Toward spatio‐temporal delineation of positive interactions in ecology

Abstract

Given unprecedented rates of biodiversity loss, there is an urgency to better understand the ecological consequences of interactions among organisms that may lost or altered. Positive interactions among organisms of the same or different species that directly or indirectly improve performance of at least one participant can structure populations and communities and control ecosystem process. However, we are still in need of synthetic approaches to better understand how positive interactions scale spatio‐temporally across a range of taxa and ecosystems. Here, we synthesize two complementary approaches to more rigorously describe positive interactions and their consequences among organisms, across taxa, and over spatio‐temporal scales. In the first approach, which we call the mechanistic approach, we make a distinction between two principal mechanisms of facilitation—habitat modification and resource modification. Considering the differences in these two mechanisms is critical because it delineates the potential spatio‐temporal bounds over which a positive interaction can occur. We offer guidance on improved sampling regimes for quantification of these mechanistic interactions and their consequences. Second, we present a trait‐based approach in which traits of facilitators or traits of beneficiaries can modulate their magnitude of effect or how they respond to either of the positive interaction mechanisms, respectively. Therefore, both approaches can be integrated together by quantifying the degree to which a focal facilitator's or beneficiary's traits explain the magnitude of a positive effect in space and time. Furthermore, we demonstrate how field measurements and analytical techniques can be used to collect and analyze data to test the predictions presented herein. We conclude by discussing how these approaches can be applied to contemporary challenges in ecology, such as conservation and restoration and suggest avenues for future research.

Uncovering patterns of freshwater positive interactions using meta‐analysis: Identifying the roles of common participants, invasive species and environmental context

“…Limited spatial and temporal measurements suggest that ecologists still cannot address important questions of positive interactions in ecology because we are not reporting work across scales (Jablonski, 2008; McGill, 2010). Negative interactions have seen important progress in this area (McLaughlin and Roughgarden, 1992; Fausch, 1998; Chizzola et al ., 2018; Weiss, 2019), but this topic will be an important future step for freshwaters, especially as spatial and temporal variation relates to stress gradients (He et al ., 2013; Tumolo et al ., 2020). Effects of facilitators on populations and communities is another important topic for future research.…”

“…organismal structures such as coral reefs) versus resource modification (e.g. breakdown of leaf material by organisms such as aquatic invertebrates) help explain the relative strength of positive interactions across space and time (Wright and Jones, 2006; Hastings et al ., 2007; Tumolo et al ., 2020). Additionally, positive interactions have been documented as critical components of many pairwise or network interactions that can even modify competitive or predatory relationships (Losey and Denno, 1998; Kay and Schemske, 2004; Gross, 2008; Thomsen et al ., 2010).…”

Invertebrate zoogeomorphology: A review and conceptual framework for rivers

“…Many zoogeomorphic engineers facilitate ecological (ecosystem engineers), as well as geomorphic change and many cohabiting taxa have contrasting geomorphic effects. Positive (Albertson et al, 2020; Tumolo et al, 2020) and negative (Katano et al, 2015) interactions in biotic communities are therefore likely to affect an organism's geomorphic impacts. Understanding community level zoogeomorphic effects is therefore a key area of future research.…”

Comparing Benthic Assemblages between Nocomis Nests and Ambient Substrate in South Carolina Streams

“…This study represents a small initial step toward understanding the role of Nocomis nesting for engineering the streambed and affecting benthic taxa. While we do show differences in taxonomic composition between chub nests and ambient substrate, many more questions remain about the scales at which the chub nest–insect interaction is relevant (Tumolo et al 2020). First, it will be necessary to parse out potential variation within sites, sub-watersheds, etc.…”