UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Experimental plant communities develop phylogenetically overdispersed abundance distributions during assembly


Allan, Eric; Jenkins, Tania; Fergus, Alexander J F; Roscher, Christiane; Fischer, Markus; Petermann, Jana; Weisser, Wolfgang W; Schmid, Bernhard (2013). Experimental plant communities develop phylogenetically overdispersed abundance distributions during assembly. Ecology, 94(2):465-477.

Abstract

The importance of competition between similar species in driving community assembly is much debated. Recently, phylogenetic patterns in species composition have been investigated to help resolve this question: phylogenetic clustering is taken to imply environmental filtering, and phylogenetic overdispersion to indicate limiting similarity between species. We used experimental plant communities with random species compositions and initially even abundance distributions to examine the development of phylogenetic pattern in species abundance distributions. Where composition was held constant by weeding, abundance distributions became overdispersed through time, but only in communities that contained distantly related clades, some with several species (i.e., a mix of closely and distantly related species). Phylogenetic pattern in composition therefore constrained the development of overdispersed abundance distributions, and this might indicate limiting similarity between close relatives and facilitation/complementarity between distant relatives. Comparing the phylogenetic patterns in these communities with those expected from the monoculture abundances of the constituent species revealed that interspecific competition caused the phylogenetic patterns. Opening experimental communities to colonization by all species in the species pool led to convergence in phylogenetic diversity. At convergence, communities were composed of several distantly related but species-rich clades and had overdispersed abundance distributions. This suggests that limiting similarity processes determine which species dominate a community but not which species occur in a community. Crucially, as our study was carried out in experimental communities, we could rule out local evolutionary or dispersal explanations for the patterns and identify ecological processes as the driving force, underlining the advantages of studying these processes in experimental communities. Our results show that phylogenetic relations between species provide a good guide to understanding community structure and add a new perspective to the evidence that niche complementarity is critical in driving community assembly.

Abstract

The importance of competition between similar species in driving community assembly is much debated. Recently, phylogenetic patterns in species composition have been investigated to help resolve this question: phylogenetic clustering is taken to imply environmental filtering, and phylogenetic overdispersion to indicate limiting similarity between species. We used experimental plant communities with random species compositions and initially even abundance distributions to examine the development of phylogenetic pattern in species abundance distributions. Where composition was held constant by weeding, abundance distributions became overdispersed through time, but only in communities that contained distantly related clades, some with several species (i.e., a mix of closely and distantly related species). Phylogenetic pattern in composition therefore constrained the development of overdispersed abundance distributions, and this might indicate limiting similarity between close relatives and facilitation/complementarity between distant relatives. Comparing the phylogenetic patterns in these communities with those expected from the monoculture abundances of the constituent species revealed that interspecific competition caused the phylogenetic patterns. Opening experimental communities to colonization by all species in the species pool led to convergence in phylogenetic diversity. At convergence, communities were composed of several distantly related but species-rich clades and had overdispersed abundance distributions. This suggests that limiting similarity processes determine which species dominate a community but not which species occur in a community. Crucially, as our study was carried out in experimental communities, we could rule out local evolutionary or dispersal explanations for the patterns and identify ecological processes as the driving force, underlining the advantages of studying these processes in experimental communities. Our results show that phylogenetic relations between species provide a good guide to understanding community structure and add a new perspective to the evidence that niche complementarity is critical in driving community assembly.

Citations

11 citations in Web of Science®
12 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

58 downloads since deposited on 16 Oct 2013
16 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:07 Faculty of Science > Institute of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies
Dewey Decimal Classification:570 Life sciences; biology
590 Animals (Zoology)
Uncontrolled Keywords:biodiversity, community assembly, convergence, Jena Experiment, limiting similarity, phylogenetic dispersion
Language:English
Date:2013
Deposited On:16 Oct 2013 11:26
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 17:02
Publisher:Ecological Society of America
ISSN:0012-9658
Free access at:Publisher DOI. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1890/11-2279.1

Download

[img]
Preview
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 3MB
View at publisher

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations