{"title":"Advancing theory of community assembly in spatially structured environments: local vs regional processes in river networks","authors":"C. Swan, B. Brown","doi":"10.1899/10-150.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The most basic ecological questions are frequently the most difficult to answer. The foundational questions of community ecology are prime examples: Why are these species found in these abundances at this location? Why does the assemblage at site X differ from that at site Y? How and why do these assemblages change through time? The questions are simple, but the answers have proven to be multifaceted, complex, and often elusive. However, community ecologists recently have made large strides in their ability to answer these fundamental questions. Much of this progress has resulted from recognition of a simple principle: processes that influence the structure and dynamics of communities occur on multiple spatial scales and, for many communities, focusing on processes at a single spatial scale will not provide understanding of the factors that shape communities. In particular, recent research has focused on the interaction between local and regional forces in structuring communities, where local refers to species interactions and environmental filtering, whereas regional refers to processes primarily driven by the dispersal of organisms. Community ecologists have long realized that both local and regional processes can structure communities, but the recent emphasis on the interactions between scales has led to progress in both theoretical and empirical community ecology. This change in perspective was implicit in the controversial Neutral Theory (Hubbell 2001), is explicit in the emerging body of theory known as Metacommunity Ecology (Leibold et al. 2004, Holyoak et al. 2005), and continues to produce a groundswell of innovative community ecology research. Embracing the interaction between local and regional factors as an organizing feature of communities has obvious significance for the study of riverine communities and ecosystems. Streams and rivers are, by their nature, spatially structured systems with a very particular dendritic (i.e., linear branching), hierarchical architecture (Fagan 2002, Grant et al. 2007). The directional flow of rivers strongly affects the movement of organisms through bulk flow, which transports both organisms and materials, and the life histories of many organisms reflect evolutionary responses to a flowing-water environment that leads to directional rather than diffusive dispersal patterns. The pervasive and sometimes extensive movement of organisms in riverine landscapes suggests that understanding community assembly and dynamics in riverine systems will require knowledge of regional dispersal-driven processes in addition to knowledge of local environmental conditions and species interactions. The results of recent research support this assertion (Heino 2005, Muneepeerakul et al. 2007, 2008a, b, Heino and Mykra 2008, Hitt and Angermeier 2008, Brown and Swan 2010, Clarke et al. 2010). Within this framework, a rapidly emerging focal point for research is the role of spatial configuration of riverine networks in dictating properties of communities. Configuration of riverine networks affects occupancy patterns of some organisms (Grant et al. 2009), changes the relative balance of local and regional forces in structuring stream invertebrate communities (Brown and Swan 2010), and affects the performance of bioassessment metrics (Hitt and Angermeier 2008). Multiscale, multispecies approaches to investigating the influence of dendritic network structure on riverine communities are the topic of this special series of articles. The contributions in this special series are bound together by a recognition of the need for simultaneous consideration of multiple spatial scales and a focus on the effects of spatial structure of riverine systems when attempting to explain the structure and func1 E-mail addresses: chris.swan@umbc.edu 2 bbrown3@umbc.edu J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc., 2011, 30(1):232–234 ’ 2011 by The North American Benthological Society DOI: 10.1899/10-150.1 Published online: 18 January 2011","PeriodicalId":49987,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the North American Benthological Society","volume":"62 1","pages":"232 - 234"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"24","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the North American Benthological Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1899/10-150.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24
Abstract
The most basic ecological questions are frequently the most difficult to answer. The foundational questions of community ecology are prime examples: Why are these species found in these abundances at this location? Why does the assemblage at site X differ from that at site Y? How and why do these assemblages change through time? The questions are simple, but the answers have proven to be multifaceted, complex, and often elusive. However, community ecologists recently have made large strides in their ability to answer these fundamental questions. Much of this progress has resulted from recognition of a simple principle: processes that influence the structure and dynamics of communities occur on multiple spatial scales and, for many communities, focusing on processes at a single spatial scale will not provide understanding of the factors that shape communities. In particular, recent research has focused on the interaction between local and regional forces in structuring communities, where local refers to species interactions and environmental filtering, whereas regional refers to processes primarily driven by the dispersal of organisms. Community ecologists have long realized that both local and regional processes can structure communities, but the recent emphasis on the interactions between scales has led to progress in both theoretical and empirical community ecology. This change in perspective was implicit in the controversial Neutral Theory (Hubbell 2001), is explicit in the emerging body of theory known as Metacommunity Ecology (Leibold et al. 2004, Holyoak et al. 2005), and continues to produce a groundswell of innovative community ecology research. Embracing the interaction between local and regional factors as an organizing feature of communities has obvious significance for the study of riverine communities and ecosystems. Streams and rivers are, by their nature, spatially structured systems with a very particular dendritic (i.e., linear branching), hierarchical architecture (Fagan 2002, Grant et al. 2007). The directional flow of rivers strongly affects the movement of organisms through bulk flow, which transports both organisms and materials, and the life histories of many organisms reflect evolutionary responses to a flowing-water environment that leads to directional rather than diffusive dispersal patterns. The pervasive and sometimes extensive movement of organisms in riverine landscapes suggests that understanding community assembly and dynamics in riverine systems will require knowledge of regional dispersal-driven processes in addition to knowledge of local environmental conditions and species interactions. The results of recent research support this assertion (Heino 2005, Muneepeerakul et al. 2007, 2008a, b, Heino and Mykra 2008, Hitt and Angermeier 2008, Brown and Swan 2010, Clarke et al. 2010). Within this framework, a rapidly emerging focal point for research is the role of spatial configuration of riverine networks in dictating properties of communities. Configuration of riverine networks affects occupancy patterns of some organisms (Grant et al. 2009), changes the relative balance of local and regional forces in structuring stream invertebrate communities (Brown and Swan 2010), and affects the performance of bioassessment metrics (Hitt and Angermeier 2008). Multiscale, multispecies approaches to investigating the influence of dendritic network structure on riverine communities are the topic of this special series of articles. The contributions in this special series are bound together by a recognition of the need for simultaneous consideration of multiple spatial scales and a focus on the effects of spatial structure of riverine systems when attempting to explain the structure and func1 E-mail addresses: chris.swan@umbc.edu 2 bbrown3@umbc.edu J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc., 2011, 30(1):232–234 ’ 2011 by The North American Benthological Society DOI: 10.1899/10-150.1 Published online: 18 January 2011
最基本的生态问题往往是最难回答的。群落生态学的基本问题就是最好的例子:为什么这些物种在这个地方如此丰富?为什么X点的组合与Y点的不同?这些组合是如何以及为什么随着时间而变化的?问题很简单,但答案却是多方面的、复杂的,而且往往难以捉摸。然而,群落生态学家最近在回答这些基本问题的能力上取得了很大的进步。这一进展很大程度上是由于认识到一个简单的原则:影响社区结构和动态的过程发生在多个空间尺度上,对许多社区来说,侧重于单一空间尺度的过程将无法理解塑造社区的因素。特别是,最近的研究集中在构建群落的局部和区域力量之间的相互作用上,其中局部是指物种相互作用和环境过滤,而区域是指主要由生物扩散驱动的过程。群落生态学家早就认识到,地方和区域过程都可以构建群落,但最近对尺度之间相互作用的重视导致了理论和实证群落生态学的进展。这种观点的变化隐含在有争议的中性理论(Hubbell 2001)中,在被称为元群落生态学的新兴理论体系中是明确的(Leibold et al. 2004, Holyoak et al. 2005),并继续产生创新群落生态学研究的浪潮。将局地因子与区域因子的相互作用作为群落的组织特征,对河流群落与生态系统的研究具有明显的意义。溪流和河流,就其本质而言,是具有非常特殊的树突(即线性分支)和层次结构的空间结构系统(Fagan 2002, Grant et al. 2007)。河流的定向流动强烈地影响着生物的运动,通过大量流动来运输生物和物质,许多生物的生活史反映了对流动水环境的进化反应,这种环境导致了定向而不是扩散的扩散模式。河流景观中生物的普遍和有时广泛的运动表明,了解河流系统中的群落组合和动态,除了了解当地环境条件和物种相互作用外,还需要了解区域分散驱动过程。最近的研究结果支持这一断言(Heino 2005, Muneepeerakul et al. 2007, 2008a, b, Heino and Mykra 2008, Hitt and Angermeier 2008, Brown and Swan 2010, Clarke et al. 2010)。在这个框架内,一个迅速出现的研究焦点是河流网络的空间配置在决定社区属性方面的作用。河流网络的配置影响了一些生物的占用模式(Grant et al. 2009),改变了构建河流无脊椎动物群落的地方和区域力量的相对平衡(Brown and Swan 2010),并影响了生物评估指标的表现(Hitt and Angermeier 2008)。多尺度、多物种的方法来研究树突网络结构对河流群落的影响是这一系列特别文章的主题。在这个特别系列的贡献是结合在一起的认识到需要同时考虑多个空间尺度和关注河流系统的空间结构的影响时,试图解释结构和功能1 E-mail地址:chris.swan@umbc.edu 2 bbrown3@umbc.edu J. N. Am。Benthol。Soc。2011, 30(1): 232-234。by The North American Benthological Society DOI: 10.1899/10-150.1