Search for: All records

The phylogenetic distance between species often predicts differences in ecologically important traits. The phylogenetic diversity and structure of biological communities can inform our understanding of the processes that shape those communities, and there is a well-developed framework for comparing phylogenetic structures of communities. However, particularly in studies of phylogenetic distances from one focal species to other members of its assemblage (a one-to-many framework), the standard metrics of community-wide studies encounter significant limitations due to the left-skewed distribution of pairwise phylogenetic distances in most biological communities. For studies that require estimating the degree of phylogenetic isolation of a focal taxon, the mean phylogenetic distance (MPD) usually provides little power to distinguish among taxa because it is heavily weighted by the many ways to be distantly related, whereas the nearest taxon distance (NTD) is highly idiosyncratic and ignores cases where multiple close relatives may contribute equally strongly to influence the focal species. Here we highlight the value of examining the cumulative distribution of phylogenetic distances in studies that take a focal-species approach. We describe and discuss the benefits of two new metrics. An integrated metric of phylogenetic distances (AUPhyDC) uses information from the whole cumulative distribution, whereas the tenth quantile (PD10) is an extremely simple metric that improves on NTD by capturing the influence of multiple close relatives on ecological interactions. Several recent examples found that PD10 did a better job of revealing ecological patterns than NTD or MPD. We provide R code to facilitate the use of these approaches and advocate for the inclusion of PD10 along with NTD and MPD in statistical packages for phylogenetic ecology. 

Invasions by multiple non‐native plant species are common, but management programs often prioritize control of individual species that are expected to have the highest impacts. Multi‐species invasions could have larger or smaller impacts than single‐species invasions depending on how multiple co‐occurring invaders interact to alter their abundance or per capita impacts. Synergistic interactions, such as facilitation, may lead to greater combined impacts. However, if management focuses on a single invader, suppressive interactions could produce unintended consequences, such as the release of a co‐occurring invader with a stronger impact. The mechanisms described here highlight where better evidence is needed to predict the combined impacts of co‐occurring invaders and which mitigation strategies are most effective. Focused research is required to provide such evidence, which can aid managers in prioritizing which plant invaders to target and in determining the best sequence of invader removal – one that minimizes detrimental impacts on communities and ecosystems.