and countervailing changes in abundance and evenness acted to constrain the magnitude of changes in species richness. Site‐to‐site differences in abundance, evenness, and richness were often decoupled, and pairwise relationships between these components across assemblages were weak. In contrast, changes in species richness and relative abundance were strongly correlated for assemblages varying through time. Temporal changes in local biodiversity showed greater inertia and stronger relationships between the component changes when compared to site‐to‐site variation. Overall, local variation in assemblage diversity was rarely due to repeated passive samples from an approximately static species abundance distribution. Instead, changing species relative abundances often dominated local variation in diversity. Moreover, how changing relative abundances combined with changes to total abundance frequently determined the magnitude of richness changes. Embracing the interdependencies between changing abundance, evenness and richness can provide new information to better understand biodiversity change in the Anthropocene. 

Abstract Ecological forecasting provides a powerful set of methods for predicting short‐ and long‐term change in living systems. Forecasts are now widely produced, enabling proactive management for many applied ecological problems. However, despite numerous calls for an increased emphasis on prediction in ecology, the potential for forecasting to accelerate ecological theory development remains underrealized.Here, we provide a conceptual framework describing how ecological forecasts can energize and advance ecological theory. We emphasize the many opportunities for future progress in this area through increased forecast development, comparison and synthesis.Our framework describes how a forecasting approach can shed new light on existing ecological theories while also allowing researchers to address novel questions. Through rigorous and repeated testing of hypotheses, forecasting can help to refine theories and understand their generality across systems. Meanwhile, synthesizing across forecasts allows for the development of novel theory about the relative predictability of ecological variables across forecast horizons and scales.We envision a future where forecasting is integrated as part of the toolset used in fundamental ecology. By outlining the relevance of forecasting methods to ecological theory, we aim to decrease barriers to entry and broaden the community of researchers using forecasting for fundamental ecological insight.