Changes in small mammal assemblage structure across a rain forest/open forest ecotone

Williams, Stephen E.; Marsh, Helene

doi:10.1017/s0266467498000157

Cited by 30 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When true structural diversity has been measured it often fails to account for species richness in rodent systems. For example, when structural characteristics such as canopy height, canopy density, and tree diameter at breast height are used to predict the diversity of tropical rodent communities, no significant relationships emerge (August 1983;Williams and Marsh 1998). Such patterns are consistent in systems of both tall stature (August 1983;Williams and Marsh 1998) and low stature (Bond et al 1980) and mirror those in this Mojave Desert rodent system.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Diversity begets diversity: relative roles of structural and resource heterogeneity in determining rodent community structure

Stevens

Tello

2011

Journal of Mammalogy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental heterogeneity is an important determinant of the diversity of natural communities. Effects of heterogeneity can emanate from complementary effects of resource heterogeneity (variation in the number of resources) and structural heterogeneity (variation in the physical structure of the environment). We examined relative effects of structural and resource heterogeneity on the diversity of 31 desert rodent communities in the Mojave Desert. Both structural and resource heterogeneity significantly accounted for rodent species diversity. Nonetheless, when unique and shared effects were examined, only resource heterogeneity exhibited a significant unique effect, accounting for more variation than structural heterogeneity in diversity of rodent communities. When compared with results of previous studies the possibility emerges that effects of either structural or resource heterogeneity might be context dependent and determined by the taxon of focus and relative variation of these two forms of heterogeneity. Accordingly, future studies should distinguish between these two important forms of environmental heterogeneity to improve understanding of their relative impacts on diversity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Diversity begets diversity: relative roles of structural and resource heterogeneity in determining rodent community structure

Stevens

Tello

2011

Journal of Mammalogy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies (Williams 1990, Laurance 1994, Williams and Marsh 1998 have shown that the vertical stratification of foliage density is significantly related to the structure of small-mammal assemblages in the rain forests of the Wet Tropics. Therefore, trapping grids were placed to include as much variability in the vegetation structure as possible within each site.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Habitat heterogeneity can have many dimensions, but all dimensions affect either the architectural complexity or the spatial and temporal heterogeneity of the habitat (Southwood 1996). Considerable research has been conducted on the relationships between habitat structure and mammal assemblage structure (e.g., M'Closkey 1976, Fox 1981, August 1983, Shenbrot et al 1994, Williams and Marsh 1998, Fox and Fox 2000. Generalities have been elusive, however, and some researchers have cast doubt on the validity of applying findings from local-scale studies to larger spatial scales (Ricklefs 1987, Levin 1992, Marquet 1994, Hughes et al 1999.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial Scale, Species Diversity, and Habitat Structure: Small Mammals in Australian Tropical Rain Forest

Williams¹,

Marsh²,

Winter³

2002

Ecology

Self Cite

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated patterns of mammal assemblage structure on the Atherton Tableland in the Wet Tropics biogeographic region of northeastern Australia. We used live trapping and quantitative estimates of stratified vegetation density to examine the relationships between the structure of the mammal assemblage and habitat structure over three nested spatial scales across a natural vegetation gradient from rain forest to dry, open forest. The narrow transition zone enabled us to examine the relationships between mammal assemblage structure and habitat structure while minimizing the confounding effects of distance, climate, and biogeographic history. The structure of the mammal assemblages was closely related to vegetation structure across and within habitats, and over all spatial scales examined. Vegetation complexity and heterogeneity both influenced assemblage structure, but the relationships varied with spatial scale. Species richness was highest in the open forest and decreased across the gradient into the rain forest. Point diversity was only weakly explained by vegetation structure, whereas Ͼ80% of the variation in species richness at the local scale could be explained by vegetation structure. Local-scale species richness of ground-dwelling mammals was mostly a product of the spatial variability in assemblage structure (␤ diversity), which was associated with the spatial variability in vegetation structure. Local-scale habitat heterogeneity thus promoted local-scale species richness via the close ecological interaction between mammals and habitat structure. The multiscale approach used here, and the nesting of spatial variability in within-habitat vegetation structure, enabled us to demonstrate the scale-dependent effects of spatial habitat heterogeneity and complexity on the structure and diversity of the small-mammal assemblage.

show abstract

“…Heterogeneity refers to the lateral extent of vegetation coverage, while complexity refers to the vertical layering of vegetation ( sensu August, 1983). Increased vegetation heterogeneity has been shown to correspond to increases in species diversity amongst small mammals (Williams & Marsh, 1998). Vegetation heterogeneity is therefore likely to increase the representation of different kinds of mammalian species within an ecosystem (similarly, complexity would also increase representation; however, this is not dealt with further here).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mammal community structure correlates with arboreal heterogeneity in faunally and geographically diverse habitats: implications for community convergence

Louys

Meloro

Elton

et al. 2011

Global Ecology and Biogeography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACTg eb_643 717..729Aim To quantify how mammal community structure relates to heterogeneity of vegetation for palaeoecological reconstructions, and to test whether historical or environmental factors are more important in structuring communities.Location Sixty-three natural protected areas in Asia, Africa and South and Central America.Methods We defined faunal communities by allocating species to ecological guilds and calculating proportional representation within each guild. Vegetation heterogeneity for each natural protected area was calculated from satellite images. The relationship between these ecospaces was calculated using canonical correlations analysis, redundancy analysis and principal components analysis. We expected that large, herbivorous mammals would be most strongly correlated with open areas. Convergence was tested by independently eliminating the effects of geography and vegetation heterogeneity on the structure of the mammal communities. We expected that vegetation would more strongly structure communities than geographical position. ResultsWe show that the guild structure of communities across habitats is significantly correlated with vegetation heterogeneity. The highest correlation was between small, scansorial-arboreal secondary consumers and heavy tree cover. The first convergence analysis shows American communities distinguished from Asian and African communities; these latter communities show a remarkable convergence in structure. Historical factors only affected the continent whose mammals had experienced a long period of isolation. The second convergence analysis shows that almost all biomes have the same or very similar community structure regardless of continent. Main conclusionsCommunities from the same environments in different continents showed remarkable convergence. Communities from the same continents only converged when those continents shared a recent geological and biological history. These results suggest that historical and environmental factors are operating over different timescales. This study confirms that environmental reconstructions made on the basis of whole communities will accurately reflect the environment that the community lived in. However, reconstructions made for fossil sites in deep time need to take historical factors into consideration. Small, arboreal and scansorial secondary consumers show the strongest correlation with vegetation, correlating with continuous tree canopy cover. This relationship allows simple reconstructions of the amount of tree cover occurring in a landscape from the proportion of species from the community falling in this ecological guild.

show abstract

Changes in small mammal assemblage structure across a rain forest/open forest ecotone

Cited by 30 publications

References 16 publications

Diversity begets diversity: relative roles of structural and resource heterogeneity in determining rodent community structure

Diversity begets diversity: relative roles of structural and resource heterogeneity in determining rodent community structure

Spatial Scale, Species Diversity, and Habitat Structure: Small Mammals in Australian Tropical Rain Forest

Mammal community structure correlates with arboreal heterogeneity in faunally and geographically diverse habitats: implications for community convergence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About