Spatial and environmental components of freshwater zooplankton structure

Pinel‐Alloul, Bernadette; Niyonsenga, Théophile; Legendre, Pierre; Gril, G.

doi:10.1080/11956860.1995.11682263

Cited by 146 publications

(127 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

119

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This makes the assumption that variables relating to patch size or distance among patches are directly related to dispersal likelihood. Past studies seeking to quantify the relative importance of environmental and spatial factors have obtained conflicting results (Cornell and Lawton 1992, Pinel-Alloul et al 1995, Cottenie 2005, possibly because actual community assembly occurs through a combination of niche and dispersal processes (Mouillot 2007) or as a result of variable choice or multicollinearity among predictors. Methods capable of accounting for collinearity among variable sets are therefore important in understanding the structure of ecological communities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relative importance of environmental, geographic, and spatial variables on zooplankton metacommunities

Dallas

Drake

2014

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Understanding the factors responsible for structuring ecological communities is a central goal in community ecology. Previous work has focused on determining the relative roles of two classes of variables (e.g., spatial and environmental) on community composition. However, this approach may ignore the disproportionate impact of variables within classes, and is often confounded by spatial autocorrelation leading to collinearity among variables of different classes. Here, we combine pattern-based metacommunity and machine learning analyses to characterize metacommunity structure of zooplankton from lakes in the northeast United States and to identify environmental, spatial, and geographic covariates associated with metacommunity structure. Analyses were performed for the entire metacommunity and for three zooplankton subsets (cladocerans, copepods, and rotifers), as the variables associated with community structure in these groups were hypothesized to differ. Species distributions of all subsets adhered to an environmental, spatial, and/or geographic gradient, but differed in metacommunity pattern, as copepod species distributions responded independently of one another, while the entire zooplankton metacommunity, cladocerans, and rotifers replaced one another in discrete groups. While environmental variables were nearly always the most important to metacommunity structure, the relative importance of variables differed among zooplankton subsets, suggesting that zooplankton subsets differ in their environmental tolerances and dispersal-limitation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relative importance of environmental, geographic, and spatial variables on zooplankton metacommunities

Dallas

Drake

2014

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…indicating that there are other unquantified environmental variables and stochastic processes that have an important role in determining macroinvertebrate community assemblage (Pinel-Alloul et al, 1995). Water chemistry data were limited in this study, which has been reported in other studies to be an important influence of pond macroinvertebrate community composition (Friday, 1987;Heino, 2000;Biggs et al, 2005;Williams et al, 2006).…”

Section: Relative Influence Of Physicochemical Biological and Spatiamentioning

confidence: 52%

“…These results have been echoed in the wider academic literature which emphasises the dominance of local (physicochemical) factors and but also the importance of the interaction between environmental factors in influencing the variation in macroinvertebrate communities at a range of spatial scales (Pinel-Alloul et al, 1995;Vanschoenwinkel et al, 2007). Taking a metacommunity approach (Leibold et al, 2004) the results from this study support and add weight to the findings of previous research which indicates that a combination of species sorting (local factors: physicochemical/biological) and mass effects (spatial: connectivity) can best describe the variation in macroinvertebrate community composition within a metacommunity (Cottenie, 2005;Vanschoenwinkel et al, 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…In the framework of metacommunity theory, a combination of species sorting and mass effect best describes the distribution and variation in macroinvertebrate assemblage at a regional scale and in meadow landscapes, but within urban ponds species sorting alone best describes the variation in macroinvertebrate community composition. Through the consideration of all three groups of variables (physicochemical, biological and spatial) together, it increases the ability to predict and examine faunal communities (Pinel-Alloul et al, 1995) and can provide greater detail and focus for management and conservation guidelines across larger spatial scales.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Within a small, highly connected pondscape in Belgium, local environmental variables were identified as the most important determinant of pond cladoceran community composition, whilst spatial factors (connectivity/pond proximity) were identified to have only a secondary role, increasing species richness through increased dispersal potential . At a larger scale, physicochemical/biological factors explained more of the variation in zooplankton community assemblage than spatial variables within 54 lakes in Quebec, Canada (Pinel-Alloul et al, 1995).…”

Section: Relative Influence Of Physicochemical Biological and Spatiamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Ecological Drivers of Cladoceran Diversity in the Central European City (Łódź, Poland): Effects of Urbanisation and Size of the Waterbody

Pawlikiewicz¹,

Jurasz

2017

Annales Zoologici Fennici

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ponds are common and abundant features in nearly all landscapes typical of European lowland landscapes yet research on freshwater biodiversity has traditionally focussed on larger waterbodies such as lakes and rivers. This has led to an increased need to understand and quantify the biodiversity associated with pond habitats to better inform the active conservation and management of these small waterbodies. This thesis examines the aquatic macroinvertebrate biodiversity (alpha, beta and gamma) and conservation value of 95 ponds in Leicestershire, UK, across a variety of urban and rural landscape types and at a range of spatial scales. In addition, the relative importance of local (physicochemical and biological) and spatial (connectivity) variables in structuring macroinvertebrate communities within ponds is investigated. At a regional scale, the greatest macroinvertebrate biodiversity and conservation value was recorded within meadow ponds compared to urban, agricultural and forest ponds. Spatially, ponds were highly physically and biologically heterogeneous. Temporally (seasonally), invertebrate communities were most dissimilar in meadow and agricultural ponds but assemblages were similar in urban and forest ponds. In urban landscapes, park ponds supported a greater diversity of invertebrates than 'other' urban or garden ponds and typically had a greater conservation value. Garden ponds were the most taxon poor of those investigated. Perennial floodplain meadow ponds supported a greater biodiversity of invertebrates compared to ephemeral meadow ponds although conservation value was similar. Despite regular inundation from the River Soar, ephemeral ponds supported distinct communities compared to perennial meadow ponds. Aquatic macrophytes supported a higher diversity of taxa than other pond mesohabitats across all landscapes studied. Physicochemical factors were identified to be the dominant influence on macroinvertebrate assemblages although, a combination of local and spatial factors best explained the variation in community composition at a regional scale and for meadow ponds. Spatial factors were not identified to significantly influence urban pond communities. This study highlights the ecological importance and conservation value of ponds in rural and anthropogenically disturbed landscapes. Recognition of the significant contribution of ponds to freshwater biodiversity at regional and landscape scales is important for future conservation of pond habitats and will help focus and direct conservation strategies to where they are needed most.iv

show abstract

Are zooplankton communities structured by taxa ecological niches or by hydrological features?

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to clarify the mechanisms that structure zooplankton communities in a lowland river network. Fourteen stations on the Scheldt upper river basin (France/Belgium) were sampled during 4 campaigns in 2014–2015. Firstly, a niche analysis of zooplankton taxa was conducted for April and September 2014 using the outlying mean index (OMI) ordination technique. Then, application of Hutchinson's niche and of Hubbell's neutral theories to zooplankton community of the river network was tested for April and June 2015. We subsequently tested whether the taxa ecological preferences revealed were reflected in the April and June 2015 zooplankton spatial distributions. In April 2015, zooplankton community dissimilarity (Bray–Curtis distance) was more influenced by environmental conditions than by hydrological distance, in accordance with niche theory. In June 2015, a stronger influence of neutral processes was suggested by an important role of hydrology. In 2014 samples, 17 over 32 taxa presented significant marginality relying on the considered environmental parameters. This specialization was reflected in the 2015 community patterns, particularly in April. During this month, local environmental parameters were more influencing than hydrology, probably related to a higher environmental heterogeneity than in June 2015. Although zooplankters are often considered to be generalists and opportunists, mainly dependent of river hydrology, these results showed that even for passive dispersers in highly connected systems, niche processes contribute to community structuring by local filtering. Determination of species niche parameters is thus important to understand observed community patterns but also changes in species distribution relative to environmental and hydrological changes.

show abstract

Spatial and environmental components of freshwater zooplankton structure

Cited by 146 publications

References 57 publications

Relative importance of environmental, geographic, and spatial variables on zooplankton metacommunities

Relative importance of environmental, geographic, and spatial variables on zooplankton metacommunities

Ecological Drivers of Cladoceran Diversity in the Central European City (Łódź, Poland): Effects of Urbanisation and Size of the Waterbody

Are zooplankton communities structured by taxa ecological niches or by hydrological features?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About