Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Life history affects how species experience succession in pen shell metacommunities

  • Community ecology - Original research
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In nature, very few species are common and broadly distributed. Most species are rare and occupy few sites; this pattern is ubiquitous across habitats and taxa. In spatially structured communities (metacommunities), regional distribution and local abundance may change as the relative effects of within-habitat processes (e.g., species interactions) and among-habitat processes (e.g., dispersal) may vary through succession. A field experiment with the marine benthic inhabitants of pen shells (Atrina rigida) tested how common and rare species respond to succession and metacommunity size. I followed community development through time and partitioned species into sessile and motile based on their natural history. Rare species drive diversity patterns and are influenced by metacommunity size: there are strong abundance–distribution differences between common and rare species in large metacommunities, but motile species show lower rates of change than sessile species. In small metacommunities both common and rare species have similar changes through time; the dichotomous distinction of common and rare species is not present. Edge effects in metacommunities affect species’ changes in distribution and abundance. In large metacommunities diversity is higher in edge habitats relative to small metacommunities during early succession. However, edge effects benefit motile species over time in small metacommunities showing a rapid increase in diversity. Individual mobility is sensitive to regional community size and allows individuals to sort among different communities. In contrast, sessile species do not show this edge effect. Metacommunity theory is a useful framework for understanding spatially structured communities, but the natural history of coexisting species cannot be ignored.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amarasekare P (2003) Competitive coexistence in spatially structured environments: a synthesis. Ecol Lett 6:1109–1122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JH (1984) On the relationship between abundance and distribution of species. Am Nat 124:255–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JH, Kodricbrown A (1977) Turnover rates in insular biogeography: effect of immigration on extinction. Ecology 58:445–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno JF, Stachowicz JJ, Bertness MD (2003) Inclusion of facilitation into ecological theory. Trends Ecol Evol 18:119–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caswell H (1976) Community structure: a neutral model analysis. Ecol Monogr 46:327–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chase JM, Leibold MA (2003) Ecological niches. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chave J (2004) Neutral theory and community ecology. Ecol Lett 7:241–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesson P (2000) Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31:343–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connell JH, Slatyer RO (1977) Mechanisms of succession in natural communities and their role in community stability and organization. Am Nat 111:1119–1144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornell HV, Lawton JH (1992) Species interactions, local and regional processes, and limits to richness of ecological communities: a theoretical perspective. J Anim Ecol 61:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freckleton RP, Noble D, Webb TJ (2006) Distributions of habitat suitability and the abundance–occupancy relationship. Am Nat 167:260–275

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gaston KJ, Blackburn TM (1999) A critique for macroecology. Oikos 84:353–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaston KJ, Blackburn TM, Lawton JH (1997) Interspecific abundance-range size relationships: an appraisal of mechanisms. J Anim Ecol 66:579–601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaston KJ, Blackburn TM, Greenwood JJD, Gregory RD, Quinn RM, Lawton JH (2000) Abundance–occupancy relationships. J Appl Ecol 37:39–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez A, Lawton JH, Gilbert FS, Blackburn TM, Evans-Freke I (1998) Metapopulation dynamics, abundance, and distribution in a microecosystem. Science 281:2045–2047

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Guichard F, Steenweg R (2008) Intrinsic and extrinsic causes of spatial variability across scales in a metacommunity. J Theor Biol 250:113–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1982) Dynamics of regional distribution—the core and satellite species hypothesis. Oikos 38:210–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holyoak M, Leibold MA, Holt RD (eds) (2005) Metacommunities. Spatial dynamics and ecological communities. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubbell SP (2001) The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Krebs CJ (1999) Ecological Methodology, 2nd edn. Addison-Welsey Educational Publishers, Menlo Park

  • Leibold MA et al (2004) The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecol Lett 7:601–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levins R, Culver D (1971) Regional coexistence of species and competition between rare species. Proc Natl Acad Sci 68:1246–1248

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Livingston G, Philpott S (2010) A metacommunity approach to co-occurrence patterns and the core-satellite hypothesis in a community of tropical arboreal ants. Ecol Res 25:1129–1140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur RH (1972) Geographical ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Magurran AE, Henderson PA (2003) Explaining the excess of rare species in natural species abundance distributions. Nature 422:714–716

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mouquet N, Loreau M (2002) Coexistence in metacommunities: the regional similarity hypothesis. Am Nat 159:420–426

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mouquet N, Loreau M (2003) Community patterns in source-sink metacommunities. Am Nat 162:544–557

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mouquet N, Munguia P, Kneitel JM, Miller TE (2003) Community assembly time and the relationship between local and regional species richness. Oikos 103:618–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munguia P (2004) Successional patterns on pen shell communities at local and regional scales. J Anim Ecol 73:64–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munguia P (2006) Diversity patterns of pen shell (Atrina rigida) communities. Department of Biological Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL

  • Munguia P (2007) Spatial structure of communities on dead pen shells (Atrina rigida) in sea grass beds. Mar Biol 152:149–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munguia P, Miller T (2008) Habitat destruction and metacommunity size in pen shell communities. J Anim Ecol 77:1175–1182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Munguia P, Mackie C, Levitan DR (2007) The influence of stage-dependent dispersal on the population dynamics of three amphipod species. Oecologia 153:533–541

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Munguia P, Osman RW, Hamilton J, Whitlatch R, Zajac R (2011) Changes in habitat heterogeneity alter marine sessile benthic communities. Ecol Appl 21:925–935

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nee S, Gregory RD, May RM (1991) Core and satellite species: theory and artifacts. Oikos 62:83–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostman O (2011) Abundance–occupancy relationships in metapopulations: examples of rock pool Daphnia. Oecologia 165:687–697

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pandit SN, Kolasa J, Cottenie K (2009) Contrasts between habitat generalists and specialists: an empirical extension to the basic metacommunity framework. Ecology 90:2253–2262

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Preston FW (1962) The canonical distribution of commonness and rarity. Part II. Ecology 43:410–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rabinowitz D (1981) Seven routes to rarity. In: Synge H (ed) The biology of rare plant conservation. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricklefs RE, Schluter D (eds) (1993) Species diversity in ecological communities. Chicago University Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Roelke DL, Eldridge PM (2008) Mixing of supersaturated assemblages and the precipitous loss of species. Am Nat 171:162–175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sale PF (1977) Maintenance of high diversity in coral reef fish communities. Am Nat 111:337–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich W, Zalewski M (2006) Abundance and co-occurrence patterns of core and satellite species of ground beetles on small lake islands. Oikos 114:338–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verberk W, van der Velde G, Esselink H (2010) Explaining abundance–occupancy relationships in specialists and generalists: a case study on aquatic macroinvertebrates in standing waters. J Anim Ecol 79:589–601

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yu DW, Wilson HB (2001) The competition–colonization trade-off is dead; long live the competition–colonization trade-off. Am Nat 158:49–93

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis, 4th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I thank K. Young for field assistance and T. Miller, D. Levitan, and C. terHorst for comments on an earlier version of the manuscript; S. Altman, M. Leibold, K. Maloney, and R. Osman, G. Livingston, Z. Darnell, B. Alenius, C. Cook, K. Heldt and K. Pierce for comments on different versions of the manuscript. All experiments comply with the current laws of the country in which the experiments were performed.

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pablo Munguia.

Additional information

Communicated by Pedro Peres-Neto.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Munguia, P. Life history affects how species experience succession in pen shell metacommunities. Oecologia 174, 1335–1344 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-013-2849-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-013-2849-7

Keywords

Navigation