Coexistence and invasibility in a two-species competition model with habitat-preference

Journal of Theoretical Biology

Volumn 265, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 609-617

  Pigolotti, Simone ^a   Cencini, Massimo ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b ISC CNR   (Italy)

^c SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

Author keywords

Dispersal; Heterogeneous habitat; Neutral theory; Spatial models; Voter model

Indexed keywords

COEXISTENCE; COMPETITION (ECOLOGY); DISPERSAL; HABITAT SELECTION; INDIVIDUAL-BASED MODEL; INVASIBILITY; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION;

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; ECOLOGICAL NICHE; IMMIGRATION; INTERSPECIFIC COMPETITION; PLACE PREFERENCE; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; POPULATION DYNAMICS; POPULATION SIZE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPECIES COEXISTENCE; SPECIES DIFFERENTIATION; SPECIES DOMINANCE; SPECIES HABITAT; SPECIES INVASION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; DECISION MAKING; ECOSYSTEM; PHYSIOLOGY; SPECIES DIFFERENCE; SPECIES EXTINCTION; TIME;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COMPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; ECOSYSTEM; EXTINCTION, BIOLOGICAL; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; POPULATION DYNAMICS; SPECIES SPECIFICITY; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 77954468038     PISSN: 00225193     EISSN: 10958541     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2010.05.041     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Adler P., Hillerislambers J., Levine J. A niche for neutrality. Ecol. Lett. 2007, 10:95-104.
2. Alonso D., Etienne R.S., McKane A.J. The merits of neutral theory. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2006, 21:451-457.
3. Amarasekare P. Competitive coexistence in spatially structured environments: a synthesis. Ecol. Lett. 2003, 6:1109-1122.
4. Bolker B.M., Pacala S.W. Spatial moment equations for plant competition: understanding spatial strategies and the advantages of short dispersal. Am. Nat. 1999, 153:575-602.
5. Beckage B., Clark J.S. Seedling survival and growth of three forest tree species: the role of spatial heterogeneity. Ecology 2003, 84:1849-1861.
6. Bell G. Neutral macroecology. Science 2001, 293:2413-2418.
7. Brown J.H., Mehlman D.W., Stevens G.C. Spatial variation in abundance. Ecology 1995, 76:2028-2043.
8. Chase J.M., Leibold M.A. Ecological Niches: Linking Classical and Contemporary Approaches 2003, The University of Chicago Press.
9. Chase J.M. Towards a really unified theory for metacommunities. Funct. Ecol. 2005, 19:182-186.
10. Chave J., Muller-Landau H.C., Levin S.A. Comparing classical community models: theoretical consequences for patterns of diversity. Am. Nat. 2002, 159:1-23.
11. Chave J. Neutral theory and community ecology. Ecol. Lett. 2004, 7:241-253.
12. Chesson P., Warner R.R. Environmental variability promotes coexistence in lottery competitive systems. Am. Nat. 1981, 117:923-943.
13. Chesson P. The stabilizing effect of a random environment. J. Math. Bio. 1982, 15:1-36.
14. Chesson P. Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Systematics 2000, 31:343-366.
15. Cox J.T., Griffeath D. Diffusive clustering in the two dimensional voter model. Ann. Probab. 1986, 14:347-370.
16. Daleo P., Alberti J., Iribarne O. Biological invasions and the neutral theory. Diversity Distributions 2009, 15:547-553.
17. Durrett R., Levin S.A. Spatial models for species-area curves. J. Theor. Biol. 1996, 179:119-127.
18. Frachebourg L., Krapivsky P.L., Redner S. Heterogeneous catalysis on a disordered surface. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1995, 75:2891-2894.
19. Fridley J.D., Stachowicz J.J., Naeem S., Sax D.F., Seabloom E.W., Smith M.D., Stohlgren T.J., Tilman D., Von Holle B. The invasion paradox: reconciling pattern and process in species invasions. Ecology 2007, 88:3-17.
20. Gardiner C.W. Handbook of Stochastic Methods: for Physics, Chemistry and the Natural Sciences 2004, Springer, New York.
21. Gilbert B., Lechowicz M.J. Neutrality, niches, and dispersal in a temperate forest understory. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2004, 101:7651-7656.
22. Gillespie J.H. The Causes of Molecular Evolution 1994, Oxford University Press Inc., USA.
23. Gravel D., Canham C.D., Beaudet M., Messier C. Reconciling niche and neutrality: the continuum hypothesis. Ecol. Lett. 2006, 9:399-409.
24. Guisan A., Thuiller W. Predicting species distribution: offering more than simple habitat models. Ecol. Lett. 2005, 8:993-1009.
25. Haegeman B., Etienne R.S. Neutral models with generalised speciation. Bull. Math. Bio. 2009, 71:1507-1519.
26. Holley R.A., Liggett T.M. Ergodic theorems for weakly interacting infinite systems and the voter model. Ann. Probab. 1975, 3:643-663.
27. Hubbell S.P. Tree dispersion, abundance and diversity in a dry tropical forest. Science 1979, 203:1299-1309.
28. Hubbell S.P. The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeografy 2001, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
29. Hubbell S.P. Modes of speciation and the lifespans of species under neutrality: a response to the comment of Robert E. Ricklefs. Oikos 2003, 100:193-199.
30. Hubbell S.P. Neutral theory and the evolution of ecological equivalence. Ecology 2006, 87:1387-1398.
31. Karlin S., McGregor J. On a genetic model of Moran. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 1962, 58:299-311.
32. Keitt T.H., Urban D.L., Milne B.T. Detecting critical scales in fragmented landscapes. Conserv. Ecol. 1997, 1:4.
33. Krapivsky P.L. Kinetics of monomer-monomer surface catalytic reactions. Phys. Rev. A 1992, 45:1067-1072.
34. Leigh E., Davidar P., Dick C., Puyravaud J., Terborgh J., ter Steege H., Wright S. Why do some tropical forests have so many species of trees?. Biotropica 2004, 36:447-473.
35. Lin K., Zhang D.-Y., He F. Demographic trade-offs in a neutral model explain death-rate-abundance-rank relationship. Ecology 2009, 90:31-38.
36. Loreau M., Mouquet N. Immigration and the maintenance of local species diversity. Am. Nat. 1999, 154:427-440.
37. McGill B.J. Strong and weak tests of macroecological theory. Oikos 2003, 102:679-685.
38. MacArthur R.H., Wilson E.O. The Theory of Island Biogeography 1967, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
39. Masuda, N., Gibert, N., Redner, S., 2010. Heterogeneous voter models. Preprint arXiv:1003.0768v1 [physics.soc-ph].
40. Melbourne B.A., Cornell H.V., Davies K.F., Dugaw C.J., Elmendorf S., Freestone A.L., Hall R.J., Harrison S., Hastings A., Holland M., Holyoak M., Lambrinos J., Moore K., Yokomizo H. Invasion in a heterogeneous world: resistance, coexistence or hostile takeover?. Ecol. Lett. 2007, 10:77-94.
41. Mouquet N., Loreau M. Community patterns in source-sink metacommunities. Am. Nat. 2003, 162:544-557.
42. Moran P.A.P. Random processes in genetics. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 1958, 54:60-71.
43. Pigolotti S., Flammini A., Marsili M., Maritan A. Species lifetimes for simple models of ecologies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2005, 102:15747-15751.
44. Pigolotti S., Cencini M. Speciation-rate dependence in species-area relationships. J. Theor. Biol. 2009, 260:83-89.
45. Pueyo S., He F., Zillio T. The maximum entropy formalism and the idiosyncratic theory of biodiversity. Ecol. Lett. 2007, 10:1017-1028.
46. Ricklefs R.E., Schluter D. Species Diversity in Ecological Communities: Historical and Geographical Perspectives 1993, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.
47. Ricklefs R.E. A comment on Hubbell's zero-sum ecological drift model. Oikos 2003, 100:185-192.
48. Robinson G.R., Quinn J.F., Stanton M.L. Invasibility of experimental habitat in a California winter annual grassland. Ecology 1995, 76:786-794.
49. Rosindell J., Cornell S.J. Species-area relationships from a spatially explicit neutral model in an infinite landscape. Ecol. Lett. 2007, 10:586-595.
50. Stohlgren T.J., Barnett D.T., Kartesz J.T. The rich get richer: patterns of plant invasions in the United States. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2003, 1:11-14.
51. Svenning J., Skov F. Limited filling of the potential range in European tree species. Ecol. Lett. 2004, 7:565-573.
52. Tilman D. Community invisibility, recruitment limitation, and grassland biodiversity. Ecology 1997, 78:81-92.
53. Tilman D. Niche tradeoffs, neutrality, and community structure: a stochastic theory of resource competition, invasion, and community assembly. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2004, 101:10854-10861.
54. Volkov I., Banavar J.R., Hubbell S.P., Maritan A. Neutral theory and relative species abundance in ecology. Nature 2003, 424:1035-1037.
55. Wright S. Evolution in Mendelian populations. Genetics 1931, 16:97-159.
56. Wright S.J. Plant diversity in tropical forests: a review of mechanisms of species coexistence. Oecologia 2002, 130:1-14.
57. Yu D.W., Terborgh J.W., Potts M.D. Can high tree species richness be explained by Hubbells null model?. Ecol. Lett. 1998, 1:193-199.
58. Zhang D.-Y., Lin K. The effects of competitive asymmetry on the rate of competitive displacement: How robust is Hubbells community drift model?. J. Theor. Biol. 1997, 188:361-367.
59. Zillio T., Condit R. The impact of neutrality, niche differentiation and species input on diversity and abundance distributions. Oikos 2007, 116:931-940.