1 / 21

Theoretical community models: Incorporating dispersal

Theoretical community models: Incorporating dispersal. Community consequences of dispersal Dispersal brings new species Dispersal allows persistence in unsuitable habitat (“sinks”) Dispersal can counteract (or reinforce) local selection

ccarole
Download Presentation

Theoretical community models: Incorporating dispersal

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Theoretical community models:Incorporating dispersal

  2. Community consequences of dispersal • Dispersal brings new species • Dispersal allows persistence in unsuitable habitat (“sinks”) • Dispersal can counteract (or reinforce) local selection • Dispersal can counteract drift (flipside: limited dispersal allows communities to drift apart) • If dispersal ability is negatively correlated with competitive ability (i.e., there is a tradeoff) across species, stable coexistence can be maintained

  3. Near log S Far log Area Dispersal brings new species The Theory of Island Biogeography (MacArthur & Wilson 1967) Colonization = dispersal Extinction = drift

  4. Dispersal allows populations to occur/persist in unsuitable habitat, elevating local diversity Freq(A) Freq(A) 1 0 0 1 + + Fitness dif (A-B) - - A wins B wins no dispersal

  5. Dispersal allows populations to occur/persist in unsuitable habitat, elevating local diversity + + Fitness dif (A-B) - - A wins B wins dispersal(per capita)

  6. Dispersal interacts with selection:Can allow an inferior competitor to overcome a selective disadvantage + + Fitness dif (A-B) - - A wins B wins dispersal(per capita)

  7. Dispersal interacts with selection:A difference in dispersal balanced by a difference in selective advantage Small competitive advantage for A Big competitive advantage for B + + Fitness dif (A-B) - - A wins B wins dispersal(per capita)

  8. Dispersal interacts with selection:A local advantage can translate into regional dominance Big competitive advantage for A Small competitive advantage for B + + Fitness dif (A-B) - - A wins B wins dispersal(per capita)

  9. no difference in degree of local selection (1) A bunch of “patches” (2) A single (and different) species has selective advantage in each patch (3) Small differences among species in “fitness” (# propagules contributed to regional “pool”) variants of (3)

  10. # Set initial communities (e.g., 25 individuals of sp. 1 + 25 of sp. 2; J = 50) J <- 50 # must be an even number COMa <- vector(length=J) COMa[1:J/2] <- 1 COMa[(J/2+1):J] <- 2 COMb <- vector(length=J) COMb[1:J/2] <- 1 COMb[(J/2+1):J] <- 2 # dispersal rate m <- 0.2 # set number of “years” to run simulations & empty matrix for data num_years <- 50 prop_1 <- matrix(0,nrow=J*num_years,ncol=2) # run model for (i in 1:(J*num_years)) { # chose cell for death death_cell <- ceiling(J*runif(1)) # pick randomly between two sites for a death; chose replacer from # other site with probability m; from same site with probability (1-m) if (runif(1) > 0.5) { if (runif(1) > m) COMa[death_cell] <- COMa[ceiling(J*runif(1))] else COMa[death_cell] <- COMb[ceiling(J*runif(1))] } else { if (runif(1) > m) COMb[death_cell] <- COMb[ceiling(J*runif(1))] else COMb[death_cell] <- COMa[ceiling(J*runif(1))] } prop_1[i,1] <- sum(COMa==1)/J prop_1[i,2] <- sum(COMb==1)/J } Limited dispersal allows drift to create differences between communities

  11. Limited dispersal allows drift to create differences between communities (and vice versa) 2 simulations of 2 communities with 2 species (A & B) Jlocal = 50, m = 0 Mean local richness = 1.5 Regional richness = 2 Mean local richness = 1 Regional richness = 2 High beta diversity; Regional richness will eventually be 1 or 2

  12. Limited dispersal allows drift to create differences between communities (and vice versa) 2 simulations of 2 communities with 2 species (A & B) Jlocal = 50, m = 0.2 Mean local richness = 2 Regional richness = 2 Mean local richness = 2 Regional richness = 2 Low beta diversity; Regional richness will eventually be 1

  13. Stable coexistence can be maintained if there is a trade-off among species between competitive ability and colonization ability Pseudo-code for 2 species A is a good disperser & poor competitor; B is the opposite for loop Kill a bunch of individuals Each species sends out a bunch of dispersers (A > B, per capita) If A lands in an empty cell, it occupies it If A lands in a B cell, it dies If A lands in an A cell, non-event If B lands in an empty cell, it dies (or has low prob of occupying it) If B lands in an A cell, it kicks out A and occupies the cell If B lands in a B cell, non-event stop for loop

  14. + - Negative frequency-dependence If A (good disperser) gets too common, then B will kick it out almost anywhere B lands If B (good competitor) gets too common, it will have few places to colonize, and empty cells will accumulate for A to colonize. Fitness dif (A-B) Freq(A) 0 1 (This type of dynamic is probably quite common in nature: r-K species)

  15. many species 2 species Good competitor Good colonizer Succession

  16. - Predators cause prey to go locally extinct, which in turn causes predator to go extinct - Prey better at getting to empty sites - Predators “chase” prey through space, but prey stay one step ahead = stable coexistence

  17. Is the effect of dispersal on communities stochastic? The trajectory of community dynamics (abundances of multiple species) can be greatly changed colonization order or by the presence/absence of particular species We don’t know who’s coming next (i.e., arriving via dispersal) Therefore, the effect of dispersal on communities is (partly) stochastic

  18. + - Expected equilibrium if… sp. A colonizes first and dominates before sp. B gets there sp. B colonizes first and dominates before sp. A gets there Complex frequency-dependence Fitness dif. (A-B) 0 1 Freq(A) ( priority effects & multiple stables states)

  19. A framework for incorporating dispersal into community ecology Leibold et al. (2004, Ecology Letters)

  20. The metacommunity framework (examples with 2 competing species, 3 patches) Species sorting Patch dynamics (showing competition-colonization tradeoff) Dispersal + Selection (constant locally, spatially heterogeneous) Dispersal + Selection (freq. dependent locally) Neutral Mass effects Dispersal + drift As in (b) but with higher dispersal Leibold et al. (2004, Ecology Letters)

  21. Key questions for determining community consequences of dispersal: (1) The composition of the dispersers (2) The selection/drift regime where the dispersers arrive

More Related