Consequences of varying regional heterogeneity in source-sink metacommunities

Oikos

Volumn 113, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 481-488

  Mouquet, N ^a   E Miller, T ^b   Daufresne, T ^c,d   M Kneitel, J ^e,f  

^a INSTITUT DES SCIENCES DE L EVOLUTION   (France)

^b FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c PRINCETON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d CEMAGREF   (France)

^e WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COEXISTENCE; COMMUNITY STRUCTURE; COMPETITION (ECOLOGY); DISPERSAL; HETEROGENEITY; METAPOPULATION; PLANT; RESOURCE SCARCITY; SPECIES RICHNESS;

EID: 33745025204     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: 16000706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.2006.0030-1299.14582.x     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Amarasekare P.. 2003. Competitive coexistence in spatially structured environments: a synthesis. Ecol. Lett. 6: 1109 1122.
2. Amarasekare P. Nisbet R. M.. 2001. Spatial heterogeneity, source-sink dynamics and the local coexistence of competing species Am. Nat. 158: 572 584.
3. Chase J. M. Leibold M. A.. 2003. Ecological niches. Linking classical and contemporary approaches. Univ. of Chicago Press.
4. Chesson P. L.. 2000a. General theory of competitive coexistence in spatially-varying environments Theor. Popul. Biol. 58: 211 237.
5. Chesson P.. 2000b. Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 31: 343 366.
6. Codeço C. T. Grover J. P.. 2001. Competition along a spatial gradient of resource supply: a microbial experiment model Am. Nat. 157: 300 315.
7. Cottenie K. Michels E. Nuytten N. et al. 2003. Zooplankton metacommunity structure: regional versus local processes in highly interconnected ponds Ecology 84: 991 1000.
8. Forbes A. E. Chase J. M.. 2002. The role of habitat connectivity and landscape geometry in experimental zooplankton metacommunities Oikos 96: 433 440.
9. Gillespie J.. 1974. Polymorphism in patchy environments Am. Nat. 108: 145 151.
10. Gonzalez A. Lawton J. H. Gilbert F. S. et al. 1998. Metapopulation dynamics, abundance, and distribution in a microecosystem Science 281: 2045 2047.
11. Grover J. P.. 1997. Resource competition. Chapman and Hall.
12. Holyoak M. Leibold M. A. Holt R.. 2005. Metacommunities: spatial dynamics and ecological communities. Chicago Univ. Press.
13. Holt R. D.. 1993. Ecology at the mesoscale: the influence of regional processes on local communities Ricklefs R. E. Schluter D. Species diversity in ecological communities: historical and geographical perspectives. Univ.of Chicago Press 77 88.
14. Kadmon R. Shmida A.. 1990. Spatiotemporal demographic processes in plant populations: an approach and a case study Am. Nat. 135: 382 397.
15. Kneitel J. M. Miller T. E.. 2003. Dispersal rates affect community composition in metacommunities of Sarracenia purpurea inquilines. Am. Nat. 162: 165 171.
16. Kneitel J. M. Chase J. M.. 2004. Trade offs in community ecology: linking spatial scales and species coexistence Ecol. Lett 7: 69 80.
17. Kunin W. E.. 1998. Biodiversity at the edge: a test of the importance of spatial'mass effects' in the Rothamsted Park grass experiments Proc. Natl Acad. Sci USA 95: 207 212.
18. Leibold M. A.. 1998. Similarity and local co-existence of species in regional biotas Evol. Ecol. 12: 95 110.
19. Leibold M. A. Miller T. E.. 2004. From metapopulations to metacommunities Hanski I Gaggiotti O. E. Ecology, genetics, and evolution of metapopulations. Elsevier Academic Press 133 150.
20. Leibold M. A. Holyoak M. Mouquet N. et al. 2004. The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology Ecol. Lett 7: 601 613.
21. Leon J. A. Tumpson D. B.. 1975. Competition between two species for two complementary or substitutable resources J. Theor. Biol. 50: 185 201.
22. Levene H.. 1953. Genetic equilibrium when more than one ecological niche is available Am. Nat. 87: 331 333.
23. Levin S. A.. 1974. Dispersion and population interactions Am. Nat. 108: 207 228.
24. Levin S. A.. 1992. The problem of pattern and scale in ecology Ecology 73: 1943 1967.
25. Loreau M. Mouquet N. Holt R.. 2003. Meta-ecosystem: a framework for a spatial ecosystem ecology Ecol. Lett. 6: 673 679.
26. MacArthur R. H.. 1972. Geographical ecology: patterns in the distribution of species. Princeton Univ. Press.
27. Mouquet N. Loreau M.. 2002. Coexistence in metacommunities: the regional similarity hypothesis Am. Nat. 159: 420 426.
28. Mouquet N. Loreau M.. 2003. Community patterns in source-sink metacommunities Am. Nat. 162: 544 557.
29. Pulliam H. R.. 2000. On the relationship between niche and distribution Ecol. Lett. 3: 349 361.
30. Ronce O. Kirkpatrick M.. 2001. When sources become sinks: migrational meltdown in heterogeneous habitats Evolution 55: 1520 1531.
31. Shmida A. Ellner S.. 1984. Coexistence of plant species with similar niches Vegetatio 58: 29 55.
32. Shurin, J. B., P. Amarasekare, J. M., Chase, R. D. et al. 2004. Alternative stable states and regional community structure. - J. Theor. Biol. 227:359-368.
33. Snyder R. E. Chesson P.. 2003. Local dispersal can facilitate coexistence in the presence of permanent spatial heterogeneity Ecol. Lett. 6: 301 309.
34. Tilman D.. 1982. Resource competition and community structure. Princeton Univ. Press.
35. Warren P. H.. 1996a. Dispersal and destruction in a multiple habitat system: an experimental approach using protist communities Oikos 77: 317 325.
36. Warren P. H.. 1996b. The effects of between-habitat dispersal rate on protist communities and metacommunities in microcosms at two spatial scales Oecologia 105: 132 140.
37. Wilson D. S.. 1992. Complex interactions in metacommunities, with implications for biodiversity and higher levels of selection Ecology 73: 1984 2000.