* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download ppt
Survey
Document related concepts
Unified neutral theory of biodiversity wikipedia , lookup
Introduced species wikipedia , lookup
Molecular ecology wikipedia , lookup
Theoretical ecology wikipedia , lookup
Biological Dynamics of Forest Fragments Project wikipedia , lookup
Community fingerprinting wikipedia , lookup
Occupancy–abundance relationship wikipedia , lookup
Habitat conservation wikipedia , lookup
Biodiversity wikipedia , lookup
Fauna of Africa wikipedia , lookup
Island restoration wikipedia , lookup
Biodiversity action plan wikipedia , lookup
Ecological fitting wikipedia , lookup
Latitudinal gradients in species diversity wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Origins & Maintenance of Diversity A Hierarchy of Processes Origins & Maintenance of Diversity A Hierarchy of Processes Processes operate on a variety of temporal & spatial scales to influence diversity The levels are nested Unique (chance) events may occur at any level Figure 30.2 from Ricklefs & Schluter (1993) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity A Hierarchy of Processes Processes operate on a variety of temporal & spatial scales to influence diversity The levels are nested Unique (chance) events may occur at any level Figure 30.2 from Ricklefs & Schluter (1993) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity A Hierarchy of Processes Processes operate on a variety of temporal & spatial scales to influence diversity The levels are nested Unique (chance) events may occur at any level Figure 30.2 from Ricklefs & Schluter (1993) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity A Hierarchy of Processes Processes operate on a variety of temporal & spatial scales to influence diversity The levels are nested Unique (chance) events may occur at any level Figure 30.2 from Ricklefs & Schluter (1993) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity A Hierarchy of Processes Processes operate on a variety of temporal & spatial scales to influence diversity The levels are nested Unique (chance) events may occur at any level Figure 30.2 from Ricklefs & Schluter (1993) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity A Hierarchy of Processes Processes operate on a variety of temporal & spatial scales to influence diversity The levels are nested Unique (chance) events may occur at any level Figure 30.2 from Ricklefs & Schluter (1993) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity A Hierarchy of Processes Biotal interchange Species production Regional diversity Stochastic extinction Habitat selection Mass extinction Local diversity Competitive exclusion Predatory exclusion A major challenge confronting advances to a research program that investigates this multi-scale set of processes is the reconstruction of historical events So, community ecologists have added phylogenetic & biogeographic analyses (e.g., phylogeography) to their toolkits… Redrawn from figure 30.1, Ricklefs & Schluter (1993) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Losos (1996) “If species adapted rapidly and without constraint, and if any lineage could occur in any community, then we would expect differences in community structure to be indicative of environmental differences. Because lineages differ in their evolutionary potential and are geographically restricted, however, comparisons of community structure must take account of communities’ histories… “…differences in the structure of communities may result as much from the differences in the lineages that occur in different communities as from differences in environmental conditions” “Phylogenetic information about the constituent lineages in a community can allow lineage effects to be factored out, thus allowing an assessment of environmental determinants of community structure” Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Ricklefs & Schluter (1993) An example from passerine birds compared between Panama and Illinois: Why do different areas vary in species richness of particular clades? “The approximately twofold difference in average age of the taxa matches the twofold difference in diversity, although age and diversity are not well correlated among individual clades.” Table 30.2 from Ricklefs & Schluter (1993) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Losos (1990, 1996) An example from Anolis lizards inhabiting Caribbean islands: Where & under what community conditions did patterns of niche-use originate? Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives 27 islands of the Lesser Antilles contain either one or two species of Anolis lizards; on 9 of the 10 two-species islands, the species differ considerably in size (one large & one small), whereas on 16 of 17 one-species islands, the species are intermediate in size Figure from Losos (1996) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Hypotheses: (1) “Size adjustment (character displacement): Species of similar size colonize an island & evolve in opposite directions in situ to minimize resource competition” From Losos (1990) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Size adjustment Large 2 Large 2 Large 2 Small 2 Small 2 Small 2 (Int. 1) (Int. 1) (Int. 1) (Int. 1) Int. 1 Int. 1 Int. 1 (Int. 1) Int. 1 (Int. 1) (Int. 1) (Int. 1) (Int. 1) Increase in size Decrease in size Switch to 2-species island Redrawn from Losos (1990) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Hypotheses: (1) “Size adjustment (character displacement): Species of similar size colonize an island & evolve in opposite directions in situ to minimize resource competition” (2) “Size assortment: Competitive exclusion or other processes prevent similar-sized species from colonizing the same island; only species that are already dissimilar in size can successfully colonize and coexist” From Losos (1990) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Size assortment Large 2 Large 2 Large 2 Small 2 Small 2 Small 2 (Small 1) (Large 1) (Large 1) (Small 1) Int. 1 Int. 1 Int. 1 (Int. 1) Int. 1 (Int. 1) (Int. 1) (Int. 1) (Int. 1) Increase in size Decrease in size Switch to 2-species island Redrawn from Losos (1990) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Size assortment & size adjustment Large 2 Large 2 Large 2 Small 2 Small 2 Small 2 (Small 2) (Large 2) (Large 2) (Small 2) Int. 1 Int. 1 Int. 1 (Int. 1) Int. 1 (Int. 1) (Int. 1) (Int. 1) (Int. 1) Increase in size Decrease in size Switch to 2-species island Redrawn from Losos (1990) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives No evidence for size assortment or size adjustment Large 2 Large 2 Int. 2 Small 2 Small 1 Small 1 (Small 1) (Large 2) (Int. 2) (Small 1) Int. 1 Int. 2 Small 1 (Int. 1) Int. 1 (Int. 1) (Int. 1) (Int. 1) (Int. 1) Increase in size Decrease in size Switch to 2-species island Redrawn from Losos (1990) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives “In the northern Lesser Antilles, large & small size appear to have evolved simultaneously when two lineages came into sympatry… exactly the prediction of a hypothesis of character displacement…” Figure from Losos (1996); quote from Losos (1990) Dominica Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives “By contrast, in the southern Lesser Antilles, evolutionary change in body size appears to have been unrelated to whether a species occurred in sympatry with congeners… Dominica Martinique Consequently, the existence of size patterns must have resulted from a process of ecological sorting in which only dissimilarsized species can successfully colonize and coexist on the same island…” Figure from Losos (1996); quote from Losos (1990) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives “Thus, the relative importance of co-evolutionary processes in determining community structure differs between the northern and southern Lesser Antilles, a result that is only apparent when these lizards are studied in a historical [phylogenetic] context” Figure from Losos (1996); quote from Losos (1990) St. Maarten St. Eustatius Dominica Martinique Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives McPeek (1995) An example from damselflies inhabiting freshwater lakes: Where and under what community conditions did patterns of niche-use originate? Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Numbers represent the amount of evolutionary change in limb length between ancestor & descendant, as deduced using parsimony methods for reconstruction of ancestral character states Redrawn from Losos (1996), based on McPeek (1995) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives The common ancestor inhabited lakes occupied by fish, where its best strategy to avoid predation was to hide Redrawn from Losos (1996), based on McPeek (1995) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Bars represent transitions to fishless lakes, where a damselfly’s best strategy to avoid predation by dragonflies is to swim or run away Redrawn from Losos (1996), based on McPeek (1995) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Cadle & Greene (1993) An example from Neotropical snake assemblages: For areas that differ in the species richness of particular clades, do contrasting characteristics of those clades contribute to emergent community-level properties? Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Cadle & Greene (1993) Observations: Three main lineages of Neotropical snakes within the family Colubridae Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Cadle & Greene (1993) Observations: Principal zones of radiation Three main lineages of Neotropical snakes within the family Colubridae The xenodontine lineages originated & diversified relatively isolated from one another, even though the current distributions overlap substantially Colubrines radiated relatively recently worldwide Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Cadle & Greene (1993) Observations: Three main lineages of Neotropical snakes within the family Colubridae The xenodontine lineages originated & diversified relatively isolated from one another, even though the current distributions overlap substantially The lineages differ in mean body size, diet, and etc. Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Cadle & Greene (1993) An example from Neotropical snake assemblages: For areas that differ in the species richness of particular clades, do contrasting characteristics of those clades contribute to emergent community-level properties? Observation: Sites in Central & South America differ in body size distribution, diet & etc. of their snakes, but those differences are largely due to differences in the dominant clades occupying those sites Conclusion: The overall size distribution, diet & etc. of a community bears a direct relationship to the clade composition (i.e., history matters) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Cadle & Greene (1993) An example from Neotropical snake assemblages: For areas that differ in the species richness of particular clades, do contrasting characteristics of those clades contribute to emergent community-level properties? Suggested a reinterpretation of patterns from Brazilian caatinga… In contrast to Vitt and Vangilder (1983), “we do not need to ‘explain’ the absence of invertebrate-eating snakes [in the caatinga community] in terms of present-day ecological factors if historical events resulted in the absence of appropriate lineages from the community” Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Losos (1996), after Brooks & McLennan (1991, 1993) “Four components contributing to community structure”: 1. Species that interact in the same way that their ancestors did in other communities 2. Species that colonized a community but did not lead to ecological shifts in residents (new associations of lineages, but ancestral ecologies were maintained) 3. Species that arose in situ and evolved different ecological requirements 4. Species that colonized a community and interacted with species already present, leading to ecological shifts in the colonizer, the resident, or both Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Webb et al. (2002) “The differences among species that co-occur in an ecological community are the result of modifications to a common ancestor that the species all ultimately share” Phylogenetic relationships provide “a new dimension of information… with which to make sense of these differences among species” Differences among species are due to divergence (either in sympatry or allopatry), which may have occurred recently due to changes in the focal species, or in the distant past due to changes in the ancestors of the focal species Similarities among species are either due to shared ancestry, or convergence (either in sympatry or allopatry) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Webb et al. (2002) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Webb (2000) An example from rainforest trees: Is the distribution of species among habitats (or samples) in a community nonrandom with respect to phylogeny? “The demonstration of nonrandom spatial association of species with habitats is a necessary but not sufficient criterion in demonstrating that habitat partitioning is important in enabling many species to coexist…” “However, to be able to show that co-occurring species in different habitats are more ecologically similar than expected by chance would support the case that species are partitioning habitat according to their autecology” “On the other hand, if species in local communities were less ecologically similar than expected by chance, this would suggest that negative neighborhood interactions [e.g., competition] were causing increased mortality among ecologically similar species…” Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Webb (2000) Specific question: Are the tree species in 0.16-ha plots more or less related than expected if such communities were formed from a random sampling of available species in the larger area (150 ha)? “…because of the conservatism of many species traits in the evolution of a lineage, we expect, in general, a positive relationship between a measure of the phylogenetic relatedness of two species and a measure of their overall lifehistory and ecological similarity…” Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Webb (2000) What about character displacement? “Under certain circumstances, where new niches are encountered (e.g., on islands) or where competition with an ecologically similar species is strong and predictable, particular ecological traits of an organism may change adaptively over time… leading to a breakdown of the correlation between phylogenetic relatedness and ecological similarity for some traits… However, even in these organisms we would still expect that a measure of ‘overall’ ecological similarity, taking many traits into account, would be correlated with phylogenetic relatedness” Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Webb (2000) Data: 28 tree plots of 40 x 40 m (0.16 ha) scattered throughout 150 ha of lowland tropical forest, Indonesia How to efficiently estimate relatedness? Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Webb (2000) Data: 28 tree plots of 40 x 40 m (0.16 ha) scattered throughout 150 ha of lowland tropical forest, Indonesia How to efficiently estimate relatedness? Created “supertrees” from published phylogenies and then counted nodes separating terminal taxa Greatest possible mean pairwise nodal distance for a community of 4 taxa (given this phylogeny) = 3.66 nodes (for A, B, E, F) Phylogeny A B C D E F Community 1: A, B, C, D Nodal distances: A A B C B 1 C 2 2 D 4 4 3 Community 2: A, B, E, F Nodal distances: A A B E B 1 E 5 5 F 5 5 1 Mean pairwise nodal dist. = (1+2+4+2+4+3)/6 = 2.66 Mean pairwise nodal dist. = (1+5+5+5+5+1)/6 = 3.66 Net Relatedness Index = 1 - (2.66/3.66) = 0.273 Net Relatedness Index = 1 - (3.66/3.66) = 0.0 From Webb (2000) Greatest possible mean nearest nodal distance for a community of 4 taxa (given this phylogeny) = 2.00 nodes (for A, C, D, F) Phylogeny A B C D E F Community 1: A, B, C, D Nodal distances: A A B C B 1 C 2 2 D 4 4 3 Community 2: A, B, E, F Nodal distances: A A B E B 1 E 5 5 F 5 5 1 Mean nearest nodal dist. = (1+1+2+3)/4 = 1.75 Mean nearest nodal dist. = (1+1+1+1)/4 = 1.0 Nearest Taxa Index = 1 - (1.75/2.0) = 0.125 Nearest Taxa Index = 1 - (1.0/2.0) = 0.5 From Webb (2000) Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Methods: Webb (2000) created 1000 sets of plots with randomized species membership, following two simple rules: (1) each species occurred in the same total number of plots as observed; (2) each plot contained the same total number of species as observed Randomized plots represent expected distributions of species if membership in plots occurs at random with respect to the overall species pool of 324 observed species throughout the 150-ha area Compared the observed Net Relatedness Index (NRI) and the observed Nearest Taxa Index (NTI) to the appropriate distributions of expected values Results: The mean NRI did not differ significantly from the expectation of the null hypothesis, but the mean NTI was significantly greater than expected Origins & Maintenance of Diversity Phylogenetic Perspectives Conclusion: Overall, species in the 0.16-ha plots were more likely to be found with species separated by fewer nodes than expected by chance (e.g., congeners) We can therefore reject the null hypothesis that species are assembled into local communities at random; there is evidence that species occur with closely related species more than we expect by chance