[en] Gap disturbance is assumed to maintain species diversity by creating environmental heterogeneity. However, little is known about how interactions with neighbours, such as competition and facilitation, alter the emerging gap patterns after extreme events. Using a spatially explicit community model we demonstrate that negative interactions, especially intraspecific competition, greatly promote both average gap size and gap-size diversity relative to positive interspecific interaction. This suggests that competition would promote diversity maintenance but also increase community invasibility, as large gaps with a wide size variety provide more diverse niches for both local and exotic species. Under interspecific competition, both gap metrics interestingly increased with species richness, while they were reduced under intraspecific competition. Having a wider range of species interaction strengths led to a smaller average gap size only under intraspecific competition. Increasing conspecific clumping induced larger gaps with more variable sizes under intraspecific competition, in contrast to interspecific competition. Given the range of intraspecific clumping in real communities, models or experiments based on randomly synthesized communities may yield biased estimates of the opportunities for potential colonizers to fill gaps. Overall, our "static" model on gap formation offers perspectives to better predict recolonization opportunity and thus community secondary succession under extreme event regimes.
Disciplines :
Environmental sciences & ecology
Author, co-author :
Liao, J.; Research Group Plant and Vegetation Ecology, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp (Campus Drie Eiken), Universiteitsplein 1, Wilrijk, Belgium, Ministry of Education's Key Laboratory of Poyang Lake Wetland and Watershed Research, Jiangxi Normal University, Ziyang Road 99, Nanchang, China
Bogaert, Jan ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Ingénierie des biosystèmes (Biose) > Biodiversité et Paysage
Nijs, I.; Research Group Plant and Vegetation Ecology, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp (Campus Drie Eiken), Universiteitsplein 1, Wilrijk, Belgium
Language :
English
Title :
Species interactions determine the spatial mortality patterns emerging in plant communities after extreme events
Denslow, J. S. Gap partitioning among tropical rainforest trees. Biotropica 12, 47-55 (1980).
Brokaw, N. V. L. Gap-phase regeneration in a tropical forest. Ecology 66, 682-687 (1985).
de Romer, A. H., Kneeshaw, D. D. & Bergeron, Y. Small gap dynamics in the southern boreal forest of Eastern Canada: Do canopy gaps influence stand development? J. Veg. Sci. 18, 815-826 (2007).
Gutierrez, A. G. et al. Gap-phase dynamics and coexistence of a long-lived pioneer and shade-tolerant tree species in the canopy of an old-growth coastal temperate rain forest of Chiloe Island, Chile. J. Biogeogr. 35, 1674-1687 (2008).
Kneeshaw, D. D. & Bergeron, Y. Canopy gap characteristics and tree replacement in the southeastern boreal forest. Ecology 79, 783-794 (1998).
Yamamoto, S. I. Forest gap dynamics and tree regeneration. J. Forest Res. 5, 223-229 (2000).
Schliemann, S. A. & Bockheim, J. G. Methods for studying treefall gaps: A review. Forest Ecol. Manag. 261, 1143-1151 (2011).
Schnitzer, S. A. & Carson, W. P. Treefall gaps and the maintenance of species diversity in a tropical forest. Ecology 82, 913-919 (2001).
Busing, R. T. & White, P. S. Species diversity and small-scale disturbance in an old-growth temperate forest: a consideration of gap partitioning concepts. Oikos 78, 562-568 (1997).
Kneeshaw, D. D. & Prevost, M. Natural canopy gap disturbances and their role in maintaining mixed-species forests of central Quebec, Canada. Can. J. Forest Res. 37, 1534-1544 (2007).
Bullock, J. M., Clear Hill, B., Silvertown, J. & Sutton, M. Gap colonization as a source of grassland community change: effects of gap size and grazing on the rate and mode of colonization by different species. Oikos 72, 273-282 (1995).
Davis, M. A., Grime, J. P. & Thompson, K. Fluctuating resources in plant communities: a general theory of invasibility. J. Ecol. 88, 528-534 (2000).
Pakeman, R. J. & Small, J. L. The role of the seed bank, seed rain and the timing of disturbance in gap regeneration. J. Veg. Sci. 16, 121-130 (2005).
Lawton, R. O. & Putz, F. E. Natural disturbance and gap-phase regeneration in a wind-exposed tropical cloud forest. Ecology 69, 764-777 (1988).
Van Peer, L., Nijs, I., Bogaert, J., Verelst, I. & Reheul, D. Survival, gap formation, and recovery dynamics in grassland ecosystems exposed to heat extremes: the role of species richness. Ecosystems 4, 797-806 (2001).
Schumacher, S. & Bugmann, H. The relative importance of climatic effects, wildfires and management for future forest landscape dynamics in the Swiss Alps. Glob. Change Biol. 12, 1435-1450 (2006).
Li, Z. Q., Bogaert, J. & Nijs, I. Gap pattern and colonization opportunities in plant communities: effects of species richness, mortality, and spatial aggregation. Ecography 28, 777-790 (2005).
Clinton, B. D. & Baker, C. R. Catastrophic windthrow in the southern Appalachians: characteristics of pits and mounds and initial vegetation responses. Forest Ecol. Manag. 126, 51-60 (2000).
De Blois, S., Domon, G. & Bouchard, A. Landscape issues in plant ecology. Ecography 25, 244-256 (2002).
Lin, Y., Hulting, M. L. & Augspurger, C. K. Causes of spatial patterns of dead trees in forest fragments in Illinois. Plant Ecol. 170, 15-27 (2004).
Stoll, P. & Prati, D. Intraspecific aggregation alters competitive interactions in experimental plant communities. Ecology 82, 319-327 (2001).
Johnson, D. J., Beaulieu, W. T., Bever, J. D. & Clay, K. Conspecific negative density dependence and forest diversity. Science 336, 904-907 (2012).
Thompson, J. N. Variation in interspecific interactions. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 19, 65-87 (1988).
Hunter, A. F. & Aarssen, L. W. Plants helping plants. Bioscience 38, 34-40 (1988).
Callaway, R. M. et al. Positive interactions among alpine plants increase with stress. Nature 417, 844-848 (2002).
Bruno, J. F., Stachowicz, J. J. & Bertness, M. D. Inclusion of facilitation into ecological theory. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18, 119-125 (2003).
Brooker, R. W. et al. Facilitation in plant communities: the past, the present, and the future. J. Ecol. 96, 18-34 (2008).
Bertness, M. D. & Callaway, R. M. Positive interactions in communities. Trends Ecol. Evol. 9, 191-193 (1994).
Callaway, R. M. Positive interactions among plants. Bot. Rev. 61, 306-349 (1995).
Callaway, R. M. & Walker, L. R. Competition and facilitation: a synthetic approach to interactions in plant communities. Ecology 78, 1958-1965 (1997).
Stachowicz, J. J. Mutualism, Facilitation, and the Structure of Ecological Communities. Bioscience 51, 235-246 (2001).
Walker, L. R., & Vitousek, P. M. An invader alters germination and growth of native dominant tree in Hawai'i. Ecology 72, 1449-1455 (1991).
Maestre, F. T., & Cortina, J. Do positive interactions increase with abiotic stress? A test from a semi-arid steppe. P. Roy. Soc. Lond. B Bio. 271, S331-S333 (2004).
Greenlee, J. T. & Callaway, R. M. Abiotic stress and the relative importance of interference and facilitation in montane bunchgrass communities in western Montana. Am. Nat. 148, 386-396 (1996).
Michalet, R. et al. Do biotic interactions shape both sides of the humped-back model of species richness in plant communities? Ecol. Lett. 9, 767-773 (2006).
Saura, S. & Martinez-Millan, J. Landscape patterns simulation with a modified random clusters method. Landscape Ecol. 15, 661-678 (2000).
Levine, J. M. Species diversity and biological invasions: Relating local process to community pattern. Science 288, 852-854 (2000).
Naeem, S. et al. Plant diversity increases resistance to invasion in the absence of covarying extrinsic factors. Oikos 91, 97-108 (2000).
Silvertown, J. & Charlesworth, D. Introduction to plant population biology, 4th edition. Blackwell Science (2001).
Weiner, J. & Conte, P. T. Dispersal and neighborhood effects in an annual plant competition model. Ecol. Model. 13, 131-147 (1981).
Pacala, S. W. & Levin S. A. Biologically generated spatial pattern and the coexistence of competing species. In: Spatial ecology: the role of space in population dynamics and interspecific interactions (eds. D. Tilman & P. Kareiva), pp. 204-232. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1997).
Murrell, D. J., Purves, D. W. & Law, R. Intraspecific aggregation and species coexistence. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17, 211-212 (2002).
Hart, T. B., Hart, J. A. & Murphy, P. G. Monodominant and species-rich forests of the humid tropics: causes for their cooccurrence. Am. Nat. 133, 613-633 (1989).
De Boeck, H. J., Nijs, I., Lemmens, C. M. & Ceulemans, R. Underlying effects of spatial aggregation (clumping) in relationships between plant diversity and resource uptake. Oikos 113, 269-278 (2006).
Monzeglio, U. & Stoll, P. Spatial patterns and species performances in experimental plant communities. Oecologia 145, 619-628 (2005).
Monzeglio, U. & Stoll, P. Effects of spatial pattern and relatedness in an experimental plant community. Evol. Ecol. 22, 723-741 (2008).
Armstrong, R. A. & Welch, A. R. Competition in lichen communities. Symbiosis 43, 1-12 (2007).
Mokany, K., Ash, J. & Roxburgh, S. Functional identity is more important than diversity in influencing ecosystem processes in a temperate native grassland. J. Ecol. 96, 884-893 (2008).
Gravel, D., Canham, C. D., Beaudet, M. & Messier, C. Shade tolerance, canopy gaps and mechanisms of coexistence of forest trees. Oikos 119, 475-484 (2010).
Saura, S. Simulacion de mapas tematicos mediante conglomerados aleatorios. Proyecto fin de carrera. Escuela Tecnica Superior de Ingenieros de Montes. Universidad Politecnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain (1998).
Hiebeler, D. Populations on fragmented landscapes with spatially structured heterogeneities: landscape generation and local dispersal. Ecology 81, 1629-1641 (2000).
Hubbell, S. P. The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography. Monographs in Population Biology. Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ, US (2001).
Diaz-Varela, E. R., Marey-Perez, M. F. & Alvarez-Alvarez, P. Use of simulated and real data to identify heterogeneity domains in scale-divergent forest landscapes. Forest Ecol. Manag. 258, 2490-2500 (2009).
Perry, G. L., Wilmshurst, J. M., McGlone, M. S., McWethy, D. B. & Whitlock, C. Explaining fire-driven landscape transformation during the Initial Burning Period of New Zealand's prehistory. Glob. Change Biol. 18, 1609-1621 (2012).
Kennedy, C. M. et al. A global quantitative synthesis of local and landscape effects on wild bee pollinators in agroecosystems. Ecol. Lett. 16, 584-599 (2013).
Milbau, A., Reheul, D., De Cauwer, B. & Nijs, I. Factors determining plant-neighbour interactions on different spatial scales in young species-rich grassland communities. Ecol. Res. 22, 242-247 (2007).
Gross, K. Positive interactions among competitors can produce species-rich communities. Ecol. Lett. 11, 929-936 (2008).
McGarigal, K., Cushman, S. A. & Ene, E. FRAGSTATS v4: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Categorical and Continuous Maps. University of Massachusetts, Amherst (2012).
Jaeger, J. A. G. Landscape division, splitting index, and effective mesh size: New measures of landscape fragmentation. Landscape Ecol. 15, 115-130 (2000).
Kubo, T., Iwasa, Y. & Furumoto, N. Forest spatial dynamics with gap expansion: total gap area and gap size distribution. J. Theor. Biol. 180, 229-246 (1996).
