Species colonisation, not competitive exclusion, drives community overdispersion over long-term succession

Ecology Letters

Volumn 18, Issue 9, 2015, Pages 964-973

  Li, Shao peng ^a,b,d   Cadotte, Marc W ^b   Meiners, Scott J ^c   Hua, Zheng shuang ^a   Jiang, Lin ^d   Shu, Wen sheng ^a  

^a SUN YAT SEN UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c EASTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Buell Small successional study; Colonisation; Community assembly; Extinction; Phylogenetic community ecology

Indexed keywords

COLONIZATION; COMMUNITY ECOLOGY; COMMUNITY STRUCTURE; COMPETITION (ECOLOGY); EXTINCTION RISK; PHYLOGENETICS; RELATEDNESS; RESIDENT POPULATION; SUCCESSION;

NEW JERSEY; UNITED STATES;

AGRICULTURE; BAYES THEOREM; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BIOTA; CLASSIFICATION; ECOSYSTEM; FOREST; PHYLOGENY; PLANT; POPULATION DYNAMICS; STATISTICAL MODEL; TIME; UNITED STATES;

AGRICULTURE; BAYES THEOREM; BIOTA; ECOSYSTEM; FORESTS; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MODELS, GENETIC; NEW JERSEY; PHYLOGENY; PLANTS; POPULATION DYNAMICS; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84938960844     PISSN: 1461023X     EISSN: 14610248     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/ele.12476     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Allan, E., Jenkins, T., Fergus, A.J., Roscher, C., Fischer, M., Petermann, J. et al. (2013). Experimental plant communities develop phylogenetically overdispersed abundance distributions during assembly. Ecology, 94, 465-477.
2. Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (2009). An update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG III. Bot. J. Linn. Soc., 161, 105-121.
3. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. (2014). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package, version 1.1-7. Available at: http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4. Last accessed 15 March 2015.
4. Bennett, J.A., Lamb, E.G., Hall, J.C., Cardinal-McTeague, W.M. & Cahill, J.F. (2013). Increased competition does not lead to increased phylogenetic overdispersion in a native grassland. Ecol. Lett., 16, 1168-1176.
5. Blomberg, S.P., Garland, T. & Ives, A.R. (2003). Testing for phylogenetic signal in comparative data: behavioral traits are more labile. Evolution, 57, 717-745.
6. Cadenasso, M.L., Meiners, S.J. & Pickett, S.T.A. (2009). The success of succession: a symposium commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Buell-Small Succession Study. Appl. Veg. Sci., 12, 3-8.
7. Cavender-Bares, J., Keen, A. & Miles, B. (2006). Phylogenetic structure of Floridian plant communities depends on taxonomic and spatial scale. Ecology, 87, S109-S122.
8. Cavender-Bares, J., Kozak, K.H., Fine, P.V.A. & Kembel, S.W. (2009). The merging of community ecology and phylogenetic biology. Ecol. Lett., 12, 693-715.
9. Clements, F.E. (1916). Plant Succession: An Analysis of the Development of Vegetation. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, DC.
10. Connell, J.H. & Slatyer, R.O. (1977). Mechanisms of succession in natural communities and their role in community stability and organization. Am. Nat., 111, 1119-1144.
11. Cornelissen, J.H.C., Lavorel, S., Garnier, E., Díaz, S., Buchmann, N., Gurvich, D.E. et al. (2003). A handbook of protocols for standardised and easy measurement of plant functional traits worldwide. Aust. J. Bot., 51, 335-380.
12. Drummond, A.J., Suchard, M.A., Xie, D. & Rambaut, A. (2012). Bayesian phylogenetics with BEAUti and the BEAST 1.7. Mol. Biol. Evol., 29, 1969-1973.
13. Edgar, R.C. (2004). MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res., 32, 1792-1797.
14. Gerhold, P., Cahill, J.F., Winter, M., Bartish, I.V. & Prinzing, A. (2015). Phylogenetic patterns are not proxies of community assembly mechanisms (they are far better). Funct. Ecol., 29, 600-614.
15. Goberna, M., Navarro-Cano, J.A., Valiente-Banuet, A., García, C. & Verdú, M. (2014). Abiotic stress tolerance and competition-related traits underlie phylogenetic clustering in soil bacterial communities. Ecol. Lett., 17, 1191-1201.
16. Gower, J.C. (1971). A general coefficient of similarity and some of its properties. Biometrics, 27, 857-871.
17. Guindon, S. & Gascuel, O. (2003). A simple, fast, and accurate algorithm to estimate large phylogenies by maximum likelihood. Syst. Biol., 52, 696-704.
18. Hardy, O.J. (2008). Testing the spatial phylogenetic structure of local communities: statistical performances of different null models and test statistics on a locally neutral community. J. Ecol., 96, 914-926.
19. Helmus, M.R., Keller, W., Paterson, M.J., Cannon, C.H., Yan, N.D. & Rusak, J.A. (2010). Communities contain closely related species during ecosystem disturbance. Ecol. Lett., 13, 162-174.
20. Huston, M. & Smith, T. (1987). Plant succession: life history and competition. Am. Nat., 130, 168-198.
21. Kembel, S.W., Cowan, P.D., Helmus, M.R., Cornwell, W.K., Morlon, H., Ackerly, D.D. et al. (2010). Picante: R tools for integrating phylogenies and ecology. Bioinformatics, 26, 1463-1464.
22. Kress, W.J., Erickson, D.L., Jones, F.A., Swenson, N.G., Perez, R., Sanjurb, O. et al. (2009). Plant DNA barcodes and a community phylogeny of a tropical forest dynamics plot in Panama. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 106, 18621-18626.
23. Kunstler, G., Lavergne, S., Courbaud, B., Thuiller, W., Vieilledent, G., Zimmermann, N.E. et al. (2012). Competitive interactions between forest trees are driven by species' trait hierarchy, not phylogenetic or functional similarity: implications for forest community assembly. Ecol. Lett., 15, 831-840.
24. Lasky, J.R., Uriarte, M., Boukili, V. & Chazdon, R.L. (2014). Trait-mediated assembly processes predict successional changes in community diversity of tropical forests. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 111, 5616-5621.
25. Letcher, S.G. (2010). Phylogenetic structure of Angiosperm communities during tropical forest succession. Proc. Biol. Sci., 277, 97-104.
26. Letcher, S.G., Chazdon, R.L., Andrade, A., Bongers, F., van Breugel, M., Finegan, B. et al. (2012). Phylogenetic community structure during succession: evidence from three Neotropical forest sites. Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst., 14, 79-87.
27. Maddison, W.P. & Slatkin, M. (1991). Null models for the number of evolutionary steps in a character on a phylogenetic tree. Evolution, 45, 1184-1197.
28. Mayfield, M.M. & Levine, J.M. (2010). Opposing effects of competitive exclusion on the phylogenetic structure of communities. Ecol. Lett., 13, 1085-1093.
29. Meiners, S.J., Cadenasso, M.L. & Pickett, S.T.A. (2004). Beyond biodiversity: individualistic controls of invasion in a self-assembled community. Ecol. Lett., 7, 121-126.
30. Meiners, S.J., Cadotte, M.W., Fridley, J.D., Pickett, S.T. & Walker, L.R. (2015). Is successional research nearing its climax? New approaches for understanding dynamic communities. Funct. Ecol., 29, 154-164.
31. Myster, R.W. & Pickett, S.T.A. (1990). Initial conditions, history and successional pathways in 10 contrasting old fields. Am. Midl. Nat., 124, 231-238.
32. Norden, N., Letcher, S.G., Boukili, V., Swenson, N. & Chazdon, R. (2012). Demographic drivers of successional changes in phylogenetic structure across life-history stages in plant communities. Ecology, 93, S70-S82.
33. Pagel, M. (1999). Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution. Nature, 401, 877-884.
34. Peay, K.G., Belisle, M. & Fukami, T. (2012). Phylogenetic relatedness predicts priority effects in nectar yeast communities. Proc. Biol. Sci., 279, 749-758.
35. Petchey, O.L. & Gaston, K.J. (2002). Functional diversity (FD), species richness and community composition. Ecol. Lett., 5, 402-411.
36. Pickett, S.T.A., Cadenasso, M.L. & Bartha, S. (2001). Implications from the Buell-Small Succession Study for vegetation restoration. Appl. Veg. Sci., 4, 41-52.
37. Posada, D. (2008). jModelTest: phylogenetic model averaging. Mol. Biol. Evol., 25, 1253-1256.
38. R Development Core Team (2014). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available at:http://www.R-project.org/. Last accessed 15 March 2014.
39. Purschke, O., Schmid, B.C., Sykes, M.T., Poschlod, P., Michalski, S.G., Durka, W. et al. (2013). Contrasting changes in taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional diversity during a long-term succession: insights into assembly processes. J. Ecol., 101, 857-866.
40. Silvertown, J. (2004). Plant coexistence and the niche. Trends Ecol. Evol., 19, 605-611.
41. Swenson, N.G. (2013). The assembly of tropical tree communities the advances and shortcomings of phylogenetic and functional trait analyses. Ecography, 36, 264-276.
42. Swenson, N.G., Erickson, D.L., Mi, X., Bourg, N.A., Forero-Montana, J., Ge, X. et al. (2012). Phylogenetic and functional alpha and beta diversity in temperate and tropical tree communities. Ecology, 93, S112-S125.
43. Tan, J., Pu, Z., Ryberg, W.A. & Jiang, L. (2012). Species phylogenetic relatedness, priority effects, and ecosystem functioning. Ecology, 93, 1164-1172.
44. Valiente-Banuet, A. & Verdú, M. (2013). Plant facilitation and phylogenetics. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., 44, 347-366.
45. Walker, L.R. & Chapin, F.S. (1987). Interactions among processes controlling successional change. Oikos, 50, 131-135.
46. Webb, C.O., Ackerly, D.D., McPeek, M.A. & Donoghue, M.J. (2002). Phylogenies and community ecology. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., 33, 475-505.
47. Webb, C.O., Ackerly, D.D. & Kembel, S.W. (2008). Phylocom: software for the analysis of phylogenetic community structure and trait evolution. Bioinformatics, 24, 2098-2100.
48. Whitfeld, T.J.S., Kress, W.J., Erickson, D.L. & Weiblen, G.D. (2012). Change in community phylogenetic structure during tropical forest succession: evidence from New Guinea. Ecography, 35, 821-830.