Modularity along organism dispersal gradients challenges a prevailing view of abrupt transitions in animal landscape perception

Ecography

Volumn 37, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 564-571

  Borthagaray, Ana Inés ^a,b,c   Barreneche, Juan Manuel ^e   Abades, Sebastián ^c,d,e   Arim, Matías ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DEL DESARROLLO   (Chile)

^b UNIVERSIDAD DE LA REPÚBLICA   (Uruguay)

^c UNIVERSIDAD SANTO TOMÁS   (Chile)

^d INSTITUTO DE ECOLOGÍA Y BIODIVERSIDAD IEB   (Chile)

^e PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; COMMUNITY STRUCTURE; DISPERSAL; LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE; MIGRATION;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 84901690358     PISSN: 09067590     EISSN: 16000587     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2013.00366.x     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Barnosky A. D. et al. 2012. Approaching a state shift in Earth's biosphere. - Nature 486: 52 - 58.
2. Bellisario B. et al. 2010. Spatial network structure and robustness of detritus-based communities in a patchy environment. - Ecol. Res. 25: 813 - 821.
3. Biswas S. R. and Wagner H. H. 2012. Landscape contrast: a solution to hidden assumptions in the metacommunity concept? - Landscape Ecol. 27: 621 - 631.
4. Bodin O. and Norberg J. 2007. A network approach for analyzing spatially structured populations in fragmented landscape. - Landscape Ecol. 22: 31 - 44.
5. Borthagaray A. I. et al. 2012. Connecting landscape structure and patterns in body size distributions. - Oikos 121: 697 - 710.
6. Brouste A. et al. 2007. On fractional Gaussian random fields simulations. - J. Stat. Softw. 23: 1 - 23.
7. Butts C. T. 2013. sna: tools for social network analysis. - R package ver. 2.3-1, < http://CRAN.R-project.org/package = sna>.
8. Carrara F. et al. 2012. Dendritic connectivity controls biodiversity patterns in experimental metacommunities. - Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109: 5761 - 5766.
9. Carstensen D. W. et al. 2012. Biogeographical modules and island roles: a comparison of Wallacea and the West Indies. - J. Biogeogr. 39: 739 - 749.
10. Csardi G. and Nepusz T. 2006. The igraph software package for complex network research. - InterJournal, Complex Systems 1695, < http://igraph.sf.net >.
11. Cushman S. A. et al. 2012. Separating the effects of habitat area, fragmentation and matrix resistance on genetic differentiation in complex landscapes. - Landscape Ecol. 27: 369 - 380.
12. Dakos V. et al. 2012. Methods for detecting early warnings of critical transitions in time series illustrated using simulated ecological data. - PLoS One 7: e41010.
13. Dale M. R. T. and Fortin M. J. 2010. From graphs to spatial graphs. - Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 41: 21 - 38.
14. Danon L. et al. 2005. Comparing community structure identification. - J. Stat. Mechan. Theory Exp. P09008.
15. de Aguiar M. A. M. et al. 2009. Global patterns of speciation and diversity. - Nature 460: 384 - 398.
16. Dupont Y. L and Olesen J. M. 2012. Stability of modular structure in temporal cumulative plant-flower-visitor networks. - Ecol. Complex. 11: 84 - 90.
17. Economo E. P. 2011. Biodiversity conservation in metacommunity networks: linking pattern and persistence. - Am. Nat. 177: E167 - E180.
18. Economo E. P. and Keitt T. H. 2010. Network isolation and local diversity in neutral metacommunities. - Oikos 119: 1355 - 1363.
19. Estrada E. and Bodin Ö. 2008. Using network centrality measures to manage landscape connectivity. - Ecol. Appl. 18: 1810 - 1825.
20. Ewers R. M. et al. 2013. Using landscape history to predict biodiversity patterns in fragmented landscapes. - Ecol. Lett. 16: 1221 - 1233.
21. Fahrig L. 2003. Effect of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. - Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 34: 487 - 515.
22. Ferrero R. 2010. Efectos de la estructura del paisaje sobre la dinámica poblacional. - Depto de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, Univ. de Granada.
23. Fortuna M. A. et al. 2009. Networks of spatial genetic variation across species. - Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106: 19045 - 19049.
24. Guimerà R. and Amaral L. A. N. 2005. Functional cartography of complex metabolic networks. - Nature 433: 895 - 900.
25. Holyoak M. et al. 2005. Metacommunities: spatial dynamics and ecological communities. - Chicago Univ. Press.
26. Hubbell S. P. 2001. A unified theory of biodiversity and biogeography. - Princeton Univ. Press.
27. Keitt T. H. 2000. Spectral representation of neutral landscapes. - Landscape Ecol. 15: 479 - 493.
28. Keitt T. H. et al. 1997. Detecting critical scales in fragmented landscapes. - Conserv. Ecol. 1: 4.
29. Laita A. et al. 2011. Graph-theoretic connectivity measures: what do they tell us about connectivity? - Landscape Ecol. 26: 951 - 967.
30. Liebhold A. et al. 2004. Spatial synchrony in population dynamics. - Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 35: 467 - 490.
31. Logue J. B. et al. 2011. Empirical approaches to metacommunities: a review and comparison with theory. - Trends Ecol. Evol. 26: 482 - 491.
32. May R. M. 1972. Will a large complex system be stable? - Nature 238: 413 - 414.
33. May R. M. 2006. Network structure and the biology of populations. - Trends Ecol. Evol. 21: 394 - 399.
34. Newman M. E. J. and Girvan M. 2004. Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. - Phys. Rev. E 69: 026113.
35. Olesen J. M. et al. 2007. The modularity of pollination networks. - Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104: 19891 - 19896.
36. Oksanen J. et. al. 2011. vegan: community ecology package. - R package ver. 2.0-5.
37. O'Neill R. V. et al. 1988. Resource utilization scales and landscape pattern. - Landscape Ecol. 2: 63 - 69.
38. Ramos-Jiliberto R. et al. 2011. A network-based approach to the analysis of ontogenetic diet shifts: an example with an endangered, small-sized fish. - Ecol. Complex. 8: 123 - 129.
39. Reichardt J. and Bornholdt S. 2006. Statistical mechanics of community detection. - Phys. Rev. E 74: 016110.
40. Rezende E. L. et al. 2009. Compartments in a marine food web associated with phylogeny, body mass, and habitat structure. - Ecol. Lett. 12: 779 - 788.
41. Ricklefs R. E. 1987. Community diversity: relative roles of local and regional processes. - Science 235: 167 - 171.
42. Ritchie M. E. 2010. Scale, heterogeneity, and the structure and diversity of ecological communities. - Princeton Univ. Press.
43. Ritters K. et al. 2000. Global-scale patterns of forest fragmentation. - Conserv. Ecol. 4: 3.
44. Rozenfeld A. et al. 2008. Network analysis identifies weak and strong links in a metapopulation system. - Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105: 18824 - 18829.
45. Rubio L. and Saura S. 2012. Assessing the importance of individual habitat patches as irreplaceable connectivity providers: and analysis of simulated and real landscape data. - Ecol. Complex. 11: 28 - 37.
46. Scheffer M. 2009. Critical transitions in nature and society. - Princeton Univ. Press.
47. Schumaker N. H. 1996. Using landscape indices to predict habitat connectivity. - Ecology 77: 1210 - 1275.
48. Solé R. V. 2011. Phase transitions. Primers in complex systems. - Princeton Univ. Press.
49. Stouffer D. B. and Bascompte J. 2011. Compartmentalization increases food web persistence. - Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108: 3648 - 3652.
50. Tischendorf L. and Fahrig L. 2000. On the usage of landscape connectivity. - Oikos 90: 7 - 19.
51. Urban D. L. and Keitt T. H. 2001. Landscape connectivity: a graph-theoretic perspective. - Ecology 82: 1205 - 1218.
52. Weiher E. and Keddy P. A. 1999. Ecological assembly rules: perspectives, advances, retreats. - Cambridge Univ. Press.
53. Winegardner A. K. et al. 2012. The terminology of metacommunity ecology. - Trends Ecol. Evol. 27: 253 - 254.
54. With K. A. and Crist T. O. 1995. Critical thresholds in species' responses to landscape structure. - Ecology 76: 2446 - 2459.
55. With K. A. and King A. W. 1999. Extinction thresholds for species in fractal landscapes. - Conserv. Biol. 13: 314 - 326.
56. With K. A. and Pavuk D. M. 2012. Direct versus indirect effects of habitat fragmentation on community patterns in experimental landscapes. - Oecologia 170: 517 - 528.