DOCSLIB.ORG

Marine Ecology Progress Series 463:73

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Marine Ecology Progress Series 463:73 Vol. 463: 73–87, 2012 MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Published August 30 doi: 10.3354/meps09858 Mar Ecol Prog Ser Species diversity, functional complexity and rarity in Arctic fjordic versus open shelf benthic systems Maria Włodarska-Kowalczuk1,*, Paul E. Renaud2, Jan Marcin We˛sławski1, Sabine K. J. Cochrane2, Stanislav G. Denisenko3 1Institute of Oceanology PAS, Powstańców Warszawy 55, 81-712 Sopot, Poland 2Akvaplan-niva, Fram Centre for Climate and Environment, N-9296 Tromsø, Norway 3Zoological Institute RAS, Universitetskaya nab. 1, 199034 St Petersburg, Russia ABSTRACT: We present a cross-system comparison of benthic species pools, species diversity, functional complexity and rarity in 2 typical Arctic coastal systems: an open shelf marginal sea and fjords (semi-enclosed, geologically younger basins remaining under strong terrestrial influences). A total of 388 van Veen grab samples were collected in the Barents Sea and 3 west Spitsbergen fjords (divided into inner and outer basins). Thirty percent of species were recorded only in fjords, questioning the common notion of the fjordic communities being merely subsets of the offshore species pools. Inner fjords, outer fjords and the open shelf hosted communities that differed signif- icantly in terms of species composition and diversity. Species richness, examined at the scales of both the ecological zone and an individual sample, was severely depleted in inner fjordic basins. The congruence of the patterns across taxonomic groups employing different life histories (ben- thic vs. pelagic dispersal) pointed to habitat deterioration rather than dispersal barriers as a factor responsible for the fjordic diversity clines. The between-habitat differences in functional diversity were expressed in decreased functional evenness and a decline in suspension-feeding, sedentary and large tube-dwelling species in fjords, affecting infaunal habitat complexity. Species redun- dancy declined across the shelf − outer fjord − inner fjord environmental gradients, suggesting a higher resilience of shelf systems. The environmental deterioration of fjordic basins did not result in the reduction of rare species. These results should be applied to strategies for managing open shelf and fjordic habitats in the Arctic. KEY WORDS: Biodiversity · Rarity · Functional diversity · Redundancy · Benthos · Arctic Resale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisher INTRODUCTION (2009) found a positive relationship between the local and regional species richness, while Somerfield et al. The interplay between local and regional pro- (2009) showed that at different spatial levels, local cesses has been recognized as an important driver of communities were not random subsets of re gional diversity patterns at different spatial scales (e.g. Hus- species pools, and tended to be composed of species ton 1999, Ricklefs 1987), but these issues have re - more closely related (i.e. having similar tolerances to mained relatively poorly explored in marine systems environmental stressors and shared functional traits) (Smith 2001). Witman et al. (2004) showed that, on a than if selected randomly. global scale, local species richness is strongly related Fjords are semi-enclosed marine inlets that remain to regional species pools in epifaunal benthic com- under strong terrestrial influences and are consid- munities encrusting subtidal rocks. For soft-bottom ered to be strongly dependent on regional species North Atlantic benthic communities, Renaud et al. pools of neighboring open shelf seas (Pearson 1980). *Email: [email protected] © Inter-Research 2012 · www.int-res.com 74 Mar Ecol Prog Ser 463: 73–87, 2012 They are geologically young areas (produced after 2005). Concepts of complementarity and redundancy the last glacial maximum some 17 000 years BP), and have enhanced our understanding of the importance are regarded as ecologically immature, non-steady- of biodiversity in ecosystem stability and response state systems that have been evolving over relatively (Naeem 1998, Loreau et al. 2001). Embedded in this short time scales (Syvitski et al. 1987). Two mecha- discussion is the potential role of rare species. In nisms are usually cited as possible causes of the many systems, a relatively large fraction of the taxa fjordic diversity impoverishment: (1) the barrier present are rare, occurring at few stations and/or at hypothesis points to the geomorphologic barriers that very low abundances (Gaston 1994). Little attention prevent a number of open shelf species from coloniz- has been given to rare species in marine systems ing the fjordic habitats; (2) the habitat hypothesis with respect to what proportion of the total biodiver- states that lower diversity in fjords is due to the less sity can be expected to be rare (but see Ellingsen et favorable environment relative to offshore habitats al. 2007), or how these taxa may operate in the com- (Buhl-Mortensen & Höisæter 1993). The barrier hypo- munity. The little evidence that exists, however, sug- thesis assumes that shelf seas serve as local species gests that rare species may provide the buffer of pools for fjordic biocenosis. Fjord communities are functional redundancy and offer some indication of often regarded as range extensions of shelf commu- community stability (Death 1996). Rare species can nities that are filtered by barrier or habitat filters. play a major role in driving temporal changes in In Arctic fjords, the main environmental gradients/ assemblages, for example under climatic or anthro- barriers are produced by the inflows of glacial melt- pogenic changes, because they appear to be much waters that are usually located in inner basins (Syvit- more sensitive to fluctuations in environmental con- ski et al. 1987). Meltwaters are loaded with high lev- ditions than abundant species (Benedetti-Cecchi et els of particulate mineral material, much of which al. 2008). Documenting this element of regional bio- sediments close to the glacial or glaciofluvial inflows diversity, therefore, may be important for both eco- (Syvitski et al. 1996, Zaja˛czkowski & Włodarska- logical under standing and ecosystem management. Kowalczuk 2007). In inner basins of west Spitsbergen Because of intensified impacts of climate change in fjords, the sedimentation rates in the water column Arctic regions (ACIA 2006), and the increase in can reach 2000 g m−2 d−1 on average, whereas the human activities (e.g. tourism, petroleum explo- sediment deposition at the sea bottom was estimated ration, fishing) driven by reduced ice cover, there is to be up to 6−9 cm yr−1 (Trusel et al. 2010). High sed- an urgent need for development of management and imentation results in the formation of unconsolidated monitoring strategies that take into account an sediments that are easily eroded, frequently resus- understanding of biodiversity and ecosystem func- pended and redeposited and can be disturbed by ice- tion. It is unclear whether traditional indicators of berg scouring or catastrophic gravity flows (Syvitski system status and our understanding of ecological et al. 1987, Zaja˛czkowski & Włodarska 2007). Longer response are relevant in Arctic regions (e.g. Olsen et persistence of fast ice cover and high water turbidity al. 2007). Further, it may be necessary to manage in the inner fjordic basins re duce pelagic primary shelf and fjordic regions differently, and these con- production, and organic matter that sediments to the trasts must be accounted for when developing indi- bottom is diluted by the high inorganic component. cators (taxa, indices, etc.) and target values that are As a result, the organic matter content in sediments valid in this regional context. decreases along the gradient from the open shelf to Here we present a study based on an extensive the inner fjord glacial bays (Włodarska-Kowalczuk & data set including 388 samples collected in 3 high lat- Pearson 2004, Winkelmann & Knies 2005). itude Arctic fjords (west Spitsbergen) and in the Functional diversity is based on understanding neighboring open Arctic shelf sea (Barents Sea). The what organisms do in ecosystems rather than on evo- Barents Sea is noted as having the greatest biodiver- lutionary history as reflected in taxonomic relation- sity of all Arctic marginal seas (Sirenko 2001), per- ships, and is proposed as a better determinant of the haps because of the strong influence of both Arctic ecosystem processes than the traditional measures of and Atlantic waters and the high productivity of the species diversity (Petchey & Gaston 2002). The rela- marine frontal systems. Macrobenthic communities tionships between species and functional diversity of the Barents Sea have been thoroughly described across different systems are poorly understood, and (e.g. Denisenko et al. 2003, Denisenko 2004, Coch - they are not necessarily strongly correlated. Thus, rane et al. 2009). Benthic communities of fjordic taxonomic diversity cannot serve as a universal sur- waters of the nearby Svalbard archipelago have also rogate for functional diversity (Micheli & Halpern been subject to considerable study (e.g. Włodarska- Włodarska-Kowalczuk et al.: Fjords and shelf benthic diversity 75 Kowalczuk & We˛sławski 2001, Włodarska-Kowal- management and conservation of the marine benthic czuk & Pearson 2004, Renaud et al. 2007). No attempt systems in Arctic open sea and semi-enclosed marine has been undertaken, however, to compare these 2 inlets. neighboring marine systems. In this paper we specif- ically ask: (1) Are fjords
Load more

Recommended publications
  • "Species Richness: Small Scale". In: Encyclopedia of Life Sciences (ELS)
    Species Richness: Small Advanced article Scale Article Contents . Introduction Rebecca L Brown, Eastern Washington University, Cheney, Washington, USA . Factors that Affect Species Richness . Factors Affected by Species Richness Lee Anne Jacobs, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA . Conclusion Robert K Peet, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA doi: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0020488 Species richness, defined as the number of species per unit area, is perhaps the simplest measure of biodiversity. Understanding the factors that affect and are affected by small- scale species richness is fundamental to community ecology. Introduction diversity indices of Simpson and Shannon incorporate species abundances in addition to species richness and are The ability to measure biodiversity is critically important, intended to reflect the likelihood that two individuals taken given the soaring rates of species extinction and human at random are of the same species. However, they tend to alteration of natural habitats. Perhaps the simplest and de-emphasize uncommon species. most frequently used measure of biological diversity is Species richness measures are typically separated into species richness, the number of species per unit area. A vast measures of a, b and g diversity (Whittaker, 1972). a Di- amount of ecological research has been undertaken using versity (also referred to as local or site diversity) is nearly species richness as a measure to understand what affects, synonymous with small-scale species richness; it is meas- and what is affected by, biodiversity. At the small scale, ured at the local scale and consists of a count of species species richness is generally used as a measure of diversity within a relatively homogeneous area.
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of Species Di7ersity on Ecosystem Producti7ity: How, Where
    FORUM is intended for new ideas or new ways of interpreting existing information. It FORUM provides a chance for suggesting hypotheses and for challenging current thinking on FORUM ecological issues. A lighter prose, designed to attract readers, will be permitted. Formal research reports, albeit short, will not be accepted, and all contributions should be concise FORUM with a relatively short list of references. A summary is not required. The influence of species di7ersity on ecosystem producti7ity: how, where, and why? Jason D. Fridley, Dept of Biology, CB 3280, Uni7. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3280, USA ([email protected]). The effect of species diversity on ecosystem productivity is cism based upon their experimental methodology controversial, in large part because field experiments investigat- (Huston 1997, Hodgson et al. 1998, Wardle 1999), ing this relationship have been fraught with difficulties. Unfortu- analyses (Aarssen 1997, Huston et al. 2000), and gen- nately, there are few guidelines to aid researchers who must overcome these difficulties and determine whether global species eral conclusions (Grime 1998, Wardle et al. 2000). As a losses seriously threaten the ecological and economic bases of result, the nature of the relationship between species terrestrial ecosystems. In response, I offer a set of hypotheses diversity and ecosystem productivity remains unclear. that describe how diversity might influence productivity in plant communities based on three well-known mechanisms: comple- One cause of the diversity-productivity debate, and mentarity, facilitation, and the sampling effect. Emphasis on a reason that this relationship remains controversial, these mechanisms reveals the sensitivity of any diversity-produc- is the lack of clear hypotheses to guide experimental tivity relationship to ecological context (i.e., where this relation- ship should be found); ecological context includes characteristics hypothesis testing.
    [Show full text]
  • Delineating Probabilistic Species Pools in Ecology and Biogeography
    GlobalGlobal Ecology Ecology and and Biogeography, Biogeography, (Global (Global Ecol. Ecol. Biogeogr.) Biogeogr.)(2016)(2016)25, 489–501 MACROECOLOGICAL Delineating probabilistic species pools in METHODS ecology and biogeography Dirk Nikolaus Karger1,2*, Anna F. Cord3, Michael Kessler2, Holger Kreft4, Ingolf Kühn5,6,7,SvenPompe5,8, Brody Sandel9, Juliano Sarmento Cabral4,7, Adam B. Smith10, Jens-Christian Svenning9, Hanna Tuomisto1, Patrick Weigelt4,11 and Karsten Wesche12,7 1Department of Biology, University of Turku, ABSTRACT Turku, Finland, 2Institute of Systematic Aim To provide a mechanistic and probabilistic framework for defining the Botany, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland, 3Department of Computational species pool based on species-specific probabilities of dispersal, environmental Landscape Ecology, Helmholtz Centre for suitability and biotic interactions within a specific temporal extent, and to show Environmental Research – UFZ, Leipzig, how probabilistic species pools can help disentangle the geographical structure of Germany, 4Biodiversity, Macroecology and different community assembly processes. Conservation Biogeography Group, University Innovation Probabilistic species pools provide an improved species pool defini- of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany, tion based on probabilities in conjunction with the associated species list, which 5Department of Community Ecology, explicitly recognize the indeterminate nature of species pool membership for a Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research given focal unit of interest and
    [Show full text]
  • The Relationship Between Productivity and Species Richness
    P1: FNE/FGO P2: FLI/FDR September 15, 1999 17:9 Annual Reviews AR093-10 Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1999. 30:257–300 Copyright c 1999 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PRODUCTIVITY AND SPECIES RICHNESS R. B. Waide1,M.R.Willig2, C. F. Steiner3, G. Mittelbach4, L. Gough5,S.I.Dodson6,G.P.Juday7, and R. Parmenter8 1LTER Network Office, Department of Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131-1091; e-mail: [email protected]; 2Program in Ecology and Conservation Biology, Department of Biological Sciences & The Museum, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas 79409-3131; e-mail: [email protected]; 3Kellogg Biological Station and the Department of Zoology, Michigan State University, Hickory Corners, Michigan 49060; e-mail: [email protected]; 4Kellogg Biological Station and the Department of Zoology, Michigan State University, Hickory Corners, Michigan 49060; e-mail: [email protected]; 5Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487-0344; e-mail: [email protected]; 6Department of Zoology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53706; e-mail: [email protected]; 7Forest Sciences Department, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska 99775-7200; e-mail: [email protected]; 8Department of Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131-1091; e-mail: [email protected] Key Words primary productivity, biodiversity, functional groups, ecosystem processes ■ Abstract Recent overviews have suggested that the relationship between species richness and productivity (rate of conversion of resources to biomass per unit area per unit time) is unimodal (hump-shaped). Most agree that productivity affects species richness at large scales, but unanimity is less regarding underlying mechanisms.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relative Importance of the Species Pool
    Journal of Ecology 2008, 96, 937–946 doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2008.01420.x TheBlackwell Publishing Ltd relative importance of the species pool, productivity and disturbance in regulating grassland plant species richness: a field experiment Timothy L. Dickson* and Bryan L. Foster Ecology and Evolutionary Biology; The University of Kansas; Lawrence, KS 66045; USA Summary 1. Ecologists have generally focused on how species interactions and available niches control species richness. However, the number of species in the regional species pool may also control richness. Moreover, the relative influence of the species pool and species interactions on plant richness may change along productivity and disturbance gradients. 2. We test the hypothesis that many species from the propagule pool will colonize into habitats of moderate productivity and moderate disturbance, and the number of species in the pool will, therefore, primarily control plant species richness in such habitats. The hypothesis also states that few species from the propagule pool will colonize into habitats of high productivity and minimal disturbance because competitive species interactions primarily control plant richness in such habitats. 3. To test this hypothesis, we experimentally varied resource availability via fertilization and irrigation, the size of the available propagule pool via sowing the seeds of 49 species and disturbance via vegetation clipping. 4. A larger propagule pool increased species richness 80% in the absence of fertilization and the presence of clipping but had no significant effect on richness in the presence of fertilization and the absence of clipping (significant fertilization × clipping × seed addition interaction). Irrigation increased species richness primarily in the absence of fertilization and the presence or clipping (significant fertilization × clipping × irrigation interaction).
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Niche Differentiation on Coexistence and Community Structure
    From trait patterns to species lifetimes: Effects of niche differentiation on coexistence and community structure by Rafael D’Andrea Rocha A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ecology and Evolutionary Biology) in The University of Michigan 2016 Doctoral Committee: Associate Professor Annette M. Ostling, Chair Professor Bradley Cardinale Professor Deborah E. Goldberg Professor Mercedes Pascual c Rafael D’Andrea Rocha 2016 All Rights Reserved Acknowledgements Annette Ostling, who tirelessly coached and supported me as a PhD student. Annette made a point to be always available for feedback on my work, even when she had tons of other things to do, which was all the time. She pushed me on when I faltered but was always friendly and never talked down to me. We collaborated closely—and intensely—on the papers we co-wrote. Her academic and financial support made possible my participation at numerous events that advanced my PhD career, including nine conferences, two courses and workshops, and two visits during her sabbatical year. She hired me twice as a GSI for her General Ecology class, which was an important learning experience, and also great fun. She introduced me to other ecologists, including James O’Dwyer, whose lab I will be joining after completing my PhD. Besides being there as my mentor and advisor, Annette doubled down as a friend and confidante. I am immensely grateful for the considerable amount of time and effort Annette dedicated to helping me during my five or six years at EEB. I would not be here without her.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrating Species Traits Into Species Pools Marko J
    Washington University in St. Louis Washington University Open Scholarship Biology Faculty Publications & Presentations Biology 6-2018 Integrating species traits into species pools Marko J. Spasojevic Christopher P. Catano Joseph A. LaManna Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/bio_facpubs Part of the Biology Commons, and the Population Biology Commons Recommended Citation Spasojevic, Marko J.; Catano, Christopher P.; and LaManna, Joseph A., "Integrating species traits into species pools" (2018). Biology Faculty Publications & Presentations. 162. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/bio_facpubs/162 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Biology at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Biology Faculty Publications & Presentations by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CONCEPTS & SYNTHESIS EMPHASIZING NEW IDEAS TO STIMULATE RESEARCH IN ECOLOGY Ecology, 99(6), 2018, pp. 1265–1276 © 2018 by the Ecological Society of America Integrating species traits into species pools 1,3 2 2 2 MARKO J. S PASOJEVIC, CHRISTOPHER P. C ATANO , JOSEPH A. LAMANNA, AND JONATHAN A. MYERS 1Department of Evolution, Ecology, and Organismal Biology, University of California Riverside, Riverside, California 92521 USA 2Department of Biology and Tyson Research Center, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri 63130 USA Abstract. Despite decades of research on the species-pool concept and the recent explosion of interest in trait-based frameworks in ecology and biogeography, surprisingly little is known about how spatial and temporal changes in species-pool functional diversity (SPFD) influence biodiversity and the processes underlying community assembly.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Pool Distributions Along Functional Trade-Offs Shape
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Species pool distributions along functional trade-offs shape plant productivity–diversity relationships Received: 20 July 2017 Loïc Chalmandrier1,2, Camille Albouy1,2,3 & Loïc Pellissier1,2 Accepted: 19 October 2017 Grasslands deliver the resources for food production and are among the most biologically diverse Published: xx xx xxxx ecosystems. These characteristics are often in conflict as increasing yield through fertilization can lead to biodiversity loss. Thus, the challenge in grassland management is to sustain both yield and diversity. Biodiversity–ecosystem functioning experiments typically reveal a positive relationship between manipulated species diversity and productivity. In contrast, observations of the effect of increasing productivity via fertilization suggest a negative association with biodiversity. Using a mathematical model simulating species co-existence along a resource gradient, we show that trade- offs and species pool structure (size and trait distribution) determines the shape of the productivity- diversity relationship. At a constant resource level, over-yielding drives a positive relationship between biodiversity and productivity. In contrast, along a resource gradient, the shape of the productivity- diversity relationship is determined by the distribution of species along trade-off axes and often resulted in a bell-shaped relationship. In accordance to this theoretical result, we then explain the general trend of plant biodiversity loss with fertilisation in the European flora, by showing empirical evidence that trait distribution of plant species pools throughout Europe is biased toward species preferring poorer soils. Grasslands provide a wealth of ecosystem services to human society, supported by species diversity and functions1. Biomass production (hereafter productivity2) in grasslands delivers the raw resources for dairy and meat production, sustaining an economy worth hundreds of millions worldwide3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Restoration Species Pool for Restoring Tropical Landscapes: Assessment Of
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/568873; this version posted March 5, 2019. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. 1 The restoration species pool for restoring tropical landscapes: assessment of 2 the largest Brazilian supply chain 3 4 Cristina Yuri Vidal 1, 2, *; Rafaela Pereira Naves3, Ricardo Augusto Gorne Viani4, 5 Ricardo Ribeiro Rodrigues2 6 7 *Address correspondence to C.Y.Vidal, email [email protected] 8 1 Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Biologia Vegetal, 9 Instituto de Biologia, Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz, 13.083-875, Campinas-SP, Brazil. 10 2 Departamento de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade de São Paulo, Escola Superior de 11 Agricultura “Luiz de Queiroz”, Av. Padua Dias, 11, 13.418-900, Piracicaba-SP, Brazil. 12 3 Departamento de Ciências Florestais, Universidade de São Paulo, Escola Superior de 13 Agricultura “Luiz de Queiroz”, Av. Padua Dias, 11, 13.418-900, Piracicaba-SP, Brazil. 14 4 Departamento de Biotecnologia e Produção Vegetal e Animal, Universidade Federal de São 15 Carlos, Centro de Ciências Agrárias, Rodovia Anhanguera, km 174, 13.600-091, Araras-SP, 16 Brazil. 17 18 Author contributions: ‘CYV and RRR conceived and designed the research. CYV performed 19 data compilation; CYV and RPN analyzed the data; CYV and RAGV led the writing of the 20 manuscript; all authors contributed to the drafts and gave final approval for publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 19 Metrics and Models of Community Phylogenetics
    Chapter 19 Metrics and Models of Community Phylogenetics William D. Pearse, Andy Purvis, Jeannine Cavender-Bares and Matthew R. Helmus Abstract Community phylogenetics combines ideas from community ecology and evolutionary biology, using species phylogeny to explore the processes underlying ecological community assembly. Here, we describe the development of the field’s comparative methods and their roots in conservation biology, biodi- versity quantification, and macroevolution. Next, we review the multitude of community phylogenetic structure metrics and place each into one of four classes: shape, evenness, dispersion, and dissimilarity. Shape metrics examine the structure of an assemblage phylogeny, while evenness metrics incorporate species abun- dances. Dispersion metrics examine assemblages given a phylogeny of species that could occupy those assemblages (the source pool), while dissimilarity metrics compare phylogenetic structure between assemblages. We then examine how metrics perform in simulated communities that vary in their phylogenetic struc- ture. We provide an example of model-based approaches and argue that they are a promising area of future research in community phylogenetics. Code to reproduce all these analyses is available in the Online Practical Material (http://www. mpcm-evolution.org). We conclude by discussing future research directions for the field as a whole. W. D. Pearse (&) Á J. Cavender-Bares Department Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior, University of Minnesota, 1987 Upper Buford Circle, Saint Paul, MN 55108, USA e-mail: [email protected] J. Cavender-Bares e-mail: [email protected] A. Purvis Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK e-mail: [email protected] M. R. Helmus Amsterdam Global Change Institute, Department of Animal Ecology, Vrije Universiteit, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands e-mail: [email protected] L.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Relative Importance of Neutral Stochasticity in Ecological Communities
    i t o r ’ Oikos 123: 1420–1430, 2014 d s E doi: 10.1111/oik.01493 OIKOS ¢ 2014 Te Authors. Oikos ¢ 2014 Nordic Society Oikos C Subject Editor: Lonnie Aarssen. Editor-in-Chief: Dries Bonte. Accepted 26 July 2014 h o i c e Assessing the relative importance of neutral stochasticity in ecological communities Mark Vellend, Diane S. Srivastava, Kathryn M. Anderson, Carissa D. Brown, Jill E. Jankowski, Elizabeth J. Kleynhans, Nathan J. B. Kraft, Alathea D. Letaw, A. Andrew M. Macdonald, Janet E. Maclean, Isla H. Myers-Smith, Andrea R. Norris and Xinxin Xue M. Vellend ([email protected]), C. D. Brown and I. H. Myers-Smith, Dépt de Biologie, Univ. de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, J1K 2R1, Canada. – D. S. Srivastava, K. M. Anderson, J. E. Jankowski, E. J. Kleynhans, N. J. B. Kraft, A. D. Letaw, A. A. M. Macdonald, J. E. Maclean, Dept of Zoology and Biodiversity Research Centre, Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada. – A. R. Norris, Dept of Forest Sciences, Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada. – X. Xue, Dept of Botany and Biodiversity Research Centre, Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada. A central current debate in community ecology concerns the relative importance of deterministic versus stochastic processes underlying community structure. However, the concept of stochasticity presents several profound philosophical, theoretical and empirical challenges, which we address here. Te philosophical argument that nothing in nature is truly stochastic can be met with the following operational concept of neutral stochasticity in community ecology: change in the composition of a community (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Unifying Measures of Biodiversity: Understanding When Richness And
    Diversity and Distributions, (Diversity Distrib.) (2013) 1–10 BIODIVERSITY Unifying measures of biodiversity: RESEARCH understanding when richness and phylogenetic diversity should be congruent † Caroline M. Tucker1,2 and Marc W. Cadotte1,2*† 1Department of Biological Sciences, ABSTRACT University of Toronto, Scarborough, 1265 Aim Biogeographical theory and conservation valuation schemes necessarily Military Trail, Toronto, ON M1C 1A4, 2 involve assessing how biodiversity is distributed through space and ‘biodiversity’ Canada, Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, encapsulates many different aspects of biological organization and information. 25 Willcocks Street, Toronto, ON M5S 3B2, While biogeography may try to explain biodiversity patterns, successful conserva- Canada tion strategies should attempt to maximize different aspects of diversity. Ulti- mately, diversity patterns are the product of evolutionary history, and research and conservation efforts seek to understand the unequal distribution of evolu- tionary history. For conservation efforts, results have been inconsistent as to A Journal of Conservation Biogeography whether species richness (SR) provides sufficient surrogacy for evolutionary his- tory. Here, we provide a conceptual framework allowing for the direct compari- son of taxonomic richness and phylogenetic diversity (PD), both in terms of their mechanistic relationship and the relationship between their spatial distributions. Location Global. Methods We present a framework that relates regional
    [Show full text]