Quantifying and disentangling dispersal in metacommunities: how close have we come? How far is there to go?

Connectivity as a Management Tool for Coastal Ecosystems in Changing Oceans

“…Therefore most methods measure dispersal patterns indirectly, e.g., through successful settlers (recruits). Previous reviews of the methodology used to measure connectivity distinguished between direct or indirect, or artificial or natural methods (Jacobson & Peres-Neto, 2010;Thorrold et al, 2002). Rather than following these dichotomies, we classify connectivity methods according to their applicability to different species or other systems.…”

“…Levels of variation (seasonality, annual variation, and periodicity) need to be examined in depth, and methods to assess connectivity should take these variations into account. Connectivity then should be thought of as the net result of all dispersal that has been observed over a given period, and the actual connectivity of the system will arise from the integration of all dispersal processes (Jacobson & Peres-Neto, 2010). …”

“…These can differ, however, in their ability to assess variability in connectivity and can be further distinguished by their specificity in measuring dispersal between subpopulations and their applicability to other systems (Cowen et al, 2006;Cowen & Sponaugle, 2009;Jones et al, 2009;Levin, 2006). Other reviews about connectivity have adopted a classification based on two main categories: direct and indirect methods (Jacobson & Peres-Neto, 2010) or natural & artificial markers (Thorrold et al, 2002). Because each method targets a different goal and is often applied to a specific scale, we have chosen instead to classify methods by assessing their specificity to a species or system.…”

The Interplay Between Landscape Structure and Biotic Interactions

“…Yet variation in dispersal rate among species in a metacommunity-a key component of metacommunity dynamics-can result from species' traits or structural aspects of the landscape (e.g., distance between patches, matrix structure, and arrangement of patches) [46]. Whereas metacommunity models include general variation in dispersal, few investigations (e.g., [47]) explore how dispersal is affected by both functional connectivity, i.e., the role of species traits and their interaction with the landscape, and structural connectivity, i.e., spatial configuration of landscape features [48]. As functional connectivity is a species-specific concept [49], considering it as such will likely better represent dispersal dynamics in metacommunities [45].…”

“…Another gap in integrating landscape structure into metacommunity theory is the absence of an underlying structural landscape model [47]. Explicit landscape models are necessary because dispersal through different landscape types [50] and the directionality of dispersal [51], which can be affected by landscape structure, can alter metacommunity structure and dynamics.…”