A hierarchical framework for investigating epiphyte assemblages: Networks, meta-communities, and scale

Ecology

Volumn 91, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 377-385

  Burns, K C ^a   Zotz, G ^b,c  

^a VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OLDENBURG   (Germany)

^c SMITHSONIAN TROPICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Panama)

Author keywords

Checkerboard distribution; Co occurrence; Epiphyte, host trees; Meta community; Nestedness; Network; Null model; Panamanian rain forest; Plant assemblages; Scale dependent patterns; Spatiotemporal variation

Indexed keywords

DATA SET; EPIPHYTE; FOREST ECOSYSTEM; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM; NESTEDNESS; PLANT COMMUNITY; POLLINATION; RAINFOREST; SEED DISPERSAL; SPATIOTEMPORAL ANALYSIS; SPECIES OCCURRENCE; SPECIES RICHNESS;

ANGIOSPERM; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; ECOSYSTEM; PHYSIOLOGY; SPECIES DIFFERENCE;

ANGIOSPERMS; ECOSYSTEM; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

PANAMA [CENTRAL AMERICA];

EID: 77949276875     PISSN: 00129658     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/08-2004.1     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Almeida-Neto, M., P. R. Guimarães, Jr., and T. M. Lewinsohn. 2007. On nestedness analyses: rethinking matrix temperature and anti-nestedness. Oikos 116:716-722. (Pubitemid 46525307)
2. Atmar, W., and B. D. Patterson. 1993. The measure of order and disorder of the distribution of species in fragmented habitat. Oecologia 96:373-382. (Pubitemid 2005666)
3. Barker, M. G., and M. A. Pinard. 2001. Forest canopy research: sampling problems, and some solutions. Plant Ecology 153:23-38.
4. Bascompte, J., and P. Jordano. 2007. Plant-animal mutualistic networks: the architecture of biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 38:567-593.
5. Bascompte, J., P. Jordano, C. J. Melián, and J. M. Olesen. 2003. The nested assembly of plant-animal mutualistic networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 312:431-433. (Pubitemid 37033937)
6. Benzing, D. H. 1990. Vascular epiphytes. General biology and related biota. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
7. Berlow, E. L., et al. 2004. Interaction strengths in food webs: Issues and opportunities. Journal of Animal Ecology 73:585598.
8. Bemal, R., T. Valverde, and L. Hernandez-Rosas. 2005. Habitat preference of the epiphyte Tillandsia recur vata (Bromeliaceae) in a semi-desert environment in Central Mexico. Canadian Journal of Botany 83:1238-1247.
9. Blüthgen, N., J. Fründ, D. P. Vázquez, and F. Menzel. 2008. What do interaction networks metrics tell us about specialisation and biological traits? Ecology 89:3387-3399.
10. Burns, K. C. 2007. Network properties of an epiphyte metacommunity. Journal of Ecology 95:1142-1151.
11. Burns, K. C. 2008. Meta-community structure of vascular epiphytes in a temperate rainforest. Botany 86:1252-1259.
12. Cardelús, C., R. K. Colwell, and J. E. Watkins, Jr. 2006. Vascular epiphyte distribution patterns: explaining the midelevation richness peak. Journal of Ecology 94:144-156.
13. Cascante-Marín, A., J. H. D. Wolf, J. G. B. Oostermeijer, and J. C. M. Den Nijs. 2008. Establishment of epiphytic bromeliads in successional tropical premontane forests in Costa Rica. Biotropica 40:441-448.
14. Chung, M. H., and K.-S. Lee. 2008. Species composition of the epiphytic diatoms on the leaf tissues of three Zostera species distributed on the southern coast of Korea. Algae 23:75-81.
15. Chung, M. Y., C. W. Park, and M. G. Chung. 2007. Extremely low levels of allozyme variation in southern Korean populations of the two rare and endangered lithophytic or epiphytic Bulbophyllum drymoglossum and Sarcanthus scolopendrifolius (Orchidaceae): implications for conservation. Biodiversity and Conservation 16:775-786.
16. Cohen, J. E. 1978. Food web and niche space. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
17. Darlington, P. J. 1957. Zoogeography: The geographical distribution of animals. Wiley, New York, New York, USA.
18. Diamond, J. M. 1975. Assembly of species communities. Pages 342-444 in M. L. Cody and J. M. Diamond, editors. Ecology and evolution of communities. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
19. Engqvist, L. 2005. The mistreatment of covariate interaction terms in linear model analyses of behavioural and evolutionary ecology studies. Animal Behaviour 70:967-971. (Pubitemid 41416642)
20. Etienne, R. S., A. M. Latimer, J. A. Silander, and R. M. Cowling. 2006. Comment on "Neutral ecological theory reveals isolation and rapid speciation in a biodiversity hot spot." Science 311:610.
21. Flores-Palacios, A., and J. G. García-Franco. 2006. The relationship between tree size and epiphyte species richness: testing four different hypotheses. Journal of Biogeography 33:323-330.
22. Gotelli, N. J., and G. R. Graves. 1993. Assembly of avian mixed-species flocks in Amazonia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 90:1388-1391. (Pubitemid 23058177)
23. Gotelli, N. J., and D. J. McCabe. 2002. Species co-occurrence: a meta-analysis of J. M. Diamond's assembly rules model. Ecology 83:2091-2096.
24. Gotelli, N. J., and B. J. McGiIl. 2006. Null versus neutral models: What's the difference? Ecography 29:793-800.
25. Guimarães, P. R., V. Rico-Gray, S. Furtado dos Reis, and J. Thompson. 2006. Asymmetries in specialization in ant-plant mutualistic networks. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 273:2041-2047.
26. Guimarães, P. R., C. Sazima, S. Furtado dos Reis, and I. Sazima. 2007. The nested structure of marine clean symbiosis: Is it like flowers and bees? Biology Letters 3:51-54.
27. Hempel, M., M. Blume, I. Blindow, and E. M. Gross. 2008. Epiphytic bacterial community composition on two common submerged macrophytes in brackish water and freshwater. BMC [BioMed Central] Microbiology 8:1-10.
28. Hietz, P., and O. Briones. 1998. Correlation between water relations and within-canopy distribution of epiphytic ferns in a Mexican cloud forest. Oecologia 114:305-316. (Pubitemid 28213754)
29. Hubbell, S. P. 2001. The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
30. Hubbell, S. P., R. B. Foster, S. T. O'Brien, K. E. Harms, R. Condit, B. Wechsler, S. J. Wright, and S. Loo de Lao. 1998. Light-gap disturbances, recruitment limitation, and tree diversity in a Neotropical forest. Science 283:554-557. (Pubitemid 129504625)
31. Ibisch, P. L. 1996. Neotropische Epiphytendiversität: das Beispiel Bolivien. Martina Galunder-Verlag, Wiehl, Germany.
32. Jabiol, J., B. Corbara, A. Dejean, and R. Cereghino. 2009. Structure of aquatic insect communities in tank-bromeliads in an East-Amazonian rainforest in French Guiana. Forest Ecology and Management 257:351-360.
33. Johansson, D. 1974. Ecology of vascular epiphytes in West African rain forest. Acta Phytogeographica Suecica 59:1-136.
34. Kitching, R. L. 2006. Crafting the pieces of the diversity jigsaw puzzle. Science 313:1055-1057.
35. Krishna, A., P. R. Guimarães, P. Jordano, and J. Bascompte. 2008. A neutral-niche theory of nestedness in mutualistic networks. Oikos 117:1609-1618.
36. Laube, S., and G. Zotz. 2006. Neither host-specific nor random: vascular epiphytes on three tree species in a Panamanian lowland forest. Annals of Botany 97:1103-1114. (Pubitemid 44447304)
37. Lázaro, A., S. Mark, and J. M. Olesen. 2005. Bird-made fruit orchards in northern Europe: nestedness and network properties. Oikos 110:321-329. (Pubitemid 40831899)
38. Leibold, M. A., et al. 2004. The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecology Letters 7:601-613.
39. Leibold, M. A., and G. M. Mikkelson. 2002. Coherence, species turnover, and boundary clumping: elements of meta-community structure. Oikos 97:237-250.
40. Lewinsohn, T. M., P. I. Prado, P. Jordano, J. Bascompte, and J. M. Olesen. 2006. Structure in plant-animal interaction assemblages. Oikos 113:174-184.
41. Löbel, S., T. Snail, and H. Rydin. 2006. Species richness patterns and metapopulation processes: evidence from epiphyte communities in boreo-nemoral forests. Ecography 29:169-182.
42. Nieder, J., S. Engwald, M. Klawun, and W. Barthlott. 2000. Spatial distribution of vascular epiphytes (including hemiepiphytes) in a lowland Amazonian rain forest (Surumoni Crane Plot) of Southern Venezuela. Biotropica 32:385-396. (Pubitemid 30766474)
43. Ollerton, J., D. McCollin, D. G. Fautin, and G. R. Allen. 2007. Finding NEMO: nestedness engendered by mutualistic Organization in anemonefish and their hosts. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 274:591-598. (Pubitemid 47055534)
44. Phillip, M., J. Böcher, H. R. Siegismund, and L. R. Nielsen. 2006. Structure of a plant-pollinator network on a pahoehoe lava desert of the Galápagos Islands. Ecography 29:531-540.
45. Pimm, S. L. 2002. Food webs. Chapman and Hall, New York, New York, USA.
46. Pittendrigh, C. S. 1948. The Bromeliad-Anopheles-Malaria complex in Trinidad. I: The Bromeliad flora. Evolution 2:58-89.
47. Proulx, S. R., D. E. L. Promislow, and P. C. Phillips. 2005. Network thinking in ecology and evolution. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20:345-353.
48. R Development Core Team. 2007. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Version 2.7.2. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. (http://www. R-project.org)
49. Rodríguez-Girones, M. A., and L. Santamaría. 2006. A new algorithm to calculate the nestedness temperature of presence-absence matrices. Journal of Biogeography 33:924-935.
50. SPSS. 2002. Release 11.5.1 for windows. SPSS, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
51. Stone, L., and A. Roberts. 1990. The checkerboard score and species distributions. Oecologia 85:74-79.
52. Stuntz, S., C. Ziegler, U. Simon, and G. Zotz. 2002. Diversity and structure of the arthropod fauna within three canopy epiphyte species in Central Panama. Journal of Tropical Ecology 18:161-176. (Pubitemid 34197006)
53. Trapnell, D. W., and J. L. Hamrick. 2004. Partitioning nuclear and chloroplast variation at multiple spatial scales in the neotropical epiphytic orchid, Laelia rubescens. Molecular Ecology 13:2655-2666.
54. Ulrich, W. 2004. Species co-occurrences and neutral models: reassessing J. M. Diamond's assembly rules. Oikos 107:603-609.
55. Ulrich, W. 2006. Nestedness: A FORTRAN program for calculating ecological matrix temperatures. Nicolaus Copernicus University of Toruń, Toruń, Poland.
56. Ulrich, W., and N. J. Gotelli. 2007. Null model analysis of species nestedness patterns. Ecology 88:1824-1831. (Pubitemid 351345202)
57. Vázquez, D. P., C. J. Melián, N. M. Williams, N. Blüthgen, B. R. Krasnov, and R. Poulin. 2007. Species abundance and asymmetric interaction strength in ecological networks. Oikos 116:1120-1127. (Pubitemid 46961694)
58. Went, F. W. 1940. Soziologie der Epiphyten eines tropischen Regenwaldes. Annales du Jardin Botanique de Buitenzorg 50:1-98.
59. Wright, S. J., V. Horlyck, and Y. Basset. 2003. Tropical canopy biology program, Republic of Panama. Pages 137-155 in Y. Basset, V. Horlyck, and S. J. Wright, editors. Studying forest canopies from above: the international canopy crane network. United Nations Environmental Program, Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, New York, New York, USA.
60. Zartman, C. E. 2003. Habitat fragmentation impacts on epiphyllous bryophyte communities in central Amazonia. Ecology 84:948-954.
61. Zotz, G., P. Bermejo, and H. Dietz. 1999. The epiphyte vegetation of Annona glabra on Barro Colorado Island, Panama. Journal of Biogeography 26:761-776.
62. Zotz, G., and P. Hietz. 2001. The ecophysiology of vascular epiphytes: current knowledge, open questions. Journal of Experimental Botany 52:2067-2078. (Pubitemid 33044986)
63. Zotz, G., and S. Schultz. 2008. The vascular epiphytes of a lowland forest in Panama: species composition and spatial structure. Plant Ecology 194:131-141. (Pubitemid 351178618)
64. Zotz, G., and B. Vollrath. 2003. The epiphyte vegetation of the palm, Socratea exorrhiza: correlations with tree size, tree age, and bryophyte cover. Journal of Tropical Ecology 19:81-90.