Abstract
Biotic interactions may strongly affect the distribution of individual species and the resulting patterns of species richness. However, the impacts can vary depending on the species or taxa examined, suggesting that the influences of interactions on species distributions and diversity are not always straightforward and can be taxon-contingent. The aim of this study was therefore to examine how the importance of biotic interactions varies within a community. We incorporated three biotic predictors (cover of the dominant vascular species) into two correlative species richness modelling frameworks to predict spatial variation in the number of vascular plants, bryophytes and lichens in arctic–alpine Fennoscandia, in N Europe. In addition, predictions based on single-species distribution models were used to determine the nature of the impact (negative vs. positive outcome) of the three dominant species on individual vascular plant, bryophyte and lichen species. Our results suggest that biotic variables can be as important as abiotic variables, but their relative contributions in explaining the richness of sub-dominant species vary among dominant species, species group and the modelling framework implemented. Similarly, the impacts of biotic interactions on individual species varied among the three species groups and dominant species, with the observed patterns partly reflecting species’ biogeographic range. Our study provides additional support for the importance of biotic interactions in modifying arctic–alpine biodiversity patterns and highlights that the impacts of interactions are not constant across taxa or biotic drivers. The influence of biotic interactions, including the taxon contingency and range-based impacts, should therefore be accounted for when developing biodiversity forecasts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aerts R (2010) Nitrogen-dependent recovery of subarctic tundra vegetation after simulation of extreme winter warming damage to Empetrum hermaphroditum. Glob Change Biol 16:1071–1081. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.01999.x
Araújo MB, Luoto M (2007) The importance of biotic interactions for modelling species distributions under climate change. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 16:743–753. doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00359.x
Austin MP, Van Niel KP (2011) Improving species distribution models for climate change studies: variable selection and scale. J Biogeogr 38:1–8. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2699.2010.02416.x
Bertness MD, Callaway R (1994) Positive interactions in communities. Trends Ecol Evol 9:191–193. doi:10.1016/0169-5347(94)90088-4
Bråthen KA, Lortie C (2015) A portfolio effect of shrub canopy height on species richness in both stressful and competitive environments. Funct Ecol doi:10.1111/1365-2435.12458
Bråthen KA, Fodstad CH, Gallet C (2010) Ecosystem disturbance reduces the allelopathic effects of Empetrum hermaphroditum humus on tundra plants. J Veg Sci 21:786–795. doi:10.1111/j.1654-1103.2010.01188.x
Brooker RW, Callaghan TV (1998) The balance between positive and negative plant interactions and its relationship to environmental gradients: a model. Oikos 81:196–207. doi:10.2307/3546481
Carlsson BA, Callaghan TV (1991) Positive plant interactions in Tundra vegetation and the importance of shelter. J Ecol 79:973–983. doi:10.2307/2261092
Cornelissen JHC et al (2001) Global change and arctic ecosystems: is lichen decline a function of increases in vascular plant biomass? J Ecol 89:984–994. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2745.2001.00625.x
Dubuis A, Pottier J, Rion V, Pellissier L, Theurillat J-P, Guisan A (2011) Predicting spatial patterns of plant species richness: a comparison of direct macroecological and species stacking modelling approaches. Divers Distrib 17:1122–1131. doi:10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00792.x
Edvardsen H, Elvebakk A, Øvstedal DO, Prøsch-Danielsen L, Schwenke JT, Sveistrup T (1988) A peat-producing Empetrum heath in coastal North Norway. Arct Alp Res 20:299–309. doi:10.2307/1551262
Elith J, Leathwick JR, Hastie T (2008) A working guide to boosted regression trees. J Anim Ecol 77:802–813. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01390.x
Eränen JK, Kozlov MV (2007) Competition and facilitation in industrial barrens: variation in performance of mountain birch seedlings with distance from nurse plants. Chemosphere 67:1088–1095. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2006.11.048
Eskelinen A (2010) Resident functional composition mediates the impacts of nutrient enrichment and neighbour removal on plant immigration rates. J Ecol 98:540–550. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2745.2010.01654.x
Eskelinen A, Stark S, Männistö M (2009) Links between plant community composition, soil organic matter quality and microbial communities in contrasting tundra habitats. Oecologia 161:113–123. doi:10.1007/s00442-009-1362-5
Ferrier S, Guisan A (2006) Spatial modelling of biodiversity at the community level. J Appl Ecol 43:393–404. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01149.x
Fielding AH, Bell JF (1997) A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environ Conserv 24:38–49. doi:10.1017/S0376892997000088
Friedman JH (2001) Greedy function approximation: a gradient boosting machine. Ann Stat 29:1189–1232. doi:10.2307/2699986
Giannini TC, Chapman DS, Saraiva AM, Alves-dos-Santos I, Biesmeijer JC (2013) Improving species distribution models using biotic interactions: a case study of parasites, pollinators and plants. Ecography 36:649–656. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2012.07191.x
Gilman SE, Urban MC, Tewksbury J, Gilchrist GW, Holt RD (2010) A framework for community interactions under climate change. Trends Ecol Evol 25:325–331. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2010.03.002
González VT, Junttila O, Lindgård B, Reiersen R, Trost K, Bråthen KA (2014) Batatasin-III and the allelopathic capacity of Empetrum nigrum. Nord J Bot 33:225–231. doi:10.1111/njb.00559
González-Salazar C, Stephens CR, Marquet PA (2013) Comparing the relative contributions of biotic and abiotic factors as mediators of species’ distributions. Ecol Model 248:57–70. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.10.007
Grytnes JA, Heegaard E, Ihlen PG (2006) Species richness of vascular plants, bryophytes, and lichens along an altitudinal gradient in western Norway. Acta Oecol 29:241–246. doi:10.1016/j.actao.2005.10.007
Guisan A, Rahbek C (2011) SESAM—a new framework integrating macroecological and species distribution models for predicting spatio-temporal patterns of species assemblages. J Biogeogr 38:1433–1444. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2699.2011.02550.x
Guisan A, Zimmermann NE (2000) Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecol Model 135:147–186. doi:10.1016/S0304-3800(00)00354-9
Hämet-Ahti L, Suominen J, Ulvinen T, Uotila P (1998) Retkeilykasvio (Field flora of Finland). Finnish Museum of Natural History, Botanical Museum, Helsinki
Jonasson S (1992) Plant responses to fertilization and species removal in tundra related to community structure and clonality. Oikos 63:420–429. doi:10.2307/3544968
Jones CG, Lawton JH, Shachak M (1994) Organisms as ecosystem engineers. Oikos 69:373–386. doi:10.2307/3545850
Jones CG, Lawton JH, Shachak M (1997) Positive and negative effects of organisms as physical ecosystem engineers. Ecology 78:1946–1957. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1997)078[1946:Paneoo]2.0.Co;2
Kissling WD, Dormann CF, Groeneveld J, Hickler T, Kühn I, McInerny GJ, Montoya JM, Römermann C, Schiffers K, Schurr FM, Singer A, Svenning J-C, Zimmermann NE, O’Hara RB (2012) Towards novel approaches to modelling biotic interactions in multispecies assemblages at large spatial extents. J Biogeogr 39:2163–2178. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2699.2011.02663.x
le Roux PC, Virtanen R, Heikkinen RK, Luoto M (2012) Biotic interactions affect the elevational ranges of high-latitude plant species. Ecography 35:1048–1056. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2012.07534.x
le Roux PC, Lenoir J, Pellissier L, Wisz MS, Luoto M (2013a) Horizontal, but not vertical, biotic interactions affect fine-scale plant distribution patterns in a low energy system. Ecology 94:671–682. doi:10.1890/12-1482.1
le Roux PC, Virtanen R, Luoto M (2013b) Geomorphological disturbance is necessary for predicting fine-scale species distributions. Ecography 36:800–808. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2012.07922.x
le Roux PC, Pellissier L, Wisz MS, Luoto M (2014) Incorporating dominant species as proxies for biotic interactions strengthens plant community models. J Ecol 102:767–775. doi:10.1111/1365-2745.12239
Levinsky I, Araújo MB, Nogués-Bravo D, Haywood AM, Valdes PJ, Rahbek C (2013) Climate envelope models suggest spatio-temporal co-occurrence of refugia of African birds and mammals. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 22:351–363. doi:10.1111/geb.12045
Liancourt P, Callaway RM, Michalet R (2005) Stress tolerance and competitive-response ability determine the outcome of biotic interactions. Ecology 86:1611–1618. doi:10.1890/04-1398
Liu C, Berry PM, Dawson TP, Pearson RG (2005) Selecting thresholds of occurrence in the prediction of species distributions. Ecography 28:385–393. doi:10.1111/j.0906-7590.2005.03957.x
Löbel S, Dengler J, Hobohm C (2006) Species richness of vascular plants, bryophytes and lichens in dry grasslands: the effects of environment, landscape structure and competition. Folia Geobot 41:377–393. doi:10.1007/bf02806555
Meier ES, Kienast F, Pearman PB, Svenning J-C, Thuiller W, Araújo MB, Guisan A, Zimmermann NE (2010) Biotic and abiotic variables show little redundancy in explaining tree species distributions. Ecography 33:1038–1048. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2010.06229.x
Mod HK, le Roux PC, Guisan A, Luoto M (2015) Biotic interactions boost spatial models of species richness. Ecography 38:913–921. doi:10.1111/ecog.01129
Nilsson M-C (1994) Separation of allelopathy and resource competition by the boreal dwarf shrub Empetrum hermaphroditum Hagerup. Oecologia 98:1–7. doi:10.1007/Bf00326083
Nilsson M-C, Zackrisson O (1992) Inhibition of Scots pine seedling establishment by Empetrum hermaphroditum. J Chem Ecol 18:1857–1870. doi:10.1007/Bf02751109
Nilsson M-C, Zackrisson O, Sterner O, Wallstedt A (2000) Characterisation of the differential interference effects of two boreal dwarf shrub species. Oecologia 123:122–128. doi:10.1007/s004420050997
Nylén T, le Roux PC, Luoto M (2013) Biotic interactions drive species occurrence and richness in dynamic beach environments. Plant Ecol 214:1455–1466. doi:10.1007/s11258-013-0266-y
Olofsson J (2004) Positive and negative plant–plant interactions in two contrasting arctic–alpine plant communities. Arct Antarct Alp Res 36:464–467. doi:10.1657/1523-0430(2004)036[0464:Panpii]2.0.Co;2
Ovaskainen O, Hottola J, Siitonen J (2010) Modeling species co-occurrence by multivariate logistic regression generates new hypotheses on fungal interactions. Ecology 91:2514–2521. doi:10.1890/10-0173.1
Pearson RG, Dawson TP (2003) Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: are bioclimate envelope models useful? Global Ecol Biogeogr 12:361–371. doi:10.1046/j.1466-822X.2003.00042.x
Pellissier L, Bråthen KA, Pottier J, Randin CF, Vittoz P, Dubuis A, Yoccoz NG, Alm T, Zimmermann NE, Guisan A (2010) Species distribution models reveal apparent competitive and facilitative effects of a dominant species on the distribution of tundra plants. Ecography 33:1004–1014. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2010.06386.x
Pirinen P, Simola H, Aalto J, Kaukoranta J-P, Karlsson P, Ruuhela R (2012) Climatological statistics of Finland 1981–2010. Reports of Finnish Meteorological Institute 2012
R Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna
Ridgeway G (2005) Generalized boosted regression models. pp 20
Schöb C, Butterfield BJ, Pugnaire FI (2012) Foundation species influence trait-based community assembly. New Phytol 196:824–834. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04306.x
Shevtsova A, Ojala A, Neuvonen S, Vieno M, Haukioja E (1995) Growth and reproduction of dwarf shrubs in a subarctic plant community: annual variation and above-ground interactions with neighbours. J Ecol 83:263–275. doi:10.2307/2261565
Shevtsova A, Haukioja E, Ojala A (1997) Growth response of subarctic dwarf shrubs, Empetrum nigrum and Vaccinium vitis-idaea, to manipulated environmental conditions and species removal. Oikos 78:440–458. doi:10.2307/3545606
Sormunen H, Virtanen R, Luoto M (2011) Inclusion of local environmental conditions alters high-latitude vegetation change predictions based on bioclimatic models. Polar Biol 34:883–897. doi:10.1007/s00300-010-0945-2
Tybirk K et al (2000) Nordic Empetrum dominated ecosystems: function and susceptibility to environmental changes. Ambio 29:90–97. doi:10.1639/0044-7447(2000)029[0090:Nedefa]2.0.Co;2
Virtanen R, Luoto M, Rämä T, Mikkola K, Hjort J, Grytnes J-A, Birks HJB (2010) Recent vegetation changes at the high-latitude tree line ecotone are controlled by geomorphological disturbance, productivity and diversity. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 19:810–821. doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00570.x
Wisz MS et al (2013) The role of biotic interactions in shaping distributions and realised assemblages of species: implications for species distribution modelling. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 88:15–30. doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.2012.00235.x
Acknowledgments
We acknowledge funding from the Academy of Finland (Project Number 1140873). H. K. M. also received funding from Research Foundation of the University of Helsinki. We also thank R. Virtanen for distribution data and T. Rämä for assistance with the field work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mod, H.K., Heikkinen, R.K., le Roux, P.C. et al. Contrasting effects of biotic interactions on richness and distribution of vascular plants, bryophytes and lichens in an arctic–alpine landscape. Polar Biol 39, 649–657 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-015-1820-y
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-015-1820-y