The Diversity-Disturbance Relationship: Is It Generally Strong and Peaked?

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Ecological Society of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Ecology. Abstract.The contemporary literature accepts that disturbance strongly influences patterns of species diversity, and that the relationship is peaked, with a maximum at intermediate levels of disturbance. We tested this hypothesis using a compilation of published species diversity-disturbance relationships that were gleaned from a literature search of papers published from 1985 through 1996 and from references therein. We identified 116 species richness-, 53 diversity-, and 28 evenness-disturbance relationships in the literature, which we grouped according to shape of relationship (nonsignificant, peaked, negative monotonic, positive monotonic, or U-shaped). We tested the relationships between the strength and shapes of these relationships and attributes of the community, disturbance, and sampling and study design. Nonsignificant relationships were the most common, comprising 35% of richness, 28% of diversity, and 50% of evenness studies. Peaked responses were reported in only 16% of richness, 19% of diversity, and 11% of evenness cases. Explained variation in the three measures of diversity was variable among studies but averaged -50%. It was higher when few samples and few disturbance levels were examined and when organisms within the samples were not exhaustively censused, suggesting that procedural artifact contributes to these relationships. Explained variation was also higher in studies in which disturbance was measured as a gradient of time passed since the last disturbance (mean r2 = 61%), vs. studies of spatial variation in richness (mean r2 = 42%). Peaked richness relationships had the greatest odds of being observed when sampled area and actual evapotranspiration were small, when disturbances were natural rather than anthropogenic in origin, and when few disturbance levels were examined. Thus, on average, diversity-disturbance relationships do not have consistently high r2 and are not as consistently peaked as the contemporary consensus would suggest. It has been hypothesized that in communities where post-disturbance succession is not driven by competitive hierarchies, disturbance intensity and frequency may have little effect on species richness (Reice 1985, Chesson and Huntly 1997). Huston (1979, 1994) suggests productivity may influence the shape of the diversity-disturbance relationship. Unpredictable, severe, episodic disturbances may have greater effects on richness than do predictable, moderate events to which communities may adapt (Reice et al. 1990). Wootton's (1998) models predict that, in multitrophic systems, IDH should hold for species competing ...

Fine-scale spatial patterns of the Tertiary relict Zelkova abelicea (Ulmaceae) indicate possible processes contributing to its persistence to climate changes

“…In fact, disturbance has been demonstrated to influence species richness (Mackey and Currie 2001), and several hypotheses have been proposed for the diversity-disturbance relationship. The intermediate disturbance hypothesis (IDH) (Levin and Paine 1974;Connell 1978) can be seen as the leading hypothesis for this relationship, whereas empirical evidences reviewed in Proulx and Mazumder (1998) suggest that this relationship would depend on the productivity of the ecosystem.…”

Flood disturbance and riparian species diversity on the Colorado River Delta

“…Their research also yielded sometimes inconsistent results. These and other disagreements in the ecological literature have caused some to conclude that disturbance is not among the most important factors that affect species diversity (Mackey and Currie 2001).…”

Disturbance effects of kelp thalli on structure and diversity of a coastal Arctic marine soft-bottom assemblage

“…Empirical evidence corroborates disturbance as a driver of species diversity and community structure on the rocky and sedimentary shores of the temperate zone (e.g. Mackey and Currie 2001). Several studies were conducted at higher latitudes, demonstrating disturbance effects on polar benthic communities, as could be inferred from theory, which suggests a relatively high importance of disturbance effects under harsh environmental conditions (Menge and Sutherland 1987).…”