Neutrality, niches, and dispersal in a temperate forest understory

Benjamin Gilbert1, Martin J. Lechowicz1,2,3
1Department of Biology, McGill University, 1205 Docteur Penfield, Montreal, QC, Canada H3A 1B1
2Department of Botany, University of British Columbia, 6270 University Boulevard, Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z4.
3Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, and

Tóm tắt

A fundamental goal of ecology is to understand what controls the distribution and abundance of species. Both environmental niches and trade-offs among species in dispersal and competitive ability have traditionally been cited as determinants of plant community composition. More recently, neutral models have shown that communities of species with identical life-history characteristics and no adaptation to environmental niches can form spatial distribution patterns similar to those found in nature, so long as the species have a limited dispersal distance. If there is a strong correlation between geographic distance and change in environmental conditions, however, such spatial patterns can arise through either neutral or niche-based processes. To test these competing theories, we developed a sampling design that decoupled distance and environment in the understory plant communities of an old-growth, temperate forest. We found strong evidence of niche-structuring but almost no support for neutral predictions. Dispersal limitation acted in conjunction with environmental gradients to determine species' distributions, and both functional and phylogenetic constraints appear to contribute to the niche differentiation that structures community assembly. Our results indicate that testing a neutral hypothesis without accounting for environmental gradients will at best cause unexplained variation in plant distributions and may well provide misleading support for neutrality because of a correlation between geographic distance and environment.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Hubbell S. P. (2001) The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography (Princeton Univ. Press Princeton).

10.1126/science.293.5539.2413

10.1006/tpbi.2002.1597

10.1086/324112

10.1038/nature01583

10.1038/nature01883

Bell G. Lechowicz M. J. & Waterway M. J. (2001) in Integrating Ecology and Evolution in a Spatial Context eds. Silvertown J. & Antonovics J. (Blackwell Scientific London) pp. 117-135.

10.1126/science.1066854

Tokeshi M. (1999) Species Coexistence: Ecological and Evolutionary Perspectives (Blackwell Scientific Oxford).

Tilman D. (1982) Resource Competition and Community Structure (Princeton Univ. Press Princeton).

10.1007/BF00318038

10.2307/2260660

10.1126/science.295.5555.636

10.1126/science.1078037

Legendre P. & Legendre L. (1998) Numerical Ecology (Elsevier Science Amsterdam) 2nd Ed.

Grigal D. F. Bell J. C. Ahrens R. J. Boone R. D. Kelly E. F. Monger H. C. & Sollins P. (1999) in Standard Soil Methods For Long-Term Ecological Research eds. Robertson G. P. Coleman D. C. Bledsoe C. S. & Sollins P. (Oxford Univ. Press New York) pp. 29-52.

10.1007/BF00031693

Ministère de l'Environnement Gouvernement du Québec Canada (1999) Répertoire des aires protégées et des aires de conservation gérées au Québec (Les Publications du Québec QB Canada).

10.1890/0012-9615(1998)068[0325:SDATHM]2.0.CO;2

10.2307/1940179

10.2307/3237168

ter Braak C. J. F. & Smilauer P. (1998) canoco (Centre for Biometry CPRO-DLO Wageningen The Netherlands) Version 4.0.

10.1038/nature01632

10.2307/2265630

10.1046/j.1365-2745.2000.00427.x

10.1046/j.1365-2699.1999.00305.x

10.1890/0012-9658(2003)084[1067:DOTSBD]2.0.CO;2

Ennos R. A. (2001) in Integrating Ecology and Evolution in a Spatial Context eds. Silvertown J. & Antonovics J. (Blackwell Scientific Oxford) pp. 45-71.

10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.33.010802.150448

10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.33.010802.150452

10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[3210:ACOTSD]2.0.CO;2

10.1126/science.297.5586.1439a