The emergence of diversity in plant communities

Levin, Simon A.; Muller‐Landau, Helene C.

doi:10.1016/s0764-4469(00)00113-x

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results show that many tree seedling traits were significantly affected by the environmental treatments, which is consistent with conventional theory (Levin and Muller‐Landau 2000). However, as in nature, the environmental treatments account for only part of the variation in most traits (see Table A1) (Niinemets 2001; Schenk and Jackson 2002; McDonald et al 2003; Santiago et al 2004; Maherali et al 2004; Wright et al 2005).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Simple analytically solvable models for optimizing an evolutionary trade‐off usually do not have multiple optima (Parker and Maynard Smith 1990; Levin and Muller‐Landau 2000; Mäkelä et al 2002; Sutherland 2005). Therefore, I examined which ways of making optimization models more complex results in the emergence of multiple optima.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Theoretical biologists have traditionally explained trait variation as arising predominantly as a consequence of variation in external selection factors such as differences in climate and levels of predation (Darwin 1859; Levin and Muller‐Landau 2000). Implicit in this perspective is the assumption that evolution should tend to converge on a single optimum strategy for a particular selective environment (Maynard Smith 1982; Sutherland 2005; Vermeij 2006; Weinreich et al 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Causes of Variation in Tree Seedling Traits: The Roles of Environmental Selection Versus Chance

Marks

2007

Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A key aspect of biodiversity is the great quantitative variation in functional traits observed among species. One perspective assertsthat trait values should converge on a single optimum value in a particular selective environment, and consequently trait variation would reflect differences in selective environment, and evolutionary outcomes would be predictable. An alternative perspective asserts that there are likely multiple alternative optima within a particular selective environment, and consequently different lineages would evolve toward different optima due to chance. Because there is evidence for both of these perspectives, there is a long-standing controversy over the relative importance of convergence due to environmental selection versus divergence due to chance in shaping trait variation. Here, I use a model of tree seedling growth and survival to distinguish trait variation associated with multiple alternative optima from variation associated with environmental differences. I show that variation in whole plant traits is best explained by environmental differences, whereas in organ level traits variation is more affected by alternative optima.Consequently, I predict that in nature variation in organ level traits is most closely related to phylogeny, whereas variation in whole plant traits is most closely related to ecology.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Causes of Variation in Tree Seedling Traits: The Roles of Environmental Selection Versus Chance

Marks

2007

Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More explicitly, we hypothesize that different degrees of spatial effects (clustering or thinning) exhibited by individual plants of the same species in a real community would be related to their life history attributes, for resource foraging and dispersion. However, we also hypothesize that spatial variability brought about by endogenous and exogenous factors might constrain the species distribution in space (Levin & Muller-Landau 2000). If this is so, we hypothesize that particular spatial arrangement of groups of species sharing the same ecological features, would be observed as a result of biotic interactions and external factors impinging on the community.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Integrating ecological features of species in spatial pattern analysis of a plant community

Pottier¹,

Marrs

Bédécarrats³

2007

J Vegetation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This empirical study was designed to explore the role of ecological features of species in the spatial patterning of a grassland community. Location: Banks of the river Rhône in France. Material and Methods: First, we explored the spatial pattern of 29 species recorded in the community using spatial autocorrelation analysis of species cover values. Second, we then explored the relationship between the patterns found and a set of life attributes that characterized the ecological features of species for resource foraging or dispersion. Finally, we explored the spatial relationship of groups of species that shared the same ecological features using cross‐correlation analysis. Results: We found a significant relationship between the spatial pattern and life attributes of the species highlighting three groups of species: (1) species characterized as competitors, reproducing by runner clonal organs and forming large, dense patches; (2) species characterized as competitive‐rud‐erals, dispersing exclusively by seed production and forming small periodic patches; and (3) species classified as CSR, characterized by rosette morphology and short rhizomes as clonal organs without any significant spatial autocorrelation. Spatial segregation was found between group 1 and group 2 up to 14 m; no significant cross‐correlation between groups 1 and 3 between 0 and 3.5 m, and association between groups 2 and 3 up to 14 m. Conclusions: These results helped to understand how species attributes (relative to stature or dispersion abilities); external factors (such as disturbance) and biotic processes (competition) interplay in structuring the plant community under study in space.

show abstract

“…More realistic approaches distribute dispersal stages according to particular dispersal kernels over certain distances but assume the adult at the centre and dispersal of individual propagules or offspring being possible in all directions (Clark et al, 1999;Hovestadt et al, 2000;Levin and Muller-Landau, 2000;Nathan and Muller-Landau, 2000;Johst et al, 2002). This isotropic (around the source) and local dispersal may lead to local clustering and has a positive effect on diversity when there is a competitive difference among the species with respect to favourable habitats (Chesson, 1994;Chesson and Neuhauser, 2002;Snyder and Chesson, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%