Metacommunity Ecology, Volume 59

Leibold, Mathew A.; Chase, Jonathan M.

doi:10.1515/9781400889068

Cited by 377 publications

(404 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

393

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Spatial heterogeneity allows different species to be favored in different patches of the metacommunity, a crucial element of the spatial storage effect (Chesson 92 2000b;Shoemaker and Melbourne 2016). Spatial heterogeneity also provides the environmental context that determines whether dispersal is limiting, sufficient, or too high relative to the 94 strength of local niche selection, which regulates the degree to which species distributions can be explained by environmental variation alone (Leibold and Chase 2018). Although it offers many 96 benefits, dispersal is costly; it requires time, energy, and risk, which suggests possible trade-offs with other life-history traits (Bonte et al 2012;Stevens et al 2012), such as dormancy.…”

Section: The Evolutionary Ecology Of Dispersal and Dormancy 82mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Metacommunity ecology provides a framework for understanding how processes on multiple spatial scales influence the assembly, structure, and dynamics of communities (Leibold 36 et al 2004;Holyoak et al 2005;Leibold and Chase 2018). At the local scale, niche selection (due to abiotic constraints and species interactions) and demographic stochasticity regulate 38 community structure (Chesson 2000a;Adler et al 2007;Gravel et al 2011;Vellend 2016).…”

Section: Introduction 34mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the maturation of metacommunity ecology has demonstrated the need to move beyond idealized models like these and instead focus on a broader metacommunity state space defined 48 by continuous gradients of dispersal, niche selection, stochasticity, and historical biogeography (Vellend 2016;Brown et al 2017;Leibold and Chase 2018). There is also a growing need to 50 incorporate additional ecological factors to explain discrepancies between theoretical predictions and patterns found in nature.…”

Section: Introduction 34mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Dormancy in metacommunities

Wisnoski¹,

Leibold²,

Lennon³

2018

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although metacommunity ecology has improved our understanding of how dispersal 16 affects community structure and dynamics across spatial scales, it has yet to adequately account for dormancy. Dormancy is a reversible state of reduced metabolic activity that enables temporal 18 dispersal within the metacommunity. Dormancy is also a metacommunity-level process because it can covary with spatial dispersal and affect diversity across spatial scales. We develop a 20 framework to integrate dispersal and dormancy, focusing on the covariation they exhibit, to predict how dormancy modifies the importance of species interactions, dispersal, and historical 22 contingencies in metacommunities. We examine case studies of microcrustaceans in ephemeral ponds, where dormancy is integral to metacommunity dynamics. We analyze traits of bromeliad-24 dwelling invertebrates and identify constraints on dispersal and dormancy strategies. Using simulations, we demonstrate that dormancy can alter classic metacommunity patterns of diversity 26 in ways that depend on dispersal-dormancy covariation and spatiotemporal environmental variability. We propose that dormancy may also facilitate evolution-mediated priority effects if 28 locally adapted seed banks prevent colonization by more dispersal-limited species. We present theoretically and empirically testable predictions for other possible ecological and evolutionary 30 implications of dormancy in metacommunities, some of which may fundamentally alter our understanding of metacommunity ecology.

show abstract

Section: The Evolutionary Ecology Of Dispersal and Dormancy 82mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introduction 34mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introduction 34mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dormancy in metacommunities

Wisnoski¹,

Leibold²,

Lennon³

2018

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Here, we found that both the average species similarity and its dependence on body size were associated with the physical structure of the landscape. Indeed, the preponderant role of heterogeneity in determining diversity patterns supports this connection (Rosenzweig 1995, Leibold andChase 2018). Indeed, the preponderant role of heterogeneity in determining diversity patterns supports this connection (Rosenzweig 1995, Leibold andChase 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…The SST also predicts a change from a negative to positive association between species size ratio and body size when the difference between the landscape and food fractal dimensions increase or when the food concentration increases (Ritchie 2010). This is the case for the skewness in the distributions of species' body sizes (Ritchie and Olff 1999), its dependence on dispersal limitation (Ritchie 2010), the increase in species similarity with food concentration (Ritchie 2010), or the existence of a humped association between richness and productivity (MacArthur and Levins 1964, Marquet and Taper 1998, Marquet et al 2008, Leibold and Chase 2018. It should be noted that other predictions of SST are shared by hypotheses that are based on alternative mechanisms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

From Hutchinsonian ratios to spatial scaling theory: the interplay among limiting similarity, body size and landscape structure

Rodríguez-Tricot

Arim

2019

Ecography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spatial scaling theory (SST) relates the physical structure of the environment to species coexistence and community assembly. Although SST is a recognized theory in ecology, few studies have evaluated its predictions, producing contradictory results and frequently failing to meet its assumptions. In addition, the 'risk predictions' of SST regarding an increase in species similarity with body size and the dependence of this pattern on the landscape and food fractal dimensions have not been evaluated. This study attempted to account for previous limitations, analyzing these predictions in coleopteran guilds that inhabit 18 temporary ponds. This metacommunity covers a large gradient of environmental variables, including food density, the landscape fractal dimension, the food fractal dimensions and other indicators of pond heterogeneity. Average similarity in carnivorous and herbivorous body sizes systematically increased with guild richness, fulfilling classical predictions of niche theory. Species similarity was associated with body size, but the association reverts from negative to positive as the landscape fractal dimension and heterogeneity increases, a pattern further supported by null model analyses. Several nonexclusive mechanisms may account for this pattern: 1) the body size-dependent landscape perception, through which small animals detect more heterogeneity than larger animals; 2) the reaching of landscape limits by larger species, which prevents them from accessing novel largest clusters; 3) the large differences between the landscape and food fractal dimensions; and 4) the homogenization of the landscape when an integer fractal dimension is reached. These mechanisms may dictate that smaller organisms are more able to capitalize on heterogeneity or available resources than larger organisms, thus promoting increased similarity among smaller species. The presented results support the connection between landscape spatial structure and biodiversity and a mechanistic understanding of this connection from the SST.

show abstract

A primer of community ecology using the R language

Kadowaki

2023

Population Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community ecology beginners often struggle to understand theories expressed in complex mathematical formulas and to master computer programming. To remedy this situation, this article provides a practical, R‐based introduction to community ecology by illustrating core concepts (vital rates, carrying capacity, and density dependence) and models that can be used to explore the patterns of species abundance and diversity. The structure of this article consists of three modeling exercises, each asking a general question that can be answered by a combination of theory and R programming: (1) what determines the abundance of species, and what makes a population persist and go extinct?; (2) what determines the distribution of species and species diversity?; (3) what determines the relative abundance of species and what allows species to coexist? Through the exercises, I discuss the following five concepts and ideas that provide valuable insights into the questions: (i) the tragedy of the commons, (ii) the theory of island biogeography, (iii) competitive exclusion, (iv) the neutral theory of biodiversity, and (v) frequency dependence. These materials are thus designed to guide the reader in developing an intuition for ecological thinking that will help capture the essence of the global environmental and biodiversity crisis. Although this article does not delineate the scope and depth of the vast field of community ecology, I hope that it will motivate the reader to step up to a more formal introduction to community ecology.

show abstract

Metacommunity Ecology, Volume 59

Cited by 377 publications

References 0 publications

Dormancy in metacommunities

Dormancy in metacommunities

From Hutchinsonian ratios to spatial scaling theory: the interplay among limiting similarity, body size and landscape structure

A primer of community ecology using the R language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About