Community regulation models as a framework for direct and indirect effects of climate change on species distributions

Abstract

Existing projections of climate change impacts focus primarily on direct abiotic impacts on individuals and populations. However, these models often ignore species interactions, which are vital for determining community composition and structure. To evaluate both direct and indirect effects of climate change on species distributions, we applied the Menge–Sutherland model, which describes the relative role of predation and environmental stress in regulating community structure. Using a space‐for‐time approach, we tested the predictions that (1) predators are more strongly impacted by increasing environmental stress than prey (as described in the Menge–Sutherland model) and (2) incorporating indirect (predator) effects increases our ability to predict impacts of increased temperature on prey distributions. We surveyed vertical distributions of predators (sea stars) and a foundational prey species (mussels) at 20 intertidal sites spanning a thermal gradient along the West Coast of the United States. Using generalized linear models and structural equation models, we found that as temperature increased, the upper limits of foundational prey species decreased (a direct effect), while prey lower limits also shifted downward, due to an indirect effect of temperature on predator distributions. Under future climate change, mussel ranges may undergo vertical shifts toward subtidal habitats, allowing for localized persistence of mussels and associated species. Our model comparisons indicate that this framework—incorporating both direct and indirect environmental stress effects within a classic community regulation model—can improve prediction of responses to warming. Community regulation models could be expanded to inform management and conservation efforts during unprecedented climate and ecological change.

Adjusting the lens of invasion biology to focus on the impacts of climate-driven range shifts

“…Additionally, while temperature is a primary driver of distribution patterns 102,103 , biotic resistance also plays a critical role 49 . Yet biotic interactions are, themselves, often altered by abiotic conditions 16,104 . Traits can act synergistically (for example, a drought causes reduced propagules), creating feedbacks that alter the magnitude of impacts.…”

“…3 for an example) have assessed the community and ecosystem impacts of species tracking their climate niche into new areas. This research gap remains despite theoretical literature that recognizes the potential for impacts and the need for such research [14][15][16][17] . The lack of studies on range shift impacts is surprising given that the introduction and spread of new species is often viewed by ecologists through the lens of invasion biology, where the primary concern is the potential for negative impacts on the recipient community.…”

Changes in water‐soluble nitrogen and organic carbon in the post‐fire litter layer of Dahurian larch forests

“…We used SEM to explore the main factors that affect litter layer WSM and to assess how the variables were affected by the different factors. To use the SEM model, we rst conducted a principal component analysis (PCA) of the two data groups-biotic and abiotic-individually to reduce the dimensionality of the data (Wallingford and Sorte, 2019). We found that the rst two principal components accounted for 71% and 71%, and 79% of total variances in the three data groups, respectively (Table 4); therefore, in the SEM analyses, we used the standardized values of WSOC and WSN and the factor loadings of the rst two principal components of each group.…”

Peer Review #1 of "Substrate rugosity and temperature matters: patterns of benthic diversity at tropical intertidal reefs in the SW Atlantic (v0.1)"

“…Thompson et al, 2002;Hiscock et al, 2004;Morelissen & Harley, 2007;Harley, 2011;Meager et al, 2011;Kordas et al, 2015). Air and sea temperatures regulate spatio-temporal patterns of the whole in the intertidal zone by creating a gradient of environmental conditions (Sunday et al, 2019;Wallingford & Sorte, 2019). Higher temperatures reduce intertidal biodiversity, particularly PeerJ reviewing PDF | (2019:07:39107:3:0:CHECK 14 Nov 2019)…”