Neutral communities may lead to decreasing diversity-disturbance relationships: Insights from a generic simulation model

Ecology Letters

Volumn 14, Issue 7, 2011, Pages 653-660

  Dos Santos, Francisca Ana Soares ^a   Johst, Karin ^a   Grimm, Volker ^a  

^a HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

Author keywords

Decreasing relationship; Density dependence; Disturbances; Ecological equivalent species; Intermediate disturbance hypothesis; Mechanisms of species coexistence; Neutral theory; Trade off mechanisms; Unimodal relationship

Indexed keywords

EID: 84931749004     PISSN: 1461023X     EISSN: 14610248     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01626.x     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Adler, P.B., HilleRisLambers, J. & Levine, J.M. (2007). A niche for neutrality. Ecol. Lett., 10, 95-104.
2. Amarasekare, P. (2003). Competitive coexistence in spatially structured environments: a synthesis. Ecol. Lett., 6, 1109-1122.
3. Banitz, T., Huth, A., Grimm, V. & Johst, K. (2008). Clumped versus scattered: how does the spatial correlation of disturbance events affect biodiversity? Theor. Ecol., 1, 231-240.
4. Begon, M., Townsend, C.R. & Harper, J.L. (2006). Ecology. Blackwell Publication, Oxford.
5. Bongers, F., Poorter, L., Hawthorne, W.D. & Sheil, D. (2009). The intermediate disturbance hypothesis applies to tropical forests, but disturbance contributes little to tree diversity. Ecol. Lett., 12, 798-805.
6. Cadotte, M.W. (2007). Competition-colonization trade-offs and disturbance effects at multiple scales. Ecology, 88, 823-829.
7. Chave, J. (2004). Neutral theory and community ecology. Ecol. Lett., 7, 241-253.
8. Chave, J., Muller-Landau, H.C. & Levin, S.A. (2002). Comparing classical community models: Theoretical consequences for patterns of diversity. Am. Nat., 159, 1-23.
9. Chesson, P. (2000). Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst., 31, 343-366.
10. Chesson, P.L. & Warner, R.R. (1981). Environmental variability promotes coexistence in lottery competitive systems. Am. Nat., 117, 923-943.
11. Condit, R., Hubbell, S.P. & Foster, R.B. (1992). Recruitment near conspecific adults and the maintenance of tree and shrub diversity in a neotropical forest. Am. Nat., 140, 261-286.
12. Connell, J.H. (1978). Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs. Science, 199, 1302-1310.
13. Coomes, D.A. & Grubb, P.J. (2003). Colonization, tolerance, competition and seed-size variation within functional groups. Trends Ecol. Evol., 18, 283-291.
14. Dislich, C., Johst, K. & Huth, A. (2010). What enables coexistence in plant communities? Weak versus strong species traits and the role of local processes. Ecol. Modell., 221, 2227-2236.
15. Floder, S. & Sommer, U. (1999). Diversity in planktonic communities: An experimental test of the intermediate disturbance hypothesis. Limnol. Oceanogr., 44, 1114-1119.
16. Gilbert, B. & Lechowicz, M.J. (2004). Neutrality, niches, and dispersal in a temperate forest understory. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA, 101, 7651-7656.
17. Grimm, V., Berger, U., Bastiansen, F., Eliassen, S., Ginot, V., Giske, J. et al. (2006). A standard protocol for describing individual-based and agent-based models. Ecol. Modell., 198, 115-126.
18. Hargrove, W.W., Hoffman, F.M. & Schwartz, P.M. (2002). A fractal landscape realizer for generating synthetic maps. Conserv. Ecol., 6, 2. Available at: Last accessed 26 April 2011.
19. Harms, K.E., Wright, S.J., Calderon, O., Hernandez, A. & Herre, E.A. (2000). Pervasive density-dependent recruitment enhances seedling diversity in a tropical forest. Nature, 404, 493-495.
20. Higgins, S.I. & Cain, M.L. (2002). Spatially realistic plant metapopulation models and the colonization-competition trade-off. J. Ecol., 90, 616-626.
21. Hubbell, S.P. (2001). The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography, 32nd edn. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
22. Hubbell, S.P. (2006). Neutral theory and the evolution of ecological equivalence. Ecology, 87, 1387-1398.
23. Janzen, D.H. (1970). Herbivores and the number of tree species in tropical forests. Am. Nat., 104, 501-528.
24. Johst, K. & Huth, A. (2005). Testing the intermediate disturbance hypothesis: When will there be two peaks of diversity? Div. Distr., 11, 111-120.
25. Johst, K., Gutt, J., Wissel, C. & Grimm, V. (2006). Diversity and disturbances in the Antarctic megabenthos: Feasible versus theoretical disturbance ranges. Ecosystems, 9, 1145-1155.
26. Kadmon, R. & Benjamini, Y. (2006). Effects of productivity and disturbance on species richness: A neutral model. Am. Nat., 167, 939-946.
27. Klausmeier, C.A. (1998). Extinction in multispecies and spatially explicit models of habitat destruction. Am. Nat., 152, 303-310.
28. Kneitel, J.M. & Chase, J.M. (2004). Trade-offs in community ecology: linking spatial scales and species coexistence. Ecol. Lett., 7, 69-80.
29. Körner, K. & Jeltsch, F. (2008). Detecting general plant functional type responses in fragmented landscapes using spatially-explicit simulations. Ecol. Modell., 210, 287-300.
30. MathWorks (2005). The Language of Technical Computing (Version 7.0.4). Available at: Last accessed 26 April 2011.
31. May, F., Grimm, V. & Jeltsch, F. (2009). Reversed effects of grazing on plant diversity: the role of belowground competition and size symmetry. Oikos, 118, 1830-1843.
32. Murrell, D., Purves, D. & Law, R. (2002). Intraspecific aggregation and species coexistence - Response from Murrell, Purves and Law. Trends Ecol. Evol., 17, 211.
33. Palmer, A.R. (1994). Variation in species richness: towards a unification of hypotheses. Folia Geobot. Phytotax., 29, 511-530.
34. Rosindell, J. & Cornell, S.J. (2007). Species-area relationships from a spatially explicit neutral model in an infinite landscape. Ecol. Lett., 10, 586-595.
35. Roxburgh, S.H., Shea, K. & Wilson, J.B. (2004). The intermediate disturbance hypothesis: Patch dynamics and mechanisms of species coexistence. Ecology, 85, 359-371.
36. dos Santos, F.A.S., Johst, K., Grimm, V. & Huth, A. (2010). Interacting effects of habitat destruction and changing disturbance rates on biodiversity: Who is going to survive? Ecol. Modell., 221, 2776-2783.
37. Saupe, D. (1988). Algorithms for random fractals. In: The Science of Fractal Images (eds Peitgen, H.O. & Saupe, D.). Springer, New York, pp. 71-136.
38. Savage, M., Sawhill, B. & Askenazi, M. (2000). Community dynamics: What happens when we rerun the tape? J. Theor. Biol., 205, 515-526.
39. Shea, K., Roxburgh, S.H. & Rauschert, E.S.J. (2004). Moving from pattern to process: coexistence mechanisms under intermediate disturbance regimes. Ecol. Lett., 7, 491-508.
40. Svensson, J.R., Lindegarth, M. & Pavia, H. (2009). Equal rates of disturbance cause different patterns of diversity. Ecology, 90, 496-505.
41. Tilman, D. (2004). Niche tradeoffs, neutrality, and community structure: A stochastic theory of resource competition, invasion, and community assembly. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA, 101, 10854-10861.
42. Turnbull, L.A., Manley, L. & Rees, M. (2005). Niches, rather than neutrality, structure a grassland pioneer guild. Proc. Biol. Sci., 272, 1357-1364.
43. Vetaas, O.R. (1997). The effect of canopy disturbance on species richness in a central Himalayan oak forest. Plant Ecol., 132, 29-38.
44. Vujnovic, K., Wein, R.W. & Dale, M.R.T. (2002). Predicting plant species diversity in response to disturbance magnitude in grassland remnants of central Alberta. Can. J. Bot., 80, 504-511.
45. Wootton, J.T. (1998). Effects of disturbance on species diversity: A multitrophic perspective. Am. Nat., 152, 803-825.
46. Wright, S.J. (2002). Plant diversity in tropical forests: a review of mechanisms of species coexistence. Oecologia, 130, 1-14.
47. Zinck, R.D., Johst, K. & Grimm, V. (2010). Wildfire, landscape diversity and the Drossel-Schwabl model. Ecol. Modell., 221, 98-105.