Quantifying eco‐evolutionary contributions to trait divergence in spatially structured systems

Govaert, Lynn; Pantel, Jelena H.; Meester, Luc De

doi:10.1002/ecm.1531

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, with all relevant variables combined, the explanatory power of functional diversity increases substantially with increasing spatial scale ( r 2 = 13%, 21% vs. 45%), but the explanatory power of species richness slightly decreases with increasing spatial scale (41%, 35% vs. 27%). Taken together, the patterns of functional community structure, site conditions and biodiversity, or their relationship, can be described as best as scale‐variant, implying that the mechanism of community assembly linking functional community structure and biodiversity are spatially variable and scale‐dependent (Chalmandrier et al., 2017; Govaert et al., 2022; Swenson & Enquist, 2009). However, environmental effects on trait mean and interspecfic variation seem scale invariant.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Depicting a community through mean, variation and covariation of traits and their different manifestations is the primary focus of trait ecology (Garnier et al., 2016). However, much of the existing knowledge in trait ecology, especially the nature and extent of the mean (Kang et al., 2014; Messier et al., 2010; Muscarella & Uriarte, 2016), variation (Albert et al., 2010; de Bello et al., 2011; Siefert et al., 2015), covariation of traits (Dwyer & Laughlin, 2017; He et al., 2021) and their relevance to assembly processes (Adler et al., 2013; Cornwell & Ackerly, 2009; Kraft et al., 2014; Shipley et al., 2006) remains spatially implicit, somewhat limiting our ability to understand spatially explicit assembly processes and biodiversity distributions in a heterogeneous landscape (Banitz, 2019; Carmona et al., 2016; Govaert et al., 2022; Moran et al., 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Putting space into trait ecology: Trait, environment and biodiversity relationships at multiple spatial scales

Biswas,

He,

et al. 2024

Journal of Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological processes such as environmental filtering and biotic interactions that shape species' traits and community diversity often vary with geographic distance, potentially generating spatial structures in trait variation, covariation and biodiversity data. Understanding spatial structures of trait, environment and biodiversity, or the spatial link between those factors, is fundamental to identifying spatially explicit assembly processes or biodiversity distributions in spatially heterogeneous landscapes but remains unclear. To address the issue, we gathered individual‐level leaf and diameter traits data paired with environmental data from a 4.8 ha subtropical Chinese forest and divided the forest into 25, 100, 400 and 1936 m2 grids representing contrasting spatial grains. Using Moran's correlograms, we quantified the spatial structures of trait variation and covariation, environmental conditions and biodiversity. We assessed the links between those variables using path analyses. Most variables were spatially positively autocorrelated. However, trait mean was more autocorrelated than trait variation or covariation, and intraspecific trait variation was more autocorrelated than interspecific variation. Autocorrelations in those community properties were generally weak at the large grain. Path analyses indicated positive associations between interspecific trait variation and species diversity at a very small to medium scale and a positive association between intraspecific variation and small‐scale functional diversity. Trait covariation constrained biodiversity, and multi‐trait means were negatively linked to very small‐ to medium‐scale species diversity but positively to medium‐ and large‐scale functional diversity. Patterns regarding multi‐trait community structure–environment–biodiversity associations were generally held for individual traits. However, depending on the trait, spatial scale and plant ontogenic stage, the pattern's strength changed, or occasionally, their sign reversed. We attribute spatial patterns in multi‐trait mean and covariation to scale‐dependent variation in environmental heterogeneity and trait variation to scale‐dependent competition. Synthesis. Our study provides novel insights into spatial and scale‐dependent variability in functional community structure, environment and biodiversity, and their relationships. Our results demonstrate the usefulness of spatial trait analyses in identifying scale‐dependent assembly processes or finding the importance of processes to biodiversity distributions in spatially heterogeneous landscapes. A spatially explicit perspective is thus helpful for the progress of trait ecology.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Putting space into trait ecology: Trait, environment and biodiversity relationships at multiple spatial scales

Biswas,

He,

et al. 2024

Journal of Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We believe that such comparative analyses can contribute to a better understanding of the patterns at each level. In addition, given that population assembly determines evolutionary potential and that patterns of local adaptation may impact community assembly and responses to environmental change (Urban et al 2008;Hendry 2017;Leibold et al 2022), the joint analysis of identity and trait variation at the level of populations and communities is important to understand how populations and communities respond to landscape heterogeneity and environmental change (Govaert et al 2021(Govaert et al , 2022. S8.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parallels and divergences in landscape genetic and metacommunity patterns in zooplankton inhabiting soda pans

Horváth

Haileselasie

Vad

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological processes maintaining landscape genetic variation and metacommunity structure in natural landscapes have traditionally been studied in isolation. Their integrated study may hold important information as to what extent the effect of major ecological processes are species- or landscape-specific, resulting in a more coherent picture on the spatial organization of biodiversity. Here, we explicitly compared the relative importance of spatial and environmental drivers of both cladoceran metacommunity structure as well as landscape genetic structure of its most widespread member, the water flea Daphnia magna, in soda pans of the Seewinkel region in Austria. The landscape of soda pans in this region is characterized by strong environmental gradients and unidirectional wind acting as a key dispersal agent among these temporary habitats. Our study shows both parallels and divergences in the relative importance of local environmental sorting and spatial connectivity in determining landscape genetic versus metacommunity structure. The metacommunity is structured primarily by the environment, while in the D. magna metapopulation, the spatial signal is predominant. The much weaker environmental signal in Daphnia can be explained by the fact that the microsatellite markers are presumably neutral and was confirmed by a per-allele analysis. An important parallel between metacommunity and landscape genetic structure is the strong signal of the prevailing wind direction in determining the spatial pattern. This suggests that for both community as well as population assembly in D. magna, wind plays an important role in determining connectivity among soda pans, thereby affecting dispersal and colonization rates influencing both local species and genetic composition.

show abstract