Data and code from: Asynchrony among local communities stabilizes ecosystem function of metacommunities
Kevin R. WilcoxAndrew T. TredennickSally E. KoernerEmily GrmanLauren M. HallettMeghan L. AvolioKimberly La PierreGregory R. HousemanForest IsbellDavid Samuel JohnsonJuha M. AlataloAndrew H. BaldwinEdward W. BorkElizabeth H. BoughtonWilliam D. BowmanAndrea J. BrittonJames F. CahillScott L. CollinsGuozhen DuAnu EskelinenLaura GoughAnke JentschChristel C. KernKari KlanderudAlan K. KnappJüergen KreylingYiqi LuoJennie R. McLarenPartick MagonigalV. G. OnipchenkoJanet S. PrevéyJodie PriceClare H. RobinsonOsvaldo E. SalaMelinda D. SmithNadejda A. SoudzilovskaiaLara SouzaDavid TilmanShannon M. WhiteZhuwen XuLaura YahdjianQiang YuPengfei ZhangYunhai Zhang
0
Citation
0
Reference
10
Related Paper
Abstract:
R code, derived metrics, and limited metadata associated with Wilcox et al. (2017). Asynchrony among local communities stabilizes ecosystem function of metacommunities. Ecology Letters.When using this data or code, please cite the original publication:
Wilcox, K.R., A.T. Tredennick, S. Koerner, E. Grman, L. Hallett, M. Avolio, K. La Pierre, G. Houseman, F. Isbell, D. Johnson, J. Alatalo, A. Baldwin, E. Bork, E. Boughton, W. Bowman, A. Britton, J. Cahill, S. Collins, G-Z. Du, A. Eskelinen, L. Gough, A. Jentsch, C. Kern, K. Klanderud, A. Knapp, J. Kreyling, Y. Luo, J. McLaren, P. Megonigal, V. Onipchenko, J. Prevéy, J. Price, C. Robinson, O. Sala, M. Smith, N. Soudzilovskaia, L. Souza, D. Tilman, S. White, Z. Xu, L. Yahdjian, Q. Yu, P. Zhang, Y, Zhang. (2017). Asynchrony among local communities stabilizes ecosystem function of metacommunities. Ecology Letters 20(12):1534–1545.
Additionally, please cite the Figshare file set:
Wilcox, K.R., A.T. Tredennick, S. Koerner, E. Grman, L. Hallett, M. Avolio, K. La Pierre. (2017). Data and code from: Asynchrony among local communities stabilizes ecosystem function of metacommunities. Figshare. https://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5384167.
R CodeThe analysis proceeds in several steps, which can be viewed most easily by examining the ~/Wilcox_etal_DerivedData_and_Code/analysis_scripts/main_text_scripts/patches_source_all_scripts.R file. Questions about the code or analysis should be directed to Kevin Wilcox (wilcoxkr@gmail.com) or Andrew Tredennick (atredenn@gmail.com).
Derived DataWe provide the full set of metrics (e.g., alpha, beta, and gamma stability and diversity) for each of our study sites. The main analysis and all figures in the paper can be reproduced using these metrics. Metrics were calculated from time series of abundance data from 62 grassland sites around the globe, although primarily from North America and Europe. The data is part of the CoRRE Data Base (http://corredata.weebly.com/), and those interested in using proprietary data not included in this fileset are encouraged to contact the CoRRE data base maintainers (http://corredata.weebly.com/contact.html).
Keywords:
Asynchrony (computer programming)
Metacommunity
Code (set theory)
Resilience
Abstract Metacommunity ecology investigates how drivers of regional and local scales cause compositional variation in a network of communities potentially linked by dispersal. We examined the metacommunity structure of epiphytic bromeliad assemblages along a coastal‐inland gradient in a subtropical geographic corridor extending from the Atlantic coast to near the Uruguay River, in the central depression of Rio Grande do Sul State, in southernmost Brazil. We surveyed floristic and environmental data on a sequence of 71 testimonial hills. We used elements of metacommunity structure to identify metacommunity patterns (i.e. random, checkerboard, nested, Clementsian, Gleasonian, evenly spaced and quasi‐structured). We ran a canonical correspondence analysis to evaluate how coastal‐inland gradient influenced species distribution. Finally, we employed variation partitioning to determine archetype‐based metacommunity structuring processes (i.e. species sorting, neutral dynamics, patch dynamics and mass effects). We found that temperature‐ and moisture‐based gradients generated environmental heterogeneity that established species filtering, determining the formation of cohesive groups of epiphytic bromeliads with coincidentally occurring boundaries (i.e. quasi‐Clementsian structure). As a result, we identified four metacommunity structures embedded along the coastal‐inland gradient: In the eastern and east‐central metacommunities, species distributions were idiosyncratic due to individual species' responses to environmental gradients (i.e. quasi‐Gleasonian structure), and in the western and west‐central metacommunities, we observed Clementsian and Gleasonian structures, respectively. Habitat heterogeneity and dispersal sufficiency (i.e. species sorting archetype) were the foremost drivers establishing metacommunity structures. Ultimately, and surprisingly, in the east‐central metacommunity, we detected source‐sink dynamics among the testimonial hills (i.e. mass effects archetype). Our findings suggest that epiphytic bromeliad assemblages are linked to a gradient‐driven pattern with moderate heterogeneity (i.e. low turnover) and identify four embedded metacommunity structures. Moreover, they indicate that the species sorting archetype best represents the processes of establishing metacommunity structures.
Metacommunity
Nestedness
Epiphyte
Gradient analysis
Cite
Citations (2)
Metacommunities occupy landscapes, yet few studies of metacommunity structure consider contributions of multiple landscape elements explicitly. Previous studies have focused on measures of focal habitat connectivity as proxies for dispersal to distinguish among alternative metacommunity models. However, it is also clear that dispersal of species and metacommunity structure are also shaped by landscape composition and configuration. Slow integration of explicit landscape heterogeneity into the metacommunity concept has both limited our understanding of how landscape–dispersal interactions shape metacommunity structure and constrained the practical relevance of metacommunity theory. In this study, we encourage integration by developing an approach that characterizes how multiple landscape elements simultaneously contribute to metacommunity structure. We demonstrate the utility of this approach by characterizing how landscape heterogeneity shapes metacommunity structure of lizards at multiple spatial scales in the Mescalero Sands. We found diversity and spatial configuration of habitats in the surrounding landscape matrix best explained the pattern of nested subsets with clumped species loss observed in this lizard metacommunity across scales. Although our analyses included connectivity metrics for focal habitats, they were not shown to be important at any scale in this study. Our results were consistent with mass effects models of metacommunity theory as interpreted through landscape contrast. By integrating explicit landscape heterogeneity into the metacommunity framework, our approach provided a spatially explicit description of how and where landscape–dispersal interactions shaped metacommunity structure across scales and is directly applicable to many systems, especially those with indistinct boundaries. Our approach complements other analytical methods designed to tease apart relative roles of environmental filtering and spatial structure in metacommunity data. Finally, our approach enhances the practical relevance of metacommunity theory for future research in ecosystems subject to increasing landscape contrast as environments continue to be fragmented, habitats become further degraded and homogenized, and matrix habitats become more inhospitable.
Metacommunity
Landscape connectivity
Ecotope
Cite
Citations (23)
Author(s): Hayes, Sean M. | Advisor(s): Anderson, Kurt E | Abstract: It has become increasingly clear that communities in nature are often not isolated systems, but instead interact with other communities via the movement of organisms (`dispersal'), forming metacommunities. The dynamics of these metacommunities can differ dramatically from what is expected from studying individual communities alone, enabling many new mechanisms for the persistence of species within communities. Central to these mechanisms is asynchrony: differences in the timing or quality of dynamics among communities. Asynchrony is often assumed to arise from environmental differences, however it is also possible for asynchrony to emerge from interactions between identical communities, a phenomenon known as pattern formation. Here we explore the role of pattern formation in metacommunity dynamics by investigating the mechanisms which lead to asynchrony among identical communities. While it is well known in the literature that the number, magnitude, and distribution of dispersal connections within a metacommunity can influence asynchrony, we demonstrate that measures describing the local stability of the synchronized state can vary independently from these properties of dispersal and plays an important role in the emergence of asynchrony in metacommunities. We also demonstrate that not only the frequency of asynchrony but the types and qualities of asynchronous dynamics vary dramatically between spatial structures with the same amount and distribution of dispersal. These findings illustrate the importance of understanding the effect of dispersal structure on the dynamical quality of asynchrony, however methods for this are limited. Thus we develop and analyze a simplified model which allows prediction of the asynchronous dynamics possible for a given dispersal structure, and the conditions promoting different dynamical regimes. Finally, we consider how the structure of interactions between species within communities influence asynchrony. We find that communities which cannot persist in the absence of dispersal among communities are the most prone to asynchrony. The net result is a negative feedback between community persistence in isolation and persistence in the presence of dispersal, confounding predicted relationships between community properties and persistence ability derived from the study of isolated communities alone.
Asynchrony (computer programming)
Metacommunity
Cite
Citations (0)
We used a metacommunity of 49 discrete communities of aquatic invertebrates to analyze the dynamical relationship between community and metacommunity species distributions as a test of the neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. At the community scale, observed variation in species richness and relative abundance was greater than predicted by neutral models, and revealed important differences among species in competitive ability and tolerance for predation. At the metacommunity scale, species with metacommunity proportions of less than 0.01% (38% of the observed metacommunity) were consistently more abundant than predicted by models. Our results are at variance with the neutral theory, and suggest that the use of an identical survival probability for all species in neutral models misrepresents substantial aspects of community assembly. Nevertheless, building and testing neutral models can provide valuable insights into the processes that determine species distributions.
Metacommunity
Community
Relative abundance distribution
Cite
Citations (1)
Current analyses of metacommunity data largely focus on global attributes across the entire metacommunity, such as mean alpha, beta, and gamma diversity, as well as the partitioning of compositional variation into single estimates of contributions of space and environmental effects and, more recently, possible contributions of species interactions. However, this view neglects the fact that different species and sites in the landscape can vary widely in how they contribute to these metacommunity‐wide attributes. We argue for a new conceptual framework with matched analytics with the goals of studying the complex and interactive relations between process and pattern in metacommunities that is focused on the variation among species and among sites which we call the ‘internal structure' of the metacommunity. To demonstrate how the internal structure could be studied, we create synthetic data using a process‐based colonization–extinction metacommunity model. We then use joint species distribution models to estimate how the contributions of space, environment, and biotic interactions driving metacommunity assembly differ among species and sites. We find that this approach to the internal structure of metacommunities provides useful information about the distinct ways that different species and different sites contribute to metacommunity structure. Although it has limitations, our work points at a more general approach to understand how other possible complexities might affect internal structure and might thus be incorporated into a more cohesive metacommunity theory.
Metacommunity
Cite
Citations (49)
The spatial isolation gradient of communities and the gradient in the species dispersal ability are recognized as determinants of biodiversity in metacommunities. In spite of this, mean field models, spatially explicit models, and experiments were mainly focused on idealized spatial arrangements of communities leaving aside the combining role of dispersal and isolation gradients in metacommunity processes. Consequently, we have an incipient understanding of the role of the real spatial arrangement of communities on biodiversity patterns. We focus on six metacommunities for which confident information about the spatial arrangement of water bodies is available. Using coalescent metacommunity models and null models that randomize the location of water bodies, we estimated the potential effect of the landscape on biodiversity and its dependence on species dispersal ability. At extremely low or high dispersal abilities, the location of ponds does not influence diversity because different communities are equally affected by the low or high incoming dispersal. At intermediate dispersal abilities, peripheral communities present a much lower richness and higher beta diversity than central communities. Moreover, metacommunities from real landscapes host more biodiversity than randomized landscapes, a result that is determined by the heterogeneity in the geographic isolation of communities. In a dispersal gradient, mass effects systematically increase the local richness and decrease beta diversity. However, the spatial arrangement of patches only has a large importance in metacommunity processes at intermediate dispersal abilities, which ensures access to central locations but limits dispersal in isolated communities. The ongoing reduction in spatial extent and simplification of the landscape may consequently undermine the metacommunity processes that support biodiversity, something that should be explicitly considered in preserving and restoring strategies.
Metacommunity
Spatial heterogeneity
Cite
Citations (14)
Abstract Current analyses of metacommunity data largely focus on global attributes across the entire metacommunity, such as mean alpha, beta, and gamma diversity, as well as the partitioning of compositional variation into single estimates of contributions of space and environmental effects and, more recently, possible contributions of species interactions. However, this view neglects the fact that different species and sites in the landscape can vary widely in how they contribute to these metacommunity-wide attributes. We argue for a new conceptual framework with matched analytics with the goals of studying the complex and interactive relations between process and pattern in metacommunities that is focused on the variation among species and among sites which we call the ‘internal structure’ of the metacommunity. To demonstrate how the internal structure could be studied, we create synthetic data using a process-based colonization-extinction metacommunity model. We then use Joint Species Distribution Models to estimate how the contributions of space, environment and biotic interactions driving metacommunity assembly differ among species and sites. We find that this approach to the internal structure of metacommunities provides useful information about the distinct ways that different species and different sites contribute to metacommunity structure. Although it has limitations, our work points at a more general approach to understand how other possible complexities might affect internal structure and might thus be incorporated into a more cohesive metacommunity theory.
Metacommunity
Cite
Citations (11)
Metacommunity
Community
Functional ecology
Cite
Citations (131)
Metacommunity theory, which has gained a central position in ecology, accounts for the role of migration in patterns of diversity among communities at different scales. Community isolation has a main role in this theory, but is difficult to estimate empirically, partly due to the taxon‐dependent nature of dispersal. Landscapes could be perceived as either fragmented or connected for organisms with contrasting dispersal abilities. Indeed, the dispersal ability of a taxon, and the spatial scale at which eco‐evolutionary processes shape local diversity, determine a taxon‐dependent metacommunity network. In this paper, we introduce a methodology using graph theory to define this taxon‐dependent metacommunity network and then to estimate the isolation of local communities. We analyzed the relative importance of local conditions versus community isolation as determinants of community richness for 25 taxa inhabiting 18 temporary ponds. Although local factors have been the foci of most previous empirical and theoretical considerations, we demonstrate that the metacommunity network is an equally important contributor to local diversity. We also found that the relative effect of local conditions and the metacommunity network depend on body size and taxon abundance. Local diversity of larger species was more affected by patch isolation, while taxon abundances were associated with positive or negative effects of isolation. Our results provide empirical support for the proposed role of metacommunity networks as determinants of community diversity and show the taxon‐dependent nature of these networks.
Metacommunity
Cite
Citations (51)
Summary Most metacommunity studies aim to explain variation in community structure using environmental and spatial variables. An alternative is to examine patterns emerging at the level of an entire metacommunity, whereby six models of metacommunity structure (i.e. random, chequerboards, nestedness, evenly spaced, Gleasonian gradients and Clementsian gradients) can be examined. We aimed to test the fit of six competing models of metacommunity structure to extensive survey data on diatoms, bacteria, bryophytes and invertebrates from three drainage basins in Finland, along a latitudinal gradient from 66 °N to 70 °N. Species were mainly distributed independently of one another (following the Gleasonian model) in the southernmost drainage basin (66 °N), whereas there were discrete community types, with sets of species responding similarly along environmental gradients (following the Clementsian model), in the northernmost drainage basin (70 °N). The patterns found were not directly related to an expected relationships between environmental heterogeneity and metacommunity structures, but rather to the geographical location of the drainage basin. There is evidently among‐region variation in the best‐fit models of metacommunity structure of stream organisms. These metacommunity patterns may show some similarities among biologically disparate organismal groups sampled at the set of the same sites, although the underlying environmental drivers of those patterns may vary between the groups.
Metacommunity
Nestedness
Distance decay
Cite
Citations (68)