Species abundance distributions result from body size-energetics relationships

Ecology

Volumn 87, Issue 9, 2006, Pages 2221-2226

  Loehle, Craig ^a  

^a NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR AIR AND STREAM IMPROVEMENT   (United States)

Author keywords

Body size effects; Geometric sequence distribution; Lognormal distribution; Neutral community model; Sampling frame

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE ESTIMATION; BIOENERGETICS; BODY SIZE; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; ENERGETICS; GEOMETRY; POPULATION DENSITY; SPECIES RICHNESS;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIODIVERSITY; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BODY SIZE; ECOSYSTEM; ENERGY METABOLISM; POPULATION DENSITY;

ANIMALS; BIODIVERSITY; BODY SIZE; ECOSYSTEM; ENERGY METABOLISM; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; POPULATION DENSITY;

EID: 33748537715     PISSN: 00129658     EISSN: 00129658     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[2221:SADRFB]2.0.CO;2     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Alonso, D., and A. J. McKane. 2004. Sampling Hubbell's neutral theory of biodiversity. Ecology Letters 7:901-910.
2. Blackburn, T. M., V. K. Brown, B. M. Doube, J. J. D. Greenwood, J. H. Lawton, and N. E. Stork. 1993. The relationship between abundance and body size in natural animal assemblages. Journal of Animal Ecology 62:519-528.
3. Blackburn, T. M., and K. J. Gaston. 1994. The distribution of body sizes of the world's bird species. Oikos 70:127-130.
4. Blackburn, T. M., and K. J. Gaston. 1997. A critical assessment of the form of the interspecific relationship between abundance and body size in animals. Journal of Animal Ecology 66:233-249.
5. Blackburn, T. M., and K. J. Gaston. 1998. Some methodological issues in macroecology. American Naturalist 151:68-83.
6. Brown, J. H., and B. A. Maurer. 1987. Evolution of species assemblages: effects of energetic constraints and species dynamics on the diversification of the North American avifauna. American Naturalist 130:1-17.
7. Brown, J. H., and P. F. Nicoletto. 1991. Spatial scaling of species composition: Body masses of North American land mammals. American Naturalist 138:1478-1512.
8. Cushman, S. A., and K. McGarigal. 2003. Landscape-level patterns of avian diversity in the Oregon coast range. Ecological Monographs 73:259-281.
9. Damuth, J. 1987. Interspecific allometry of population density in mammals and other animals: the independence of body mass and population energy use. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society of London 31:193-246.
10. Devries, P. J., and T. R. Walla. 2001. Species diversity and community structure in neotropical fruit-feeding butterflies. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society of London 74:1-15.
11. Dewdney, A. K. 1997. A dynamical model of abundances in natural communities. Coenoses 12:67-76.
12. Dewdney, A. K. 1998. A general theory of the sampling process with applications to the "veil line." Theoretical Population Biology 54:294-302.
13. Dewdney, A. K. 2000. A dynamical model of communities and a new species-abundance distribution. Biological Bulletin 198:152-165.
14. Dewdney, A. K. 2003. The stochastic community and the logistic-J distribution. Acta Oecologica 24:221-229.
15. Ernest, S. K. M. 2005. Body size, energy use, and community structure of small animals. Ecology 86(6):1407-1413.
16. Fisher, R. A., A. S. Corbet, and C. B. Williams. 1943. The relation between the number of species and the number of individuals in a random sample of an animal population. Journal of Animal Ecology 12:42-58.
17. Franco, M., and C. K. Kelly. 1998. The interspecific mass-density relationship and plant geometry. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (USA) 95:7830-7835.
18. Griffiths, D. 1998. Sampling effort, regression method, and the shape and slope of size-abundance relations. Journal of Animal Ecology 67(5):795-804.
19. He, F. 2005. Deriving a neutral model of species abundance from fundamental mechanisms of population dynamics. Functional Ecology 19:187-193.
20. Hozumi, K., K. Shinozaki, and Y. Tadaki. 1968. Studies on the frequency distribution of the weight of individual trees in a forest stand. I. A new approach toward the analysis of the distribution function and the -3/2th power distribution. Japanese Journal of Ecology 18:10-20.
21. Hubbell, S. P. 2001. The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
22. Hubbell, S. P., and R. B. Foster. 1983. Diversity of canopy trees in a neotropical forest and implications for the conservation of tropical trees. Pages 25-41 in S. J. Sutton, T. C. Whitmore, and A. C. Chadwick, editors. Tropical rain forest ecology and management. Special Publication 2. British Ecological Society, Blackwell, Oxford, UK.
23. Loehle, C., and A. Hansen. 2005. Community structure and scaling relations for the avifauna of the US Pacific and Inland Northwest. Ecological Complexity 2:59-70.
24. Makarieva, A. M., V. G. Gorshkov, and B.-L. Li. 2005. Why do population density and inverse home range scale differently with body size? Implications for ecosystem stability. Ecological Complexity 2:259-271.
25. Marquet, P. A., R. A. Quifiones, S. Abades, F. Labra, M. Tognelli, M. Arim, and M. Rivadeneira. 2005. Scaling and power-laws in ecological systems. Journal of Experimental Biology 208:1749-1769.
26. Maurer, B. A., J. H. Brown, and R. D. Rusler. 1992. The micro and macro in body size evolution. Evolution 46:939-953.
27. May, R. M. 1975. Patterns of species abundance and diversity. Pages 81-120 in M. L. Cody and J. M. Diamond, editors. Ecology and evolution of communities. Belknap Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
28. McGill, B. J. 2003. A test of the unified neutral theory of biodiversity. Nature 422:881-885.
29. Niklas, K. J., J. J. Midgley, and R. H. Rand. 2003. Size-dependent species richness: trends within plant communities and across latitude. Ecology Letters 6:631-636.
30. Plotkin, J. B., and H. C. Muller-Landau. 2002. Sampling the species composition of a landscape. Ecology 83:3344-3356.
31. Preston, F. W. 1962a. The canonical distribution of commonness and rarity: part I. Ecology 43:185-215.
32. Preston, F. W. 1962b. The canonical distribution of commonness and rarity: part II. Ecology 43:410-432.
33. Rosenzweig, M. L. 1995. Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
34. Smallwood, K. S., and C. Schonewald. 1996. Scaling population density and spatial pattern for terrestrial, mammalian carnivores. Oecologia 105(3):329-335.
35. Sugihara, G. 1980. Minimal community structure: an explanation of species-abundance patterns. American Naturalist 116:770-787.
36. Tokeshi, M. 1999. Species coexistence: ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Blackwell Sciences, Oxford, UK.
37. Ulrich, W., and M. Ollik. 2004. Frequent and occasional species and the shape of relative-abundance distributions. Diversity and Distributions 10:263-269.
38. Williams, A., J. A. Koslow, and P. R. Last. 2001. Diversity, density and community structure of the demersal fish fauna of the continental slope off western Australia (20 to 35° S). Marine Ecology Progress Series 212:247-263.
39. Williamson, M., and K. J. Gaston. 2005. The lognormal distribution is not an appropriate null hypothesis for the species-abundance distribution. Table 2. Journal of Animal Ecology 74:409-422.
40. Wilson, J. B., and H. Gitay. 1995. Community structure and assembly rules in a dune slack: variance in richness, guild proportionality, biomass constancy and dominance/diversity relations. Vegetatio 116:93-106.
41. Yin, Z. -Y., S.-L. Peng, H. Ren, Q. Guo, and Z.-H. Chen. 2005. LogCauchy, log-sech and lognormal distributions of species abundances in forest communities. Ecological Modelling 184:329-340.