Effects of rapid evolution on species coexistence

Hart, Simon P.; Turcotte, Martin M.; Levine, Jonathan M.

doi:10.1073/pnas.1816298116

Cited by 137 publications

(186 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

176

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Levine & HilleRisLambers () pioneered this approach, which has since been applied in multiple studies (e.g. Adler et al , Godoy & Levine ; Godoy et al ; Chu & Adler ; Kraft et al ; Chung & Rodgers ; Germain et al ; Cardinaux et al ; Petry et al ; Hart et al ). Beyond testing conditions for coexistence, this approach can also link dynamics with underlying mechanisms (e.g.…”

Section: Ways Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Signs of stabilisation and stable coexistence

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many empirical studies motivated by an interest in stable coexistence have quantified negative density dependence, negative frequency dependence, or negative plant–soil feedback, but the links between these empirical results and ecological theory are not straightforward. Here, we relate these analyses to theoretical conditions for stabilisation and stable coexistence in classical competition models. By stabilisation, we mean an excess of intraspecific competition relative to interspecific competition that inherently slows or even prevents competitive exclusion. We show that most, though not all, tests demonstrating negative density dependence, negative frequency dependence, and negative plant–soil feedback constitute sufficient conditions for stabilisation of two‐species interactions if applied to data for per capita population growth rates of pairs of species, but none are necessary or sufficient conditions for stable coexistence of two species. Potential inferences are even more limited when communities involve more than two species, and when performance is measured at a single life stage or vital rate. We then discuss two approaches that enable stronger tests for stable coexistence‐invasibility experiments and model parameterisation. The model parameterisation approach can be applied to typical density‐dependence, frequency‐dependence, and plant–soil feedback data sets, and generally enables better links with mechanisms and greater insights, as demonstrated by recent studies.

show abstract

Section: Ways Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Signs of stabilisation and stable coexistence

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Communities may harbor very different traits depending on whether they are recent assemblages randomly drawn from the regional pool, or if species had time to adapt to the local environmental conditions and to the presence of other species (Hendry, 2016). The time required for such community adaptation may often be quite short even by ecological standards, considering the mounting evidence that species can adapt rapidly to environmental changes and to the presence of competitors or predators (Thompson, 1998; Faillace & Morin, 2016; Hart et al ., 2019). By altering species trait composition, community adaptation should thus impact BEF relationships, and control their existence, magnitude and shape.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How community adaptation affects biodiversity-ecosystem functioning relationships

Aubree

David

Jarne

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryEvidence is growing that evolutionary dynamics can impact biodiversity-ecosystem functioning (BEF) relationships. However the nature of such impacts remains poorly understood. Here we use a modelling approach to compare random communities, with no trait evolutionary fine-tuning, and co-adapted communities, where traits have co-evolved, in terms of emerging biodiversity-productivity, biodiversitystability, and biodiversity-invasion relationships. Community adaptation impacted most BEF relationships, sometimes inverting the slope of the relationship compared to random communities. Biodiversity-productivity relationships were generally less positive among co-adapted communities, with reduced contribution of sampling effects. The effect of community-adaptation, though modest regarding invasion resistance, was striking regarding invasion tolerance: co-adapted communities could remain very tolerant to invasions even at high diversity. BEF relationships are thus contingent on the history of ecosystems and their degree of community adaptation. Short-term experiments and observations following recent changes may not be safely extrapolated into the future, once eco-evolutionary feedbacks have taken place.

show abstract

“…Submerged macrophytes, on the other hand, are very common at high latitudes, but in most cases do not appear to prevent duckweed from successfully invading [52]. Third, while duckweed strains exhibit phenotypic variation in their competitive and environmental responses [53,32], our mechanistic niche models use mean values extracted from regression parameters. While identifying how variation around these means affects geographic range predictions is beyond the scope of this study, our mechanistic model can be expanded to investigate these effects.…”

Section: Thermal Fluctuations Maintain the Coexistence Boundary Of Smentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These minute floating plants widely coexist in fresh waters across N. America, Eurasia, Africa, and Australia (SI Appendix, Figs. S1 and S2), though competition limits their stable coexistence under certain conditions [32,33]. Our objective was to test whether species' laboratory-measured growth responses to temperature and competition can be used to accurately predict their poleward range limits.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers to coexistence limit the poleward range of a globally-distributed plant

Armitage

Jones

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Species' poleward ranges are thought to be primarily limited by climatic constraints rather than biotic interactions such as competition. However, theory suggests that a species' tolerance to competition is reduced in harsh environments, such as at the extremes of its climatic niche. This implies that under certain conditions, interspecific competition near species' range margins can prevent the establishment of populations into otherwise tolerable environments and results in geographic distributions being shaped by the interaction of climate and competition. We test this prediction by challenging an experimentally-parameterized mechanistic competition model to predict the poleward range boundaries of two widely co-occurring and ecologically-similar aquatic duckweed plants. We show that simple, mechanistic ecological niche models which include competition and thermal response terms best predict the northern range limits of our study species, outperforming competition-free mechanistic models and matching the predictive ability of popular statistical niche models fit to occurrence records. Next, using the theoretical framework of modern coexistence theory, we show that relative nonlinearity in competitors' responses to temperature fluctuations maintains coexistence at the subordinate competitor's poleward range boundary, highlighting the importance of this underappreciated fluctuation-dependent coexistence mechanism. Our results demonstrate the predictive utility of mechanistic niche models and support a more nuanced, interactive role of climate and species interactions in determining range boundaries, which may help explain the conflicting results from previous tests of classic range limit theory and contribute to a more mechanistic understanding of range dynamics under global change.K eywords range limit | competition | coexistence | ecological niche model | thought to have primacy over interspecific interactions in determining species' poleward boundaries. However, empirical support for this century-old hypothesis -variously called stress gradient hypothesis or the species interactions-abiotic stress hypothesis (SIASH) [5]-remains mixed [6,7,8,9,10].These hypotheses commonly posit that the per capita magnitude [11,5] or relative frequency [12,13] of negative interactions, such as competition, should decrease with environmental stress resulting in weaker competitive regulation of populations in harsher environments. While this prediction often holds (reviewed in [5]), a population's tolerance of competition can also decrease in harshening environments, where even weak competition can drive an already-low per capita growth rate, r (= dN/N dt, where N is population size), below zero [14,15,16,17,18,19]. The relative importance of competition or other negative interactions in shaping range margins may therefore hinge on a balance between the overall intensity of competition experienced by a marginal population and the extent to which competition suppresses its environmentallydetermined per capita growth rate.Assumin...

show abstract

Effects of rapid evolution on species coexistence

Cited by 137 publications

References 44 publications

Signs of stabilisation and stable coexistence

Signs of stabilisation and stable coexistence

How community adaptation affects biodiversity-ecosystem functioning relationships

Barriers to coexistence limit the poleward range of a globally-distributed plant

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About