When can competition and dispersal lead to checkerboard distributions?

Tad Dallas, Brett A. Melbourne, Alan Hastings

Forskningsoutput: TidskriftsbidragArtikelVetenskapligPeer review

Sammanfattning

Summary 1.Checkerboard distributions ? mutually exclusive species co-occurrences ? are a common observation in community ecology and biogeography. While the underlying causes of checkerboard distributions have remained elusive, a longstanding argument is that they are representative of strong competitive interactions and/or dispersal limitation. 2.We explore this using a stochastic two-patch metacommunity model combined with an experimental two-patch system of competing Tribolium species, quantifying checkerboard distributions using the abundance-based index Ast. 3.We find that maintenance of checkerboard distributions is possible in a limited parameter space consisting of low dispersal rates, low population growth rates, and high interspecific competition. Checkerboards were not maintained in experimental metacommunities. 4.Our model, parameterized using independent data, echoed this finding, providing a clear link between model and experiment, and suggested that only small regions of parameter space would allow for checkerboard distributions between patches with equally hospitable environments. These findings may provide insight into when interspecific competition and dispersal limitation would promote checkerboard distributions. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Originalspråkengelska
TidskriftJournal of Animal Ecology
Volym0
Utgåvaja
ISSN0021-8790
DOI
Status!!E-pub ahead of print - 10 okt 2018
MoE-publikationstypA1 Tidskriftsartikel-refererad

Vetenskapsgrenar

  • 1181 Ekologi, evolutionsbiologi

Citera det här

Dallas, Tad ; Melbourne, Brett A. ; Hastings, Alan. / When can competition and dispersal lead to checkerboard distributions?. I: Journal of Animal Ecology. 2018 ; Vol. 0, Nr. ja.
@article{d05473d465054449a6b99257ac5783e3,
title = "When can competition and dispersal lead to checkerboard distributions?",
abstract = "Summary 1.Checkerboard distributions ? mutually exclusive species co-occurrences ? are a common observation in community ecology and biogeography. While the underlying causes of checkerboard distributions have remained elusive, a longstanding argument is that they are representative of strong competitive interactions and/or dispersal limitation. 2.We explore this using a stochastic two-patch metacommunity model combined with an experimental two-patch system of competing Tribolium species, quantifying checkerboard distributions using the abundance-based index Ast. 3.We find that maintenance of checkerboard distributions is possible in a limited parameter space consisting of low dispersal rates, low population growth rates, and high interspecific competition. Checkerboards were not maintained in experimental metacommunities. 4.Our model, parameterized using independent data, echoed this finding, providing a clear link between model and experiment, and suggested that only small regions of parameter space would allow for checkerboard distributions between patches with equally hospitable environments. These findings may provide insight into when interspecific competition and dispersal limitation would promote checkerboard distributions. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.",
keywords = "Community assembly, Co-occurrence, Multi-species communities, Mutual exclusion, Tribolium Competition and checkerboards, 1181 Ecology, evolutionary biology",
author = "Tad Dallas and Melbourne, {Brett A.} and Alan Hastings",
year = "2018",
month = "10",
day = "10",
doi = "10.1111/1365-2656.12913",
language = "English",
volume = "0",
journal = "Journal of Animal Ecology",
issn = "0021-8790",
publisher = "John Wiley & Sons, Ltd (10.1111)",
number = "ja",

}

When can competition and dispersal lead to checkerboard distributions? / Dallas, Tad; Melbourne, Brett A.; Hastings, Alan.

I: Journal of Animal Ecology, Vol. 0, Nr. ja, 10.10.2018.

Forskningsoutput: TidskriftsbidragArtikelVetenskapligPeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - When can competition and dispersal lead to checkerboard distributions?

AU - Dallas, Tad

AU - Melbourne, Brett A.

AU - Hastings, Alan

PY - 2018/10/10

Y1 - 2018/10/10

N2 - Summary 1.Checkerboard distributions ? mutually exclusive species co-occurrences ? are a common observation in community ecology and biogeography. While the underlying causes of checkerboard distributions have remained elusive, a longstanding argument is that they are representative of strong competitive interactions and/or dispersal limitation. 2.We explore this using a stochastic two-patch metacommunity model combined with an experimental two-patch system of competing Tribolium species, quantifying checkerboard distributions using the abundance-based index Ast. 3.We find that maintenance of checkerboard distributions is possible in a limited parameter space consisting of low dispersal rates, low population growth rates, and high interspecific competition. Checkerboards were not maintained in experimental metacommunities. 4.Our model, parameterized using independent data, echoed this finding, providing a clear link between model and experiment, and suggested that only small regions of parameter space would allow for checkerboard distributions between patches with equally hospitable environments. These findings may provide insight into when interspecific competition and dispersal limitation would promote checkerboard distributions. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

AB - Summary 1.Checkerboard distributions ? mutually exclusive species co-occurrences ? are a common observation in community ecology and biogeography. While the underlying causes of checkerboard distributions have remained elusive, a longstanding argument is that they are representative of strong competitive interactions and/or dispersal limitation. 2.We explore this using a stochastic two-patch metacommunity model combined with an experimental two-patch system of competing Tribolium species, quantifying checkerboard distributions using the abundance-based index Ast. 3.We find that maintenance of checkerboard distributions is possible in a limited parameter space consisting of low dispersal rates, low population growth rates, and high interspecific competition. Checkerboards were not maintained in experimental metacommunities. 4.Our model, parameterized using independent data, echoed this finding, providing a clear link between model and experiment, and suggested that only small regions of parameter space would allow for checkerboard distributions between patches with equally hospitable environments. These findings may provide insight into when interspecific competition and dispersal limitation would promote checkerboard distributions. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

KW - Community assembly

KW - Co-occurrence

KW - Multi-species communities

KW - Mutual exclusion

KW - Tribolium Competition and checkerboards

KW - 1181 Ecology, evolutionary biology

U2 - 10.1111/1365-2656.12913

DO - 10.1111/1365-2656.12913

M3 - Article

VL - 0

JO - Journal of Animal Ecology

JF - Journal of Animal Ecology

SN - 0021-8790

IS - ja

ER -