Recent advances in metacommunities and meta-ecosystem theories

Guichard, Frédéric

doi:10.12688/f1000research.10758.1

Cited by 27 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In parallel, the growing recognition that resources are not stationary and spatial flows of resources can also play a significant role in the dynamics of various types of biological communities [5] fostered the development of the metaecosystem framework [13,14]. By explicitly integrating local production and spatial movement of resources within metacommunities, this framework demonstrated the feedback between community and resource dynamics across spatial scales [15]. Organisms moving among ecosystems modify the spatial distribution of resources, and thus habitat suitability, through local resource consumption and biomass recycling [16].…”

Section: Ecosystem Couplings Outside the Metacommunity Boxmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meta-Ecosystems 2.0: Rooting the Theory into the Field

Gounand

Harvey

Little

et al. 2018

Trends in Ecology & Evolution

193

248

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The meta-ecosystem framework demonstrates the significance of among-ecosystem spatial flows for ecosystem dynamics and has fostered a rich body of theory. The high level of abstraction of the models, however, impedes applications to empirical systems. We argue that further understanding of spatial dynamics in natural systems strongly depends on dense exchanges between field and theory. From empiricists, more and specific quantifications of spatial flows are needed, defined by the major categories of organismal movement (dispersal, foraging, life-cycle, and migration). In parallel, the theoretical framework must account for the distinct spatial scales at which these naturally common spatial flows occur. Integrating all levels of spatial connections among landscape elements will upgrade and unify landscape and meta-ecosystem ecology into a single framework for spatial ecology.

show abstract

Section: Ecosystem Couplings Outside the Metacommunity Boxmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meta-Ecosystems 2.0: Rooting the Theory into the Field

Gounand

Harvey

Little

et al. 2018

Trends in Ecology & Evolution

193

248

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A main goal of community ecology was to understand the determinants of species diversity at different spatial scales. Metacommunity theory has emerged as a framework to investigate the spatial distribution of species and the dynamics of spatially structured ecosystems (Leibold et al 2004; Massol et al 2011; Guichard 2017). Metacommunity theory has been originally proposed to include four main (not mutually exclusive) paradigms explaining the coexistence of species (Leibold et al 2004, Shoemaker & Melbourne 2016, Fournier et al 2017; but see also criticism of Brown et al 2017), and synthesising how basic processes can drive metacommunity assembly.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing metacommunity processes through signatures in spatiotemporal turnover of community composition

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although metacommunity ecology has been a major field of research in the last decades, with both conceptual and empirical outputs, the analysis of the temporal dynamics of metacommunities has only emerged recently and consists mostly of repeated static analyses. Here we propose a novel analytical framework to assess metacommunity processes using path analyses of spatial and temporal diversity turnovers. We detail the principles and practical aspects of this framework and apply it to simulated datasets to illustrate its ability to decipher the respective contributions of entangled drivers of metacommunity dynamics. We then apply it to four empirical datasets. Empirical results support the view that metacommunity dynamics may be generally shaped by multiple ecological processes acting in concert, with environmental filtering being variable across both space and time. These results reinforce our call to go beyond static analyses of metacommunities that are blind to the temporal part of environmental variability.

show abstract

“…Spatial biodiversity is usually partitioned into three components: local species richness (alfa diversity), regional species richness (gamma diversity) and compositional variation of the communities across sites (spatial beta diversity ;Jost 2006). Because different mechanisms operate at local and regional scales to shape biodiversity, studying the relationship between local and regional diversity is essential for understanding how communities are structured (Guichard 2017). In this regard, studying beta diversity (Whittaker 1960) is a key issue to link local (i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…regional) spatial scales 'by the dispersal of one or more of their constituent species' forming altogether a metacommunity (Leibold et al 2004, Mittelbach 2012. Metacommunity is, thus, a highly relevant concept in ecology and conservation as it considers species assemblages as resulting from the interaction of processes at different scales (local and regional) that were previously analysed in a separate way, which is expected to be less capable of capturing the complexity of formation and maintenance of communities (Logue et al 2011, Guichard 2017. One of the key mechanisms that define metacommunity dynamics is the mass-effects, which implies the dispersal of organisms across heterogeneous environments away from their source habitats or communities (Leibold et al 2004, Mittelbach 2012 and causes that dispersal rates between local communities can affect species diversity (Mouquet andLoreau 2003, Vanschoenwinkel et al 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Species and individual replacements contribute more than nestedness to shape vertebrate scavenger metacommunities

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding the mechanisms that organize biodiversity is central in ecology and conservation. Beta diversity links local (alfa) and regional (gamma) diversity, giving insight into how communities organize spatially. Metacommunity ecology provides the framework to interpret regional and local processes interacting to shape communities. However, the lack of metacommunity studies for large vertebrates may limit the understanding and compromise the preservation of ecosystem functions and services. We aim to understand the mechanisms underlying differences in species composition among vertebrate scavenger communities ‒ which provide key ecosystem functions, e.g. carrion consumption ‒ within a metacommunity context. We obtained species richness and abundances at scavenger communities consuming ungulate carcasses monitored through motion‐triggered remote cameras in seven terrestrial ecosystems in Spain. We partitioned beta diversity to decompose incidence‐based (species presence/absence) and abundance‐based dissimilarities into their components (turnover/balanced variation and nestedness/abundance gradient, respectively). We identified the environmental factors explaining the observed patterns. The vertebrate scavenger metacommunity consisted of 3101 individuals from 30 species. Changes in composition among ecosystems were mostly (> 84%) due to species or individual replacement (i.e. turnover or balanced variation). Species or individual loss/gain (i.e. nestedness or abundance gradient) accounted for 13–16% of these changes. Mean carcass weight, elevation and habitat diversity were the main factors explaining species/individual replacement. Our findings suggest that local processes such as species‐sorting through habitat heterogeneity would dominate scavenger metacommunity dynamics together with stochastic forces (i.e. related to carrion unpredictability and scavenging being a widespread strategy among vertebrates). The presence of structured patterns (i.e. nestedness) in beta diversity could reflect a role of deterministic processes: mass‐effects through dispersal and defaunation. Vultures are long‐distance foragers and functionally dominant species, which would connect local assemblages within the metacommunity, supporting scavenger diversity and functions across space. These results highlight the importance of managing vertebrate scavenger assemblages within a metacommunity context.

show abstract

Recent advances in metacommunities and meta-ecosystem theories

Cited by 27 publications

References 69 publications

Meta-Ecosystems 2.0: Rooting the Theory into the Field

Meta-Ecosystems 2.0: Rooting the Theory into the Field

Assessing metacommunity processes through signatures in spatiotemporal turnover of community composition

Species and individual replacements contribute more than nestedness to shape vertebrate scavenger metacommunities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About