Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Se está descargando tu SlideShare. ×

community ecology (RAKESH)

Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Anuncio
Próximo SlideShare
Community ecology
Community ecology
Cargando en…3
×

Eche un vistazo a continuación

1 de 84 Anuncio

Más Contenido Relacionado

A los espectadores también les gustó (20)

Anuncio

Similares a community ecology (RAKESH) (20)

Más de RAKESH KUMAR MEENA (20)

Anuncio

Más reciente (20)

community ecology (RAKESH)

  1. 1. Presented By RAKESH KR. MEENA ID-15MSENT014 SAM HIGGINBOTTOM INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURE, TECHNOLOGY & SCIENCES (Deemed to be University) ALLAHABAD-211007,U.P., INDIA
  2. 2. Community ecology [Chpt 20] a) Definition of community b) Views on community organization c) Community structure and organization
  3. 3. Community Structure [Chpt 20] Any definition of a community is necessarily VAGUE, but the relevant features of a community require that an assemblage of species coexist together in a habitat and they interact. Therefore, a working definition of a COMMUNITY is: A collection of plant and animal populations that are INTERACTING directly or indirectly. An ASSOCIATION is a plant community possessing a DEFINITIVE SPECIES COMPOSITION.
  4. 4.  Autotrophic communities require only the energy from the sun to drive the process of photosynthesis, such as forests and grasslands.  Heterotrophic communities, such as organisms that inhabit a fallen log, depend on the autotrophic community for their energy source.  All communities have certain characteristics that define their biological and physical structure, but these characteristics vary in both SPACE and TIME.  A GUILD is a GROUP OF SPECIES within a community that interact MORE STRONGLY AMONG THEMSELVES than with others, utilizing HABITAT or FOOD resources in a SIMILAR MANNER. ·
  5. 5. Classification of most communities is in large part based on the structure of the PLANT COMMUNITY or association. Plants represent the MOST STABLE living component of the community. Because they LACK MOBILITY, they must cope with the prevailing environment and, therefore, are excellent indicators. Characterization of a community is based on both the: • BIOLOGICAL STRUCTURE (the mix of species) and the • PHYSICAL STRUCTURE (the physical features of the biotic and abiotic environment).
  6. 6. The form and structure of terrestrial communities are largely defined by the vegetation including growth form, vertical, horizontal, and biological structure: o Raunkiaer’s life forms - classification of plant life in relation to the HEIGHT of PERENNATING tissue (embryonic or meristemic tissues that remain inactive over winter or prolonged dry periods) above ground. Perennating tissues include buds, bulbs, tubers, roots, and seeds. Raunkiaer recognized six life forms:
  7. 7.  Phanerophytes - trees and shrubs greater than 25 cm in height that have their leaf-producing buds elevated above ground on stems.  Cryptophytes (geophytes)-grasses which have above- ground tissues that DIE BACK IN WINTER or during prolonged dry periods and survive unfavorable periods as BUDS buried in the ground on a BULB or RHIZOME.  Therophytes-annuals that survive unfavorable periods as SEEDS and complete their life cycle from seed to seed in one season.  Chamaephytes-perennial shoots or buds are on the SURFACE of the ground to about 25 cm ABOVE the surface.  Hemicryptophytes-perennial shoots or buds are CLOSE TO THE SURFACE of the ground, often COVERED WITH LITTER. Epiphytes-plants that GROW ON OTHER PLANTS with their roots up in the air.
  8. 8.  A community with a high percentage of perennating tissue well above ground (phanerophytes) would be characteristic of WARMER, WETTER climates; A community where most of the plants are classified as cryptophytes and hemicryptophytes would be characteristic of COLDER or DRIER environments. Therophytes are very common in FIRE-DOMINATED habitats.  When species within a community are classified into life forms and each life form is expressed as a PERCENTAGE, the result is a LIFE FORM SPECTRUM that reflects the plants’ adaptations to the environment, especially climate, and provides a standard means for describing community structure. NB Caution should be exercised when using these life forms as a basis for community classification. Overlap does occur among the Raunkiaer life form spectra of various communities, with NO ONE community represented by a SPECIFIC LIFE FORM and NO LIFE FORM occurring in ONLY ONE COMMUNITY.
  9. 9. • Vertical structure is determined largely by life form of the plants, including their size, branching, and leaves, which influences and is influenced by the vertical GRADIENT OF LIGHT. The structure of a well-developed forest has up to 5 LAYERS, 6 in a TROPICAL FOREST: o Canopy - the primary site of energy fixation through PHOTOSYNTHESIS which has a major influence on the rest of the forest depending on the amount of sunlight that penetrates to lower layers. o Understory - generally consists of TALL SHRUBS and understory TREES, and younger trees, some of which are the same species as those in the canopy. Species that are unable to TOLERATE SHADE will die; others will eventually grow to reach maturity after some of the older trees in the canopy die or are harvested. o Shrub layer - a layer of small to medium SHADE TOLERANT SHRUBS. o Herb or ground layer- the nature of this layer will depend on the soil moisture and nutrient conditions, the slope position, the density of the canopy and understory, and the aspect of the slope, all of which vary from place to place throughout the forest.
  10. 10. o Forest floor - the site where DECOMPOSITION takes place and where nutrients are released from DECAYING ORGANIC MATTER for reuse by the forest plants. Tropical rain forest also may have a sixth layer: o Emergents - emergents are trees that rise above the general canopy.
  11. 11. • The vertical structure of aquatic (freshwater) ecosystems is determined by light penetration and profiles of temperature and oxygen. Four general layers are recognized: o Epilimnion - a layer of FREELY CIRCULATING water, found in the summer in well-stratified lakes. o Metalimnion - a layer characterized by a thermocline—a very steep and REAPID DECLINE IN TEMPERATURE. o Hypolimnion- a deep, COLD layer of dense water about 4o C, often LOW IN OXYGEN. o Bottom mud - a layer of bottom mud. The following two structural layers are ROUGHLY based on light penetration:  Photic zone – (~LIGHT ZONE) an upper layer roughly corresponding to the epilimnion which is dominated by autotrophic phytoplankton and is the site of PHOTOSYNTHESIS.  Benthic zone - (~BOTTOM ZONE) a lower layer roughly corresponding to the hypolimnion and bottom mud where DECOMPOSITION IS MOST ACTIVE.
  12. 12. • Horizontal structure is the pattern of vegetation ACROSS the landscape. It is LESS PREDICTABLE than vertical structure due to the VARIABILITY in the PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT, and DISPERSAL and other biotic factors that interact to affect the distribution of organisms. Communities exist in large and small PATCHES separated from one another producing a horizontal pattern that increases the physical and ecological COMPLEXITY of the environment. This patchiness exists on different scales across the landscape including WITHIN PATCH heterogeneity, BETWEEN PATCH heterogeneity, and heterogeneously patterned LANDSCAPES. At all levels, the size, shapes, and dispersion of patches affect their COLONISATION by individuals, the PERSISTENCE of these individuals on the patch, the population dynamics, and the NUMBER OF SPECIES in an area.
  13. 13. The MIX of species, including their NUMBER and relative DOMINANCE, define the BIOLOGICAL STRUCTURE of a community. Dominants in a community may be the MOST NUMEROUS, possess the HIGHEST BIOMASS, preempt the MOST SPACE, make the largest CONTRIBUTION OF ENERGY FLOW or mineral cycling, or by some other means control or influence the rest of the community. Keystone species are those whose presence is CRITICAL TO THE INTEGRITY of the community. Three features define biological structure: • species dominance, • species diversity, and • species abundance.
  14. 14. Dominance- several measures are used to determine dominance: Relative dominance - the ratio of basal AREA or aerial COVERAGE or BIOMASS of a species to the TOTAL basal AREA or coverage or biomass of all species in the community. Relative abundance - the numerical abundance of ONE SPECIES relative to the TOTAL ABUNDANCE of all species. Relative frequency - an index based on the NUMBER OF sample POINTS OR PLOTS in which a species is found to occur relative to the TOTAL NUMBER OF SAMPLES taken. This index is best used when the species are very DIFFERENT IN SIZE (as large species may skew results, being big, but few individuals)
  15. 15. Importance value - the combination of relative dominance, relative abundance, and relative frequency. Most species do not achieve a high level of importance in the community, but those that do serve as INDEX SPECIES. Species diversity is usually determined by some index that combines species RICHNESS (the number of species within a community) with a measure of species evenness or equitability (the relative abundance of individuals among the species). The more equitable the distribution, the greater is evenness. Species diversity increases as the numbers of individuals in the total population are more equitably distributed among the species. Communities with low evenness are dominated numerically by few species (lots of a small number of trees for example).
  16. 16.  Shannon index of diversity - determines the uncertainty associated with two individuals drawn at random from the SAME COMMUNITY belonging to the SAME SPECIES. It considers both richness and evenness. Uncertainty is GREATEST when species richness and species evenness are HIGH. In communities composed of organisms with a wide range of size, an index may lead us to UNDERESTIMATE THE IMPORTANCE of FEWER BUT LARGER individuals and overestimate that of more common species. The indices also FAILS TO DISTINGUISH between the ABUNDANT AND RARER species, which contribute little to the index.
  17. 17. The Shannon index of diversity is used as one measure of the biological structure of a community for making comparisons. Comparisons are made of species diversity:  within a community (alpha or α diversity),  between communities or habitats (beta or β diversity), or  among communities over a geographic area (gamma or γ diversity). Shannon index of richness - derived by dividing a community’s ACTUAL species diversity by its MAXIMUM POSSIBLE species diversity.
  18. 18. Species abundance - two communities with the same diversity index value do not necessarily have the same exact species richness and evenness. A complete picture of the distribution of species abundances in a community must involve an examination of the relative abundance of each species against RANK, where rank is defined by relative abundance (compared to other species) The most abundant species is plotted first along the x axis, with the corresponding value of the y axis being the value of relative abundance. This process is continued until all species are plotted. The resulting graph is a rank-abundance diagram.
  19. 19. Theoretically, the relative abundances of the species exhibited in the rank-abundance diagram represent the manner in which species DIVIDE THE RESOURCES or ENVIRONMENTAL SPACE. In a community where the organisms are of SIMILAR SIZE, ABUNDANT species preempt a LARGER PROPORTION of space than do less abundant species. Using the model of niche breadth and overlap among competing species, the rank abundance curves provide a model of niche partitioning.
  20. 20. Species abundance Rank-abundance curves for two forest communities. Rank abundance is the species ranking based on relative abundance. Relative abundance (y axis) is expressed on a log10 axis. Note that one forest community has a higher species richness and evenness than the other. WV mature hardwood forest VA young hardwood forest
  21. 21. Three statistical models have been developed to describe the patterns of relative abundance, all based on resource partitioning: o (A) Random niche (broken stick), o (B) Niche preemption (geometric distribution hypothesis), and o (C) The log-normal hypothesis.
  22. 22. These models describe patterns of species abundance, but they are of LITTLE VALUE in determining the UNDERLYING CAUSES for the observed abundance relationships. Any conceptual model of how communities are structured— the patterns of species distribution and abundance—must explicitly address the INFLUENCE OF SPECIES INTERACTIONS.
  23. 23. Species interactions There are no clear-cut generalizations about the role of competition, predation, parasitism, and mutualism in shaping the structure of all communities, but there are examples where particular interactions play a significant role. COMPETITION has historically been assumed to be the DOMINANT INTERACTION, especially COMPETITIVE EXCLUSION, but examples of competition are often less definitive than for predation and parasitism. The importance of competition in community structure likely varies from community to community.
  24. 24. Within any given community, COMPETITION is most pronounced among SESSILE organisms such as plants, or among members of the SAME GUILD. Determining the degree to which COMPETITION INFLUENCES the RELATIVE ABUNDANCE of species is DIFFICULT because so many OTHER FACTORS that have a direct influence on population dynamics. MUTUALISM has been studied less but COULD well be one of the MOST IMPORTANT determinants of community structure.
  25. 25. Food webs and community structure - one of the most fundamental processes in nature is the acquisition of food to supply the energy and nutrients needed for assimilation. The variety of species interactions—predation, parasitism, competition, and mutualism—are all involved in the acquisition of food resources. A FOOD CHAIN is a descriptive diagram with a series of arrows, each pointing from one species to another from which it is a source of food. Feeding relationships are virtually NEVER LINEAR and involve the meshing of NUMEROUS FOOD CHAINS and organisms feeding at various levels and in various food chains (=FOOD WEB)
  26. 26. o Physically STABLE environments tend to have food webs consisting of LONGER FOOD CHAINS than do fluctuating environments. o Vertical stratification and herbivores: top carnivore ratios also influence food web structure. Two views of how community structure is regulated through food webs have been developed: o Bottom-up regulation and o Top-down regulation.
  27. 27.  Bottom-up regulation - emphasizes the limitations imposed by the AVAILABILITY OF FOOD resources (species populations) at the NEXT LOWER LEVEL and the role of competition among species that draw on those food resources. The level above is influenced by the resources provided by the level below (autotrophs limit herbivores, herbivores limit carnivores, etc.).  Top-down regulation - the abundance at each level is controlled by CONSUMERS (PREDATORS) at the TOP of the food chain. e.g. When carnivores suppress the number of herbivores, plants experience a release from grazing and flourish. These views are fundamentally different and are still the subject of much debate.
  28. 28. Assembly rules - the removal or addition of species can have profound effects on the structure and function of the community. Given the importance of interactions and the interdependence among species within a community, how do species become assembled to form a community? Two approaches have been used to investigate community development and structure: 1. Remove keystone species (a species whose activities have a SIGNIFICANT ROLE in determining community structure) and study how the community restructures itself —what species become the new dominants and what species increase or decrease.
  29. 29. 2. Reconstruct the sequence in which SPECIES WERE ADDED when the community was formed and attempt to determine what COLONIZATION SEQUENCES may or may not be possible. This approach attempts to establish the rules that govern the assembly of species to form communities. Perhaps the most important insight gained is the importance of understanding the HISTORICAL CONTEXT in which a community arises. Although the SAME SPECIES may be found in SIMILAR COMMUNITIES, each may have colonized the area at DIFFERENT TIMES and in DIFFERENT SEQUENCES, which would change species relationships. Each community develops within a historical context that will influence species interactions. Thus different assembly routes will produce differences in community organization. Understanding of the development of communities is essential to habitat restoration and conservation.
  30. 30. • Community classification - while communities may be discussed as discrete units, the actual physical delineation of a community is difficult. Communities often BLEND INTO ONE ANOTHER, with differences becoming more pronounced with distance. Typically, community classification schemes include a consideration of community “physiognomy” (essentially the appearance of the community, the general appearance, vertical structure, and growth form of vegetation).
  31. 31. • Because animal distribution appears to correlate with VEGETATIONAL COMMUNITIES, classification of physiognomy will relate to both plant and animal life. • Communities are often named after the DOMINANT FORM OF LIFE, usually plants, such as deciduous or coniferous forest, sagebrush, shortgrass prairie. • They may be further identified by a few CHARACTERISTIC or DOMINANT SPECIES that represent a shorthand method of naming the community e.g. kelp forest, maerl beds • In the marine environment, animals often can be the dominant form of life e.g. mussel beds, gorgonian reefs, coral reefs. However, each community should be described by providing a COMPLETE LIST of species and their RELATIVE POPULATION SIZES and CONTRIBUTIONS TO TOTAL BIOMASS.
  32. 32. o Where HABITAT BOUNDARIES are WELL-DEFINED, communities may be classified by PHYSICAL FEATURES such as tidal flats, sand dunes, cliffs, ponds, and streams. o Other communities may be further classified based on prevailing ENVIRONMENTAL REGIMES (e.g. temperate/ fast flowing etc) or SPECIES COMPOSITION including frequency, dominance, constancy, presence, and fidelity Areas with similar combinations of species may be classified as the same community type. The type is named after the dominant organisms or the ones with the highest frequency (e.g. oak- hickory forest).
  33. 33. Species may be grouped as EXCLUSIVE, those completely or nearly completely confined to one type of community; CHARACTERISTIC, those most closely identified with a certain community; or UBIQUITOUS, those with no particular affinity for any community. o ORDINATION is a technique for arranging and comparing communities along a linear axis according to their SIMILARITY IN SPECIES COMPOSITION. It is an exploratory data analysis technique designed to seek patterns or trends. Various statistical methods have been developed to analyse ordinate communities, looking at large complex sets of variables: e.g. principle component analysis, cluster analysis, discriminate analysis, correspondence analysis etc. etc.
  34. 34. Moving across the landscape, we notice that the nature of the physical and biological structure of the community changes. Often those changes are small, subtle ones in the species composition or height of the vegetation. However, as we travel further and further, these changes become more pronounced. These changes in the physical and biological structure of communities as we move across spatial gradients (the landscape) are referred to as ZONATION. If the transition between two communities is abrupt and distinct, there may be no problem in defining the community boundaries. However, the differences in the species composition and patterns of dominance observed in the two communities may occur gradually over the distance in the two communities may occur gradually over the distance from hilltop to stream. In this case, the boundary is not so clear.
  35. 35. .
  36. 36. and rest….
  37. 37. Community dynamics [Chpt 21] a) Succession i) Models of succession a) Views on community organization i) Clements approach ii) Gleason approach iii) Fundamental nice a) Plants, environment & community dynamics i) Models of plant community dynamics ii) Allogenic & autogenic changes
  38. 38. Community Dynamics • As environmental conditions change in time and space, the structure of the community, both physical and biological, also changes. The result is a dynamic mosaic of communities on the landscape. It is this changing pattern of community structure that is the focus of community ecology. • Zonation is a SPATIAL pattern related to gradients in environmental conditions often associated with elevation, slope position, and aspect. • Succession is the TEMPORAL change in community structure through time. In contrast to zonation, succession refers to a given point in space —a single location. The sequence of communities is called a SERE and each of the changes is a SERAL STAGE. o Although each seral stage is a point in a continuum of vegetation through time, it is recognizable as a distinct community with its own characteristic structure and species composition.
  39. 39. SUCCESSION: Temporal variation in community structure in one place. oThe initial or early successional species, often referred to as pioneer species, are usually characterized by high growth rates, smaller size, high degree of dispersal, and high rates of population growth (r-selected species). o In contrast, late successional species generally have lower rates of dispersal and colonization, slower growth rates, and are larger and longer-lived (K-selected species). o Two types of successional patterns are identified:  Primary succession occurs on a site previously unoccupied by a community.  Secondary succession occurs on previously occupied (vegetated) sites following disturbance.
  40. 40. oThe concept of succession was introduced by Henry Cowles in 1899 and expanded by Frederick Clements.  They viewed succession as a predictable, directional, inevitable process driven by the action of plants on their environment (termed facilitation)  that concluded with a stable end point determined by the prevailing climate (the climatic climax community).
  41. 41. oThe climax represented a community at some equilibrium or STEADY STATE with the physical and biotic environment that continued to reproduce itself in the absence of disturbance.  Clements further recognized only one climax for a region whose characteristics were determined solely by climate. Successional processes and modifications of the environment overcome the effects of differences in topography, soil parent material, and other factors.
  42. 42. Five models of succession: 1. Reciprocal replacement (A. S. Watt 1947)-succession is viewed as a cyclic rather than a linear process leading to some defined endpoint.
  43. 43. 2. Shifting-mosaic steady state (Bormann and Likens 1979)-an outgrowth of the reciprocal replacement model where the community is viewed as being composed of a mosaic of patches, each in a phase of successional development. Representation of a forested landscape – Although each patch is continuously changing, the average characteristics of the forest remain relatively constant— in a steady state condition.
  44. 44. 3. Autosuccession (Hanes 1971) - some communities, especially those found in extreme environments, are often characterized by an absence of temporal shifts in species composition following disturbance (The community replaces itself following disturbance rather than going through a series of successional stages)
  45. 45. 4. Nonsuccessional dynamics (fluctuations)-fluctuations differ from succession in that although the relative abundance of the species making up the community may change over time, the species composing the community remain the same. (The species found within a community remain unchanged through time, but species abundance, or age class, or dominance does change) No new species invade the site and changes in dominants may be reversible. These changes in species abundance result from seasonal or annual variations in environmental conditions such as soil moisture or temperature, or preferential selection of one species over another by grazers.
  46. 46. 5. Degradative succession-succession in heterotrophic communities involving the decomposition of dead organic material. • Succession is characterized by early dominance of fungi and invertebrates that feed on dead organic matter. • The organisms that first colonize the site are ones that can feed on fresh organic matter. Their feeding activities bring about physical and chemical changes in the substrate. • After they have exploited the energy and nutrients accessible to them, they disappear and are replaced by a group of organisms able to extract nutrients and energy left in a less accessible form. • Each group changes the substrate to a point that it can no longer survive there and is replaced by the next group of organisms until the organic matter is degraded.
  47. 47. • As the biological and physical structure of vegetation changes during the process of succession, animal life associated with those stages also changes. • Animals are influenced more by structural characteristics of vegetation than by species composition. Therefore, successional stages of animals may not correspond to the successional stages of plants. • Therefore, the key to diversity of wildlife in a given area is the maintenance of a heterogeneous landscape with habitat patches of various successional stages and of adequate sizes and connectiveness to meet the animals needs and promote gene exchange and dispersal.
  48. 48. Processes Controlling Community Dynamics • Community structure does not vary randomly across the landscape (zonation) or through time (succession); rather, it exhibits repeatable, often predictable patterns. •This suggests a common mechanism or mechanisms influencing the process of succession. • An association is a type of community with: (1) relatively consistent species composition, (2) a uniform physical (physiognomic) structure, and (3) a distribution that is characteristic of a particular habitat, such as a hilltop or valley.
  49. 49. Views of communities and succession The Clements vs Gleason views of communities and succession: o F. E. Clements (1916) developed a descriptive theory of succession based on his view of the community as an association or superorganism. The logic was that if clusters or groups of species repeatedly associated together, that is evidence for either positive or neutral interactions among them, favoring the view of communities as integrated units. o Based on this logic, Clements developed the organismal concept of communities. He viewed species in an association as having similar environmental requirements and therefore similar distributional limits along important environmental gradients. The boundaries between adjacent associations are narrow, with very few species in common. o This view suggests a common evolutionary history and similar fundamental responses and tolerances for the component species.
  50. 50. F.E. Clements (continued) o Mutualism and coevolution play an important role in the evolution of species making up the association. The community developed as an integrated whole which Clements considered as a superorganism, the ultimate expression of which was the climax. o The climax was an assemblage of vegetation that belonged to the highest type of vegetation community possible under the prevailing climate. This climax can, according to Clements, reproduce itself, “repeating with essential fidelity the stages of its development.” (i.e. the climax is the ‘mature adult’ association)
  51. 51.  H. A. Gleason (1917, 1926) regarded the community as consisting of individual species that respond independently to environmental conditions: “the vegetation of an area is merely the resultant of two factors, the fluctuation and fortuitous immigration of plants and an equally fluctuating and variable environment.” He emphasized species rather than communities as the essential unit. o Succession results from the individual responses of different species to the prevailing environmental conditions. Plants involved in succession are those that arrive first on the site and are able to establish themselves under prevailing environmental conditions. o As time passes, plants modify the environment, and competition and other interactions among species determine the final outcome.
  52. 52. o His view became known as the individualistic continuum concept. The continuum concept states that the relationship between coexisting species is a result of similarities in their requirements and tolerances, not a result of strong interactions or common evolutionary history, as viewed by Clements. o Boundaries between communities are gradual and difficult to identify. What is referred to as a community is merely the group of species found to coexist under any particular set of environmental conditions.
  53. 53. Connell and Slatyer (1977) proposed a theoretical framework for understanding succession that included three different models: 1. Facilitation model - the organisms themselves bring about changes within the community, modifying the environment in such a way that they prepare the site for later successional species, thus facilitating their success. This is a holistic and Clementsian model.
  54. 54. 2. Inhibition model - species interactions are purely competitive and no species is competitively superior to another. The site belongs to those species that become established first and are able to hold their positions against all invaders. They make the site less suitable for both early and late successional species through consumption of resources and modification of the environment. Although early successional species may suppress their growth for a long time, ultimately, species that are long-lived come to dominate. Such succession is not orderly and is less predictable than that observed under the facilitation model. This is a reductionist (Gleason) approach with competition driving vegetational change.
  55. 55. 3. Tolerance model - involves the interaction of competition and life history traits. It suggests that later successional species are neither inhibited nor aided by species of earlier stages. • Later-stage species can invade a site, become established, and grow to maturity in the presence of those preceding them, because they have a greater tolerance for the lower level of resources created by earlier species. • As time progresses, the early successional species decline in abundance and the community is dominated by the tolerant species. • This model suggests that early stages of succession are driven by competition, whereas later stages are dominated by species that can invade and tolerate lower resource regimes than previously existing species on the site.
  56. 56. • Noble and Slatyer (1981) proposed a framework for understanding succession that focused on species life history characteristics that determine the place of a species in a succession rather than on species interactions. These characteristics are called vital attributes and they fall into three categories: 1. Ability and method by which a species recovers following disturbance. 2. The ability of a species to grow and reproduce under competition. 3. Species longevity. o Species within an area are classified based on their vital attributes, and predictions about successional sequences are possible. o This model explains succession in terms of species characteristics and is grounded in the Gleasonian view of communities.
  57. 57. Another frame work… the Fundamental Niche A model of community dynamics based on a species’ fundamental niche is based on four premises: 1. The fundamental niche of a species acts as a primary constraint on its distribution and abundance. 2. Species vary in their fundamental niches (environmental tolerances). Characteristics that allow an organism to prosper under one set of environmental conditions often limit its ability to do equally well under differing environmental conditions. 3. Environmental conditions change in time and space. 4. The fundamental niche is modified by species interactions (realized niches). Organisms interact through direct contact (i.e., competition and predation) or indirectly through modification of the physical environment.
  58. 58. Fundamental niches of seven hypothetical species along an environmental gradient in the absence of competition from other species. The species all have bell-shaped responses to the gradient, but each has different tolerance limits defined by a minimum and maximum value along the gradient. As conditions change, for example from e1 to e2, the set of species that can potentially occur in the community changes. These changes can occur in either time or space.
  59. 59. Plants, the environment & community dynamics There are two components of plant response to the environment that are critical for understanding community dynamics. One is the response of the individual to the prevailing environment, such as light, nutrients, and moisture. The other is how the individuals modify the environment = autogenic environmental change. It is the combination of these two plant responses to the environment that give rise to the dynamics of communities across the landscape.
  60. 60. There are 3 current models of plant community dynamics: 1. Plant strategies and vegetative processes (Grime 1977, 1979)- the concept of the r and K life history classification was expanded to include three primary plant strategies: (a) R or ruderal strategy species - Species exhibiting the R, or ruderal, strategy rapidly colonize disturbed sites but are small in stature and short-lived. Allocation of resources is primarily to reproduction, with characteristics allowing for a wide dispersal of propagules to newly disturbed sites. (b) C or competitor strategy species - Predictable habitats with abundant resources favor species that allocate resources to growth, favoring resource acquisition and competitive ability (C species).
  61. 61. (c) S or stress tolerators strategy species- Habitats where resources are limited favor stress-tolerant species (S species) that allocate resources to maintenance.  This model considers plant succession to be a sequence of life history strategies beginning with ruderals invading the site, followed by competitors, and eventually stress tolerators. Changes in species dominance result from autogenic changes in resource availability as a direct result of resource consumption by the plants with resource availability decreasing as succession progresses. R C S
  62. 62. 2. Resource-ratio model (Tilman 1985, 1988)- based on the trade-off in characteristics that enable plants to compete for the essential resources of nitrogen and light. -The ability to effectively compete for light is associated with allocation of carbon to the production of above-ground tissues— leaves and stems. -Conversely, the ability to effectively compete for nitrogen is associated with the production of root tissues. According to the resource-ratio model, succession comes about as the relative availability of nitrogen and light change through time. • As biogeochemical processes make more soil nitrogen available, plant growth increases, reducing the availability of light at the soil surface - leads plant species replacement (plants adapted to high nutrient and low light availability) Low soil nitrogen High soil nitrogen High light Low light
  63. 63. 3. Individual-based model (Huston and Smith 1987)- based on the cost-benefit concept that plant adaptations for the simultaneous use of two or more resources are limited by physiological and life history constraints. Their model focuses on the resources of light and water. The plants themselves largely influence variations in available light within the community (i.e. autogenic), while the availability of water is largely a function of climate and soils (i.e. allogenic).
  64. 64. The following three premises summarize the consequences of constraints on the simultaneous use of light and water by individual plants: i) There is an inverse relationship between the ability to survive and grow under low-light conditions and the ability to photosynthesize and grow at high rates when the availability of light is high. ii) There is an inverse relationship between the ability to survive and grow under low-water conditions and the ability to photosynthesize and grow at high rates when water is freely available. iii) Tolerances to conditions of low light and low water are interdependent. i.e. The set of physiological and morphological characteristics that enable a plant to survive and grow under shaded conditions (e.g., allocation of carbon to the production of leaves and stem) is in direct conflict with its ability to tolerate low water availability (e.g., high allocation to the production of roots).
  65. 65. Allogenic & Autogenic changes Most of the plants succession discussion so far was about autogenic (self-made) changes in environment. Allogenic (abiotic environmental) changes can produce patterns of succession over time scales ranging from days to millennia or longer. Fluctuations in the environment that occur repeatedly over the lifetime of an individual are unlikely to influence patterns of succession among species with that general life span. In contrast, shifts in environmental conditions that occur at periods as long or longer than the organism’s life span are likely to result in shifts in species dominance—succession.
  66. 66. Temporal changes in the abundance of dominant phytoplankton species over the period of May through October in Lawrence Lake, Michigan (1979) as a result of allogenic changes (seasonal temperature and photoperiod changes) The mean generation time of the phytoplankton species is in the range of 1-10 days.
  67. 67. Allogenic environmental change is the dominant influence on spatial variations in community structure — i.e. zonation. Patterns of temperature and moisture resulting from regional variations in climate are the major determinant of regional and global patterns of vegetation distribution, and they form the basis of most vegetation classification systems. On a more local scale, climate interacts with soil and topography to influence patterns of temperature and soil moisture. The underlying geology of an area interacts with climate to influence soil characteristics such as texture. In turn, texture has a direct effect on soil moisture-holding capacity, cation exchange capacity, and base saturation, influencing the moisture and nutrient environment of plants.
  68. 68. In aquatic environments, water depth and salinity are examples of allogenic environmental gradients that directly influence the distribution and dynamics of communities. The distinction between autogenic and allogenic environmental change is often blurred when abiotic (allogenic) environmental factors influence the manner in which organisms modify the environment. By affecting rates of survival, growth and reproduction, allogenic variations influence competition for resources.
  69. 69. SPECIES RICHNESS & SUCCESSION During succession, two opposing forces affect species richness. Colonization increases species richness and species replacement decreases species richness. This results in a pattern of increasing and decreasing species diversity from early to late successional stages. The particular pattern can be influenced by factors such as the growth rate of a population and disturbance. At both high and low disturbance frequencies, species diversity remains low. However, at an intermediate frequency of disturbance, species diversity remains high. As a final note… herbivory can influence plant community dynamics both directly and indirectly (causing disturbance etc.)
  70. 70. And finally… you’re climbing up a mountain…
  71. 71. •A transect up a mountain in an area with four plant species - the distribution of the four species is presented in 2 ways. 1 - In one view, the species distribution is plotted as a function of altitude or elevation. NB the four plants exhibit a continuum of species regularly replacing each other in a sequence of A, B, C, and D with increasing altitude.
  72. 72. 2- Species distribution described as you walk up the mountainside - the distributions of the four species are not continuous. As a result, you would see a number of species associations you walk along the transect. These communities composed of coexisting species are a consequence of the spatial pattern of the landscape.
  73. 73. • The two views are quite different yet consistent. Each species has a continuous response along an environmental gradient, elevation. • Yet it is the spatial distribution of that environmental variable across the landscape that determines the overlapping patterns of distribution—the composition of the community. • The simple example presented here examines only one feature of the environment—elevation. • Yet the structure of communities is the product of a complex interaction of pattern and process. Species respond to a wide array of environmental factors that vary spatially and temporally across the landscape, and the interactions among organisms influence the nature of those responses.

Notas del editor

  • Community Structure
      Any definition of a community is necessarily vague, but the relevant features of a community require that an assemblage of species coexist together in a habitat and they interact. Therefore, a working definition of a community is a collection of plant and animal populations that are interacting directly or indirectly. An association is a plant community possessing a definitive species composition.
    Autotrophic communities require only the energy from the sun to drive the process of photosynthesis, such as forests and grasslands.
    Heterotrophic communities, such as organisms that inhabit a fallen log, depend on the autotrophic community for their energy source. All communities have certain characteristics that define their biological and physical structure, but these characteristics vary in both space and time.
    A guild is a group of species within a community that interact more strongly among themselves than with others, utilizing habitat or food resources in a similar manner.
    ·
  • Community Structure
      Any definition of a community is necessarily vague, but the relevant features of a community require that an assemblage of species coexist together in a habitat and they interact. Therefore, a working definition of a community is a collection of plant and animal populations that are interacting directly or indirectly. An association is a plant community possessing a definitive species composition.
    Autotrophic communities require only the energy from the sun to drive the process of photosynthesis, such as forests and grasslands.
    Heterotrophic communities, such as organisms that inhabit a fallen log, depend on the autotrophic community for their energy source. All communities have certain characteristics that define their biological and physical structure, but these characteristics vary in both space and time.
    A guild is a group of species within a community that interact more strongly among themselves than with others, utilizing habitat or food resources in a similar manner.
    ·
  • Classification of most communities is in large part based on the structure of the plant community or association. Plants represent the most stable living component of the community. Because they lack mobility, they must cope with the prevailing environment and, therefore, are excellent indicators. Characterization of a community is based on both the biological structure (the mix of species) and the physical structure (the physical features of the biotic and abiotic environment).
    The form and structure of terrestrial communities are largely defined by the vegetation including growth form, vertical, horizontal, and biological structure:
    Raunkiaer’s life forms-classification of plant life in relation to the height of perennating tissue (embryonic or meristemic tissues that remain inactive over winter or prolonged dry period) above ground. Perennating tissues include buds, bulbs, tubers, roots, and seeds. Raunkiaer recognized six life forms:
  • Classification of most communities is in large part based on the structure of the plant community or association. Plants represent the most stable living component of the community. Because they lack mobility, they must cope with the prevailing environment and, therefore, are excellent indicators. Characterization of a community is based on both the biological structure (the mix of species) and the physical structure (the physical features of the biotic and abiotic environment).
    The form and structure of terrestrial communities are largely defined by the vegetation including growth form, vertical, horizontal, and biological structure:
    Raunkiaer’s life forms-classification of plant life in relation to the height of perennating tissue (embryonic or meristemic tissues that remain inactive over winter or prolonged dry period) above ground. Perennating tissues include buds, bulbs, tubers, roots, and seeds. Raunkiaer recognized six life forms:
  • Phanerophytes-trees and shrubs greater than 25 cm in height that have their leaf-producing buds elevated above ground on stems.
    Cryptophytes (geophytes)-grasses which have above-ground tissues that die back in winter or during prolonged dry periods and survive unfavorable periods as buds buried in the ground on a bulb or rhizome.
    Therophytes-annuals that survive unfavorable periods as seeds and complete their life cycle from seed to seed in one season. 
    Chamaephytes-perennial shoots or buds are on the surface of the ground to about 25 cm above the surface.
    Hemicryptophytes-perennial shoots or buds are close to the surface of the ground, often covered with litter.
    Epiphytes-plants that grow on other plants with their roots up in the air.
  • The form and structure of terrestrial communities are largely defined by the vegetation. The plants may be tall or short, evergreen or deciduous, herbaceous or woody. Such characteristics can describe growth forms.
    A more useful system was designed in 1903 by Christen Raunkiaer. Instead of considering a plant’s growth form, he classified plant life by the relation of the embryonic or meristemic tissues that remain inactive over the winter or prolonged dry period—the perennating tissue—to their height above ground. Such perennating tissue includes buds, bulbs, tubers, roots, and seeds. Raunkiaer recognized six principal life forms, summarized in this illustration. All of the species within a plant community can be grouped into these six classes: phanerophytes are trees and shrubs greater than 25 cm in height and have their leaf-producing buds elevated above ground on stems; cryptophytes (geophytes) are grasses which have above-ground tissues that die back in winter or during prolonged dry periods and survive unfavorable periods as buds buried in the ground on a bulb or rhizome; therophytes are annuals that survive unfavorable periods as seeds and complete their life cycle from seed to seed in one season; chamaephytes have perennial shoots or buds on the surface of the ground to about 25 cm above the surface; hemicryptophytes have perennial shoots or buds close to the surface of the ground, often covered with litter; and epiphytes are plants that grow on other plants with their roots up in the air.
  • A community with a high percentage of perennating tissue well above ground (phanerophytes) would be characteristic of warmer, wetter climates; a community where most of the plants are classified as cryptophytes and hemicryptophytes would be characteristic of colder or drier environments. Therophytes are very common in fire-dominated habitats.
    When species within a community are classified into life forms and each life form is expressed as a percentage, the result is a life form spectrum that reflects the plants’ adaptations to the environment, especially climate, and provides a standard means for describing community structure.
    Caution should be exercised when using these life forms as a basis for community classification. Overlap does occur among the Raunkiaer life form spectra of various communities, with no one community represented by a specific life form and no life form occurring in only one community.
  • A community with a high percentage of perennating tissue well above ground (phanerophytes) would be characteristic of warmer, wetter climates. A community where most of the plants are classified as cryptophytes (buds buried in the ground) and hemicryptophytes (perennial shoots or buds close to the surface, often covered with litter) would be characteristic of colder or drier environments. When the species within a community are classified into life forms and each life form is expressed as a percentage, the result is a life form spectrum that reflects the plants’ adaptations to the environment, particularly the climate, as shown here. Such a system of classification provides a standard means of describing the structure of the community.
  • Vertical structure is determined largely by life form of the plants, including their size, branching, and leaves, which influences and is influenced by the vertical gradient of light. The structure of a well-developed forest has up to five layers, six in a tropical forest:
    Canopy-the primary site of energy fixation through photosynthesis which has a major influence on the rest of the forest depending on the amount of sunlight that penetrates to lower layers.
    Understory-generally consists of tall shrubs and understory trees, and younger trees, some of which are the same species as those in the canopy. Species that are unable to tolerate shade will die; others will eventually grow to reach maturity after some of the older trees in the canopy die or are harvested.
    Shrub layer-a layer of small to medium shade tolerant shrubs.
    Herb or ground layer-the nature of this layer will depend on the soil moisture and nutrient conditions, the slope position, the density of the canopy and understory, and the aspect of the slope, all of which vary from place to place throughout the forest.
    Forest floor-the site where decomposition takes place and where nutrients are released from decaying organic matter for reuse by the forest plants.
  • Emergents-emergents are trees that rise above the general canopy and are found in tropical rain forests.
    The vertical structure of aquatic ecosystems is determined by light penetration and profiles of temperature and oxygen. Four general layers are recognized, and two other structural layers based on light penetration:
    Epilimnion-a layer of freely circulating water, found in the summer in well-stratified lakes.
    Metalimnion-a layer characterized by a thermocline—a very steep and rapid decline in temperature.
    Hypolimnion-a deep, cold layer of dense water about 4oC, often low in oxygen.
    Bottom mud-a layer of bottom mud.
    The following two structural layers are based on light penetration:
    Photic zone-an upper layer roughly corresponding to the epilimnion which is dominated by autotrophic phytoplankton and is the site of photosynthesis.
    Benthic zone-a lower layer roughly corresponding to the hypolimnion and bottom mud where decomposition is most active.
  • A distinctive feature of a community is vertical structure, as illustrated here. On land, vertical structure is determined largely by the life form of the plants—their size, branching, and leaves—which in turn, influences and is influenced by the vertical gradient of light. The vertical structure of the plant community provides the physical structure in which many forms of animal life are adapted to live. A well-developed forest ecosystem, for example, has several layers of vegetation. For top to bottom, they are the canopy, the understory, the shrub layer, the herb or ground layer, and the forest floor. The tropical rain forest has one additional stratum, emergents, trees that rise above the general canopy of the forest.
    The canopy, which is the primary site of energy fixation through photosynthesis, has a major influence on the rest of the forest. If it is fairly open, considerable sunlight will reach the lower layers and the understory and shrub strata will be well developed if water and nutrients are ample. If the canopy is dense and closed, light levels are low and the understory and shrub layers will be poorly developed. The understory generally consists of tall shrubs and understory trees, and younger trees, some of which are the same species as those in the canopy. Species that are unable to tolerate shade will die; others will eventually grow to reach the canopy after some of the older trees die or are harvested.
    The nature of the herb layer will depend on the soil moisture and nutrient conditions, the slope position, the density of the canopy and understory, and the aspect of the slope, all of which vary from place to place throughout the forest.
    The final layer, the forest floor, is the site where the important process of decomposition takes place and where nutrients are released from decaying organic matter for reuse by the forest plants.
  • Horizontal structure is the pattern of vegetation across the landscape. It is less predictable than vertical structure due to the variability in the physical environment, and dispersal and other biotic factors that interact to affect the distribution of organisms. Communities exist in large and small patches separated from one another producing a horizontal pattern that increases the physical and ecological complexity of the environment. This patchiness exists on different scales across the landscape including within patch heterogeneity, between patch heterogeneity, and heterogeneously patterned landscapes. At all levels, the size, shapes, and dispersion of patches affect their colonization by individuals, the persistence of these individuals on the patch, the population dynamics, and the number of species in an area.
  • The mix of species, including their number and relative dominance, define the biological structure of a community. Dominants in a community may be the most numerous, possess the highest biomass, preempt the most space, make the largest contribution of energy flow or mineral cycling, or by some other means control or influence the rest of the community. Keystone species are those whose presence is critical to the integrity of the community. Three features define biological structure: species dominance, species diversity, and species abundance.
     Dominance- several measures are used to determine dominance:
    Relative dominance-the ratio of basal area or aerial coverage or biomass of a species to the total basal area or coverage or biomass of all species in the community.
    Relative abundance-the numerical abundance of one species relative to the total abundance of all species.
    Relative frequency-an index based on the number of sample points or plots in which a species is found to occur relative to the total number of samples taken. This index is best used when the species are very different in size.
  • The mix of species, including their number and relative dominance, define the biological structure of a community. Dominants in a community may be the most numerous, possess the highest biomass, preempt the most space, make the largest contribution of energy flow or mineral cycling, or by some other means control or influence the rest of the community. Keystone species are those whose presence is critical to the integrity of the community. Three features define biological structure: species dominance, species diversity, and species abundance.
     Dominance- several measures are used to determine dominance:
    Relative dominance-the ratio of basal area or aerial coverage or biomass of a species to the total basal area or coverage or biomass of all species in the community.
    Relative abundance-the numerical abundance of one species relative to the total abundance of all species.
    Relative frequency-an index based on the number of sample points or plots in which a species is found to occur relative to the total number of samples taken. This index is best used when the species are very different in size.
  • Importance value-the combination of relative dominance, relative abundance, and relative frequency. Most species do not achieve a high level of importance in the community, but those that do serve as index species.
    Species diversity is usually determined by some index that combines species richness (the number of species within a community) with a measure of species evenness or equitability (the relative abundance of individuals among the species). The more equitable the distribution, the greater is evenness. Species diversity increases as the numbers of individuals in the total population are more equitably distributed among the species. Communities with low evenness are dominated numerically by few species.
  • Shannon index of diversity-determines the uncertainty associated with two individuals drawn at random from the same community belonging to the same species. It considers both richness and evenness. Uncertainty is greatest when species richness and species evenness are high. In communities composed of organisms with a wide range of size, an index may lead us to underestimate the importance of fewer but larger individuals and overestimate that of more common species. The indices also fail to distinguish between the abundant and rarer species, which contribute little to the index.
       The Shannon index of diversity is used as one measure of the biological structure of a community for making comparisons. Comparisons are made of species diversity within a community (alpha or  diversity), between communities or habitats (beta or  diversity), or among communities over a geographic area (gamma or  diversity).
    Shannon index of richness-derived by dividing a community’s actual species diversity by its maximum possible species diversity.
  • Shannon index of diversity-determines the uncertainty associated with two individuals drawn at random from the same community belonging to the same species. It considers both richness and evenness. Uncertainty is greatest when species richness and species evenness are high. In communities composed of organisms with a wide range of size, an index may lead us to underestimate the importance of fewer but larger individuals and overestimate that of more common species. The indices also fail to distinguish between the abundant and rarer species, which contribute little to the index.
       The Shannon index of diversity is used as one measure of the biological structure of a community for making comparisons. Comparisons are made of species diversity within a community (alpha or  diversity), between communities or habitats (beta or  diversity), or among communities over a geographic area (gamma or  diversity).
    Shannon index of richness-derived by dividing a community’s actual species diversity by its maximum possible species diversity.
  • Species abundance-two communities with the same diversity index value do not necessarily have the same exact species richness and evenness. A complete picture of the distribution of species abundances in a community must involve an examination of the relative abundance of each species against rank, where rank is defined by relative abundance. The most abundant species is plotted first along the x axis, with the corresponding value of the y axis being the value of relative abundance. This process is continued until all species are plotted. The resulting graph is a rank-abundance diagram. Theoretically, the relative abundances of the species exhibited in the rank-abundance diagram represent the manner in which species divide the resources or environmental space. In a community where the organisms are of similar size, abundant species preempt a larger proportion of space than do less abundant species. Using the model of niche breadth and overlap among competing species, the rank abundance curves provide a model of niche partitioning.
  • Species abundance-two communities with the same diversity index value do not necessarily have the same exact species richness and evenness. A complete picture of the distribution of species abundances in a community must involve an examination of the relative abundance of each species against rank, where rank is defined by relative abundance. The most abundant species is plotted first along the x axis, with the corresponding value of the y axis being the value of relative abundance. This process is continued until all species are plotted. The resulting graph is a rank-abundance diagram. Theoretically, the relative abundances of the species exhibited in the rank-abundance diagram represent the manner in which species divide the resources or environmental space. In a community where the organisms are of similar size, abundant species preempt a larger proportion of space than do less abundant species. Using the model of niche breadth and overlap among competing species, the rank abundance curves provide a model of niche partitioning.
  • Describing a community using a single index of diversity is convenient for purposes of comparison; however, it is not a unique description of community composition. Two communities with the same diversity index value do not necessarily have the same exact species richness and evenness. A complete picture of the distribution of species abundances in a community must involve an examination of the relative abundance of all species in some systematic fashion. This picture is obtained by plotting the relative abundance of each species against rank, where rank is defined by relative abundance. Thus, the most abundant species is plotted first along the x axis, with the corresponding value of the y axis being the value of relative abundance. This process is continued until all species are plotted. The resulting graph is called a rank-abundance diagram. The rank-abundance diagrams for two forest stands are shown in this figure.
    Theoretically, the relative abundances of the species exhibited in the rank-abundance diagram represent the manner in which species divide the resources or environmental space. In a community where the organisms are of similar size, abundant species preempt a larger proportion of space and resources than do less abundant species. In this way, the rank-abundance curves tell us something about how resources are partitioned within a community. Using the model of niche breadth and overlap among competing species presented in an earlier lesson, we can view the rank abundance curves as a model of niche partitioning.
  • Three statistical models have been developed to describe the patterns of relative abundance, all based on resource partitioning:
     Random niche or broken stick model-views abundance as a random partitioning of resources distributed along a continuum. The length of each segment represents the abundance of species. The model assumes that species in the community use the critical resource with no overlap between species. This model is rarely realistic. It produces the highest evenness of the three models. This type of rank-abundance curve is observed only in small samples of taxonomically related animals with stable populations and long life cycles occupying a small homogeneous community.
  • In an attempt to understand the mechanisms underlying the community organization, three statistical models have been developed to describe the patterns of relative abundance.
    The random niche or broken stick model (shown as A in this graph) views abundance as a random partitioning of resources distributed along a continuum. The analogy is that of a stick on which are randomly marked a number of points that represent niche boundaries. Then the stick is broken at each point into segments. The length of each segment represents the abundance of species. If the segments, representing the relative abundance of the species, are plotted in a rank-abundance diagram with abundance (y axis) expressed on a log scale, then the curve shown in A results. The model assumes that species in the community use the critical resource with no overlap between species. This model is rarely realistic. It produces the highest evenness of the three models. This type of rank-abundance curve is observed only in small samples of taxonomically related animals with stable populations and long life cycles occupying a small homogeneous community, such as the sampling of nesting birds in a forest during the breeding season.
  • The niche preemption or geometric distribution hypothesis supposes that the most successful or dominant species preempts the most space. The next most successful claims the next largest share of space, and so on, with the least successful occupying what little space is left. The resulting rank-abundance curve is a straight line, curve B, in this illustration, and the distribution of the species forms a geometric series. This model produces the highest dominance and lowest evenness of the three models. Such a distribution is achieved only by plant communities containing a few species and occupying severe environments such as a desert. In most plant and animal communities, species overlap in the use of space and resources.
  • The third model, the log-normal hypothesis, supposes that the relative abundance of each species is determined by a variety of conditions, such as food, space, microclimate, and other environmental variables that directly or indirectly affect species success. If a variety of environmental factors are influencing the abundance of species in different and often independent ways, then the resulting pattern may appear rather random. The rank abundance curve produced by this model will fall somewhere between the random niche and geometric distribution curves, as shown in curve C.
  • These models describe patterns of species abundance, but they are of little value in determining the underlying causes for the observed abundance relationships. Any conceptual model of how communities are structured—the patterns of species distribution and abundance—must explicitly address the influence of species interactions.
  • Species interactions-there are no clear-cut generalizations about the role of competition, predation, parasitism, and mutualism in shaping the structure of all communities, there are examples where particular interactions play a significant role. Competition has historically been assumed to be the dominant interaction, especially competitive exclusion, but examples of competition are often less definitive than for predation and parasitism. The importance of competition in community structure likely varies from community to community. Within any given community, competition is most pronounced among sessile organisms such as plants, or among members of the same guild. However, even when competition is found, determining the degree to which it influences the relative abundance of species is difficult because so many other factors that have a direct influence on population dynamics, such as climate, or on population size, such as predation, are also present. Mutualism has been studied less but could well be one of the most important determinants of community structure.
  • Species interactions-there are no clear-cut generalizations about the role of competition, predation, parasitism, and mutualism in shaping the structure of all communities, there are examples where particular interactions play a significant role. Competition has historically been assumed to be the dominant interaction, especially competitive exclusion, but examples of competition are often less definitive than for predation and parasitism. The importance of competition in community structure likely varies from community to community. Within any given community, competition is most pronounced among sessile organisms such as plants, or among members of the same guild. However, even when competition is found, determining the degree to which it influences the relative abundance of species is difficult because so many other factors that have a direct influence on population dynamics, such as climate, or on population size, such as predation, are also present. Mutualism has been studied less but could well be one of the most important determinants of community structure.
  • · Food webs and community structure-one of the most fundamental processes in nature is the acquisition of food to supply the energy and nutrients needed for assimilation. The variety of species interactions—predation, parasitism, competition, and mutualism—are all involved in the acquisition of food resources. A food chain is a descriptive diagram with a series of arrows, each pointing from one species to another fro which it is a source of food. Feeding relationships are virtually never linear and involve the meshing of numerous food chains and organisms feeding at various levels and in various food chains.
     Physically stable environments tend to have food webs consisting of longer food chains than do fluctuating environments.
    Vertical stratification and herbivore top carnivore ratios also influence food web structure.
    Two views of how community structure is regulated through food webs have been developed: bottom-up or top-down regulation.
  • · Food webs and community structure-one of the most fundamental processes in nature is the acquisition of food to supply the energy and nutrients needed for assimilation. The variety of species interactions—predation, parasitism, competition, and mutualism—are all involved in the acquisition of food resources. A food chain is a descriptive diagram with a series of arrows, each pointing from one species to another fro which it is a source of food. Feeding relationships are virtually never linear and involve the meshing of numerous food chains and organisms feeding at various levels and in various food chains.
     Physically stable environments tend to have food webs consisting of longer food chains than do fluctuating environments.
    Vertical stratification and herbivore top carnivore ratios also influence food web structure.
    Two views of how community structure is regulated through food webs have been developed: bottom-up or top-down regulation.
  • Feeding relationships in nature, however, are not simple, straight-line food chains. Rather they involve numerous food chains meshed into a complex food web with links leading from primary producers through an array of consumers: herbivores, carnivores, and omnivores, illustrated by this midwinter food web in a salt marsh in the San Francisco Bay area. Such food webs are highly interwoven, with linkages representing a wide variety of species interactions. The structure of communities cannot be understood solely in terms of the direct interactions between species. An analysis of the mechanisms controlling community structure must include the indirect effects represented by the structure of the food web.
    The study of food web structure in a variety of communities, terrestrial, marine, and freshwater, has resulted in the emergence of a number of general patterns. Analyses suggest that food webs in fluctuating environments—ones characterized by variations in temperature, salinity, pH, moisture, and other conditions—tend to have shorter food chains with fewer links that those in more constant environments. Food chains in constant environments, such as pelagic regions of the ocean, are characterized by a greater species richness and more links to the food chain.
    Environmental variability alone, however, does not appear to constrain the average or maximum length of a food chain. Highly stratified environments such as a forest and pelagic water column have longer food chains than those in poorly stratified habitats such as grassland, tundra, and stream bottoms. The widest food webs, those with the greatest number of herbivores, were the shortest. In contrast, narrow food webs had the greatest fraction of top carnivores.
  • Bottom-up regulation-emphasizes the limitations imposed by the availability of food resources (species populations) at the next lower level and the role of competition among species that draw on those food resources. The level above is influenced by the resources provided by the level below (autotrophs limit herbivores, herbivores limit carnivores, etc.).
    Top-down regulation-the abundance at each level is controlled by consumers (predators) at the top of the food chain. When carnivores suppress the number of herbivores, plants experience a release from grazing and flourish.
    These views are fundamentally different and are still the subject of much debate.
  • ·  Assembly rules-the removal or addition of species can have profound effects on the structure and function of the community. Given the importance of interactions and the interdependence among species within a community, how do species become assembled to form a community? Two approaches have been used to investigate community development and structure:
    1.  Remove keystone species and study how the community restructures itself—what species become the new dominants and what species increase or decrease.
  • 2. Reconstruct the sequence in which species were added when the community was formed and attempt to determine what colonization sequences may or may not be possible. This approach attempts to establish the rules that govern the assembly of species to form communities. Perhaps the most important insight gained is the importance of understanding the historical context in which a community arises. Although the same species may be found in similar communities, each may have colonized the area at different times and in different sequences, which would change species relationships. Each community develops within a historical context that will influence species interactions. Thus different assembly routes will produce differences in community organization.
    o Understanding of the development of communities is essential to habitat restoration and conservation.
  • The removal or addition of a species can have profound consequences on the structure and function of the community. These results emphasize the importance of the interactions, both direct and indirect, among the species making up the community. Given this interconnectedness and, in many cases, interdependence among species within a community, one is faced with the inevitable question of how communities come into being. How do the species become assembled to form a community?
    Ecologists have used two approaches to investigate community development and structure. One is to remove a keystone species and study how the community restructures itself—what species become the new dominants and what species increase or decrease. The second approach is to attempt to reconstruct the sequence in which species were added when the community was formed, and to figure out what colonization sequences may or may not be possible. In effect, this second approach tries to establish the rules that govern the assembly of species to form communities. It is much like fitting together a jigsaw puzzle, with one significant difference. The assembly rule for putting together a jigsaw puzzle is fixed by the relative shapes of the pieces. Assembly rules for a community involve alternative pieces that also fit but change the configuration of the puzzle.
    The example of the jigsaw puzzle shown here is very simplistic. Many more species and types of species interactions are involved in the colonization and establishment of communities. However, theoretical studies examining the assembly of communities do provide some insights into how communities develop. Perhaps the most important insight gained is the importance of understanding the historical context in which a community arises. Although the same species may be found in similar communities, each may have colonized the area at different times and in different sequences, which would change species relationships. Each community develops within a historical context that will influence species interactions. Thus different assembly routes will produce differences in community organization.
    Assembly rules become quite important in conservation, especially in the restoration of ecosystems.
  • Community classification-while communities may be discussed as discrete units, the actual physical delineation of a community is difficult. Communities often blend into one another, with differences becoming more pronounced with distance. Typically, community classification schemes include a consideration of community “physiognomy” (essentially the appearance of the community, the general appearance, vertical structure, and growth form of vegetation).
    Because animal distribution appears to correlate with vegetational communities, classification of physiognomy will relate to both plant and animal life.
    Communities are often named after the dominant form of life, usually plants, such as deciduous or coniferous forest, sagebrush, or shortgrass prairie. They may be further identified by a few characteristic or dominant species that represent a shorthand method of naming the community. However, each community should be described by providing a complete list of species and their relative population sizes and contributions to the total biomass.
  • Community classification-while communities may be discussed as discrete units, the actual physical delineation of a community is difficult. Communities often blend into one another, with differences becoming more pronounced with distance. Typically, community classification schemes include a consideration of community “physiognomy” (essentially the appearance of the community, the general appearance, vertical structure, and growth form of vegetation).
    Because animal distribution appears to correlate with vegetational communities, classification of physiognomy will relate to both plant and animal life.
    Communities are often named after the dominant form of life, usually plants, such as deciduous or coniferous forest, sagebrush, or shortgrass prairie. They may be further identified by a few characteristic or dominant species that represent a shorthand method of naming the community. However, each community should be described by providing a complete list of species and their relative population sizes and contributions to the total biomass.
  • Where habitat boundaries are well-defined, communities may be classified by physical features such as tidal flats, sand dunes, cliffs, ponds, and streams.
    Finer subdivisions may be based on prevailing environmental regimes and species composition including frequency, dominance, constancy, presence, and fidelity. Areas with similar combinations of species may be classified as the same community type. The type is named after the dominant organisms or the ones with the highest frequency.
    Species may be grouped as exclusive, those completely or nearly completely confined to one type of community; characteristic, those most closely identified with a certain community; or ubiquitous, those with no particular affinity for any community.
    Ordination is a technique for arranging and comparing communities along a linear axis according to their similarity in species composition. It is an exploratory data analysis technique designed to seek patterns or trends.
  • Where habitat boundaries are well-defined, communities may be classified by physical features such as tidal flats, sand dunes, cliffs, ponds, and streams.
    Finer subdivisions may be based on prevailing environmental regimes and species composition including frequency, dominance, constancy, presence, and fidelity. Areas with similar combinations of species may be classified as the same community type. The type is named after the dominant organisms or the ones with the highest frequency.
    Species may be grouped as exclusive, those completely or nearly completely confined to one type of community; characteristic, those most closely identified with a certain community; or ubiquitous, those with no particular affinity for any community.
    Ordination is a technique for arranging and comparing communities along a linear axis according to their similarity in species composition. It is an exploratory data analysis technique designed to seek patterns or trends.
  • If a community is defined by its physical and biological structure, how different must two adjacent areas be to be referred to as different and separate communities? This is not a simple question. Moving across the landscape, we notice that the nature of the physical and biological structure of the community changes. Often those changes are small, subtle ones in the species composition or height of the vegetation. However, as we travel further and further, these changes become more pronounced. These changes in the physical and biological structure of communities as we move across spatial gradients (the landscape) are referred to as zonation. If the transition between two communities is abrupt and distinct, there may be no problem in defining the community boundaries. However, the differences in the species composition and patterns of dominance observed in the two communities may occur gradually over the distance in the two communities may occur gradually over the distance from hilltop to stream. In this case, the boundary is not so clear.
  • As we move across a landscape, the biological and physical structure of the community changes. At first these changes may be subtle, the presence of a new species not encountered in the adjacent area, or a change in the vertical structure, such as when one encounters an opening in a forest. Patterns of spatial variation in community structure or zonation are common to all environments, aquatic and terrestrial. This figure provides an illustration of zonation in a salt marsh. Note the variations in both the physical and biological structure of the communities as we move from the tidal zone (shoreline) through the marsh to the upland terrestrial environments. The dominant plant growth forms give way to shrubs and trees as we move to dry land, and the depth to the water table increases. Within the zone dominated by grasses and sedges, the dominant species change as we move back from the tidal areas. A variety of environmental factors change as we move along this spatial gradient, including microtopography, water depth, and salinity. Distinct communities are recognizable in these differing environments, in terms of both the species that dominate and the structural features of the vegetation such as height, density, and dispersion that define the structure of the community.
  • Community Dynamics
     
    As environmental conditions change in time and space, the structure of the community, both physical and biological, likewise changes. The result is a dynamic mosaic of communities on the landscape. It is this changing pattern of community structure that is the focus of community ecology.
    Zonation is a complex spatial pattern related to gradients in environmental conditions often associated with elevation, slope position, and aspect.
    Succession is the temporal change in community structure through time. In contrast to zonation, succession refers to a given point in space—a single location. The sequence of communities is called a sere and each of the changes is a seral stage.
    Although each seral stage is a point in a continuum of vegetation through time, it is recognizable as a distinct community with its own characteristic structure and species composition.
  • The initial or early successional species, often referred to as pioneer species, are usually characterized by high growth rates, smaller size, high degree of dispersal, and high rates of population growth (r-selected species).
    In contrast, late successional species generally have lower rates of dispersal and colonization, slower growth rates, and are larger and longer-lived (K-selected species).
    Two types of successional patterns are identified:
    Primary succession occurs on a site previously unoccupied by a community.
    Secondary succession occurs on previously occupied (vegetated) sites following disturbance.
  • The concept of succession was introduced by Henry Cowles in 1899 and expanded by Frederick Clements.
    They viewed succession as a predictable, directional, inevitable process driven by the action of plants on their environment (termed facilitation) that concluded with a stable end point determined by the prevailing climate (the climatic climax community).
    The climax represented a community at some equilibrium or steady state with the physical and biotic environment that continued to reproduce itself in the absence of disturbance.
    Clements further recognized only one climax for a region whose characteristics were determined solely by climate. Successional processes and modifications of the environment overcome the effects of differences in topography, soil parent material, and other factors.
    Over time, all communities within a region would converge to and stabilize at a single climax. Communities other than the climax were regarded as successional stages leading to the climax.
  • The concept of succession was introduced by Henry Cowles in 1899 and expanded by Frederick Clements.
    They viewed succession as a predictable, directional, inevitable process driven by the action of plants on their environment (termed facilitation) that concluded with a stable end point determined by the prevailing climate (the climatic climax community).
    The climax represented a community at some equilibrium or steady state with the physical and biotic environment that continued to reproduce itself in the absence of disturbance.
    Clements further recognized only one climax for a region whose characteristics were determined solely by climate. Successional processes and modifications of the environment overcome the effects of differences in topography, soil parent material, and other factors.
    Over time, all communities within a region would converge to and stabilize at a single climax. Communities other than the climax were regarded as successional stages leading to the climax.
  • Over time, all communities within a region would converge to and stabilize at a single climax. Communities other than the climax were regarded as successional stages leading to the climax. Although some of Clements’s six step hypothesis of succession (initiation, immigration, establishment, competition, site modification, and stabilization) can be found in many modern approaches to succession, new studies have revealed further insight into mechanisms of vegetation change, the nature of the climax (if indeed it exists) and whether successional changes are truly predictable and directional
  • Five models of succession:
    Reciprocal replacement (A. S. Watt 1947)-succession is viewed as a cyclic rather than a linear process leading to some defined endpoint. Successional states within the community that appear to be directional are often phases in a cycle of vegetation replacement. Death of vegetation or periodic disturbance starts regeneration again at some particular stage. Such changes usually occur continuously on a small scale within a community, and they are repeated over the course of time throughout the entire community. This model changes the concept of succession from a unidirectional series of stages finally reaching some endpoint, to that of the larger community being composed of a variety of patches undergoing different stages in a process of cyclic replacement. (Succession is viewed as consisting of a series of repeating seral stages [cyclic replacement] occurring in a limited area within a community)
  • Shifting-mosaic steady state (Bormann and Likens 1979)-an outgrowth of the reciprocal replacement model where the community is viewed as being composed of a mosaic of patches, each in a phase of successional development. The term steady state is a statistical description of the collection of patches, the average state of the community. Each patch is continuously changing, going through some successional sequence such as in the model of cyclic replacement. Even though the mosaic is continuously changing, when viewed collectively, the average composition of the overall community (average over all patches) may remain fairly constant—in a steady state. (Succession is views the community as consisting of a mosaic of patches, with each patch cycling through successional stages while the overall composition of the community remains unchanged)
  • Autosuccession (Hanes 1971)-some communities, especially those found in extreme environments, are often characterized by an absence of temporal shifts in species composition following disturbance; the community is self-replacing. Succession may be more a gradual elimination of individuals present from the onset rather than a replacement of initial species by new species. (The community replaces itself following disturbance rather than going through a series of successional stages)
    Nonsuccessional dynamics (fluctuations)-fluctuations differ from succession in that although the relative abundance of the species making up the community may change over time, the species composing the community remain the same. No new species invade the site and changes in dominants may be reversible. These changes in species abundance result from seasonal or annual variations in environmental conditions such as soil moisture or temperature, or preferential selection of one species over another by grazers. (The species found within a community remain unchanged through time, but species, or age class, or dominance does change)
  • Autosuccession (Hanes 1971)-some communities, especially those found in extreme environments, are often characterized by an absence of temporal shifts in species composition following disturbance; the community is self-replacing. Succession may be more a gradual elimination of individuals present from the onset rather than a replacement of initial species by new species. (The community replaces itself following disturbance rather than going through a series of successional stages)
    Nonsuccessional dynamics (fluctuations)-fluctuations differ from succession in that although the relative abundance of the species making up the community may change over time, the species composing the community remain the same. No new species invade the site and changes in dominants may be reversible. These changes in species abundance result from seasonal or annual variations in environmental conditions such as soil moisture or temperature, or preferential selection of one species over another by grazers. (The species found within a community remain unchanged through time, but species, or age class, or dominance does change)
  • Degradative succession-succession in heterotrophic communities involving the decomposition of dead organic material. Succession is characterized by early dominance of fungi and invertebrates that feed on dead organic matter. Available energy and nutrients are most abundant in the early stages of succession and decline steadily as succession proceeds. The organisms that first colonize the site are ones that can feed on fresh organic matter. Their feeding activities bring about physical and chemical changes in the substrate. After they have exploited the energy and nutrients accessible to them, they disappear and are replaced by a group of organisms able to extract nutrients and energy left in a less accessible form.
    Each group changes the substrate to a point that it can no longer survive there and is replaced by the next group of organisms until the organic matter is degraded. Thus heterotrophic succession is similar to autotrophic succession in that changes in the substrate are brought about by the organisms themselves. It differs , however, in that energy is degraded and not accumulated in organic biomass. (The decay and degradation of organic matter involves a sequence of organismal invasions and replacements as the organic base is altered with energy and nutrient availability declining through time)
  • · As the biological and physical structure of vegetation changes during the process of succession, animal life associated with those stages also changes. Animals are influenced more by structural characteristics of vegetation than by species composition. Therefore, successional stages of animals may not correspond to the successional stages identified for plants. Density of animal life across the range of seral stages varies with the nature of each individual community. Therefore, the key to diversity of wildlife in a given area is the maintenance of a heterogeneous landscape with habitat patches of various successional stages and of adequate sizes and connectiveness to meet the animals needs and promote gene exchange and dispersal.
  • As the biological and physical structure of vegetation changes during the process of succession, animal life also changes, as illustrated here. Animal life is influenced more by structural characteristics of vegetation than by species composition. For this reason successional stages of animal life might not correspond to the successional stages identified by plant ecologists.
    Density of animal life across a range of seral stages varies with the nature of each individual community. The key to diversity of wildlife in a given area is the maintenance of a heterogeneous landscape with habitat patches of various successional stages.
  • Community structure does not vary randomly across the landscape (zonation) or through time (succession); rather, it exhibits repeatable , often predictable patterns. In fact, the observed similarity in pattern of species colonization and extinction through time for sites across a wide range of environmental conditions suggests to ecologists a common mechanism or mechanisms influencing the process of succession. The search for these underlying mechanisms controlling the dynamics of communities has been and continues to be a major focus of ecology. Our current understanding of processes structuring communities is built on a rich history of ecological research that spans the past two centuries.
  • Views of communities and succession
    The Clements vs Gleason views of communities and succession:
    F. E. Clements (1916) developed a descriptive theory of succession based on his view of the community as an association or organism. The logic was that if clusters or groups of species repeatedly associated together, that is evidence for either positive or neutral interactions among them, favoring the view of communities as integrated units. Based on this logic, Clements developed the organismal concept of communities. He viewed species in an association as having similar environmental requirements and therefore similar distributional limits along important environmental gradients. The boundaries between adjacent associations are narrow, with very few species in common. This view suggests a common evolutionary history and similar fundamental responses and tolerances for the component species.
  • Mutualism and coevolution play an important role in the evolution of species making up the association. The community developed as an integrated whole which Clements considered as a superorganism, the ultimate expression of which was the climax. The climax was an assemblage of vegetation that belonged to the highest type of vegetation community possible under the prevailing climate. This climax can, according to Clements, can reproduce itself, “repeating with essential fidelity the stages of its development.”
  • H. A. Gleason (1917, 1926) regarded the community as consisting of individual species that respond independently to environmental conditions; “the vegetation of an area is merely the resultant of two factors, the fluctuation and fortuitous immigration of plants and an equally fluctuating and variable environment.” He emphasized species rather than communities as the essential unit.
    Succession results from the individual responses of different species to the prevailing environmental conditions. Plants involved in succession are those that arrive first on the site and are able to establish themselves under prevailing environmental conditions.
    As time passes, plants modify the environment and competition and other interactions among species determine the final outcome.
  • His view became known as the individualistic continuum concept. The continuum concept states that the relationship between coexisting species is a result of similarities in their requirements and tolerances, not a result of strong interactions or common evolutionary history, as viewed by Clements.
    Boundaries between communities are gradual and difficult to identify. What is referred to as a community is merely the group of species found to coexist under any particular set of environmental conditions.
  • · Connell and Slatyer (1977) proposed a theoretical framework for understanding succession that included three different models:
    Facilitation model-the organisms themselves bring about changes within the community, modifying the environment in such a way that they prepare the site for later successional species, thus facilitating their success. This is a holistic and Clementsian model.
    Inhibition model-species interactions are purely competitive and no species is competitively superior to another. The site belongs to those species that become established first and are able to hold their positions against all invaders. They make the site less suitable for both early and late successional species through consumption of resources and modification of the environment. Ultimately, species that are long-lived come to dominate even though early successional species may suppress their growth for a long time. Such succession is not orderly and is less predictable than that observed under the facilitation model. This is a reductionist (Gleason) approach with competition driving vegetational change.
  • · Connell and Slatyer (1977) proposed a theoretical framework for understanding succession that included three different models:
    Facilitation model-the organisms themselves bring about changes within the community, modifying the environment in such a way that they prepare the site for later successional species, thus facilitating their success. This is a holistic and Clementsian model.
    Inhibition model-species interactions are purely competitive and no species is competitively superior to another. The site belongs to those species that become established first and are able to hold their positions against all invaders. They make the site less suitable for both early and late successional species through consumption of resources and modification of the environment. Ultimately, species that are long-lived come to dominate even though early successional species may suppress their growth for a long time. Such succession is not orderly and is less predictable than that observed under the facilitation model. This is a reductionist (Gleason) approach with competition driving vegetational change.
  • Tolerance model-involves the interaction of competition and life history traits. It suggests that later successional species are neither inhibited nor aided by species of earlier stages. Later-stage species can invade a site, become established, and grow to maturity in the presence of those preceding them, because they have a greater tolerance for the lower level of resources created by earlier species. As time progresses, the early successional species decline in abundance and the community is dominated by the tolerant species. This model suggests that early stages of succession are driven by competition, whereas later stages are dominated by species that can invade and tolerate lower resource regimes than previously existing species on the site. This model depends on alternative life history characteristics.
    All three models share the same view of community dynamics: (1) community dynamics are influenced by the characteristics of individual species; and (2) species adapted to a particular environment share a complex of characteristics.
    The difficulty with this framework is that most successional sequences cannot be categorized into any one of the models.
  • All three models share the same view of community dynamics: (1) community dynamics are influenced by the characteristics of individual species; and (2) species adapted to a particular environment share a complex of characteristics.
    The difficulty with this framework is that most successional sequences cannot be categorized into any one of the models.
  • · Noble and Slatyer (1981) proposed a framework for understanding succession that focused on species life history characteristics that determine the place of a species in a succession rather than on species interactions. These characteristics are called vital attributes and they fall into three categories:
    1. Ability and method by which a species recovers following disturbance.
    2. The ability of a species to grow and reproduce under competition.
    3. Species longevity.
    Species within an area are classified based on their vital attributes, and predictions about successional sequences are possible.
  • · A model of community dynamics based on a species fundamental niche is based on four premises:
    1.  The fundamental niche of a species acts as a primary constraint on its distribution and abundance.
    2.  Species vary in their fundamental niches (environmental tolerances). Characteristics that allow an organism to prosper under one set of environmental conditions often limit its ability to do equally well under differing environmental conditions.
    3. Environmental conditions change in time and space. Environmental change that is a feature of the physical environment is an allogenic change. Change that is a direct result of the growth and development of the vegetation is autogenic change.
    4. The fundamental niche is modified by species interactions (realized niches). Organisms interact through direct contact (i.e., competition and predation) or indirectly through modification of the physical environment.
    The fundamental niche constrains the distribution and abundance of species as environmental conditions vary; however, the response of species can be modified by its interactions with other species.
  • The model thus far includes changes in community structure based on differences in the environmental response of species (their fundamental niche) and changes in environmental conditions. This relationship is summarized by the graphic presented here. We can represent the fundamental niches of a variety of species by defining a number of bell-shaped curves along some environmental gradient. The response of each species is defined in terms of abundance. Although the curves defining the fundamental niches of the species overlap, there are differences in the range of conditions that can be tolerated (i.e., beyond which the species is not found to survive). The distribution of fundamental niches along the environmental gradient represents a primary constraint on the structure of communities. For any given range of environmental conditions, only a subset of the species can survive, grow and reproduce. As the environmental conditions change in either time or space, the possible distribution and abundance of species will change.
    However, the model thus far considers only the responses of species to environmental conditions in isolation—without considering possible interactions among the species that can co-occur under any set of environmental conditions. There are a variety of ways in which species within the community interact and modify patterns of distribution and abundance.
  • · There are two components of plant response to the environment that are critical for understanding community dynamics. One is the response of the individual to the prevailing environment, such as light, nutrients, and moisture. The other is how the individuals modify the environment—autogenic environmental change. It is the combination of these two plant responses to the environment that give rise to the dynamics of communities across the landscape.
    Three current models of community dynamics-
    Plant strategies and vegetative processes (Grime 1977, 1979)-the concept of the r and K life history classification was expanded to include three primary plant strategies:
    1. R or ruderal strategy species- Species exhibiting the R, or ruderal, strategy rapidly colonize disturbed sites but are small in stature and short-lived. Allocation of resources is primarily to reproduction, with characteristics allowing for a wide dispersal of propagules to newly disturbed sites.
    2. C or competitor strategy species- Predictable habitats with abundant resources favor species that allocate resources to growth, favoring resource acquisition and competitive ability (C species).
  • · There are two components of plant response to the environment that are critical for understanding community dynamics. One is the response of the individual to the prevailing environment, such as light, nutrients, and moisture. The other is how the individuals modify the environment—autogenic environmental change. It is the combination of these two plant responses to the environment that give rise to the dynamics of communities across the landscape.
    Three current models of community dynamics-
    Plant strategies and vegetative processes (Grime 1977, 1979)-the concept of the r and K life history classification was expanded to include three primary plant strategies:
    1. R or ruderal strategy species- Species exhibiting the R, or ruderal, strategy rapidly colonize disturbed sites but are small in stature and short-lived. Allocation of resources is primarily to reproduction, with characteristics allowing for a wide dispersal of propagules to newly disturbed sites.
    2. C or competitor strategy species- Predictable habitats with abundant resources favor species that allocate resources to growth, favoring resource acquisition and competitive ability (C species).
  • 3.  S or stress tolerators strategy species- Habitats where resources are limited favor stress-tolerant species (S species) that allocate resources to maintenance.
    This model considers plant succession to be a sequence of life history strategies beginning with ruderals invading the site, followed by competitors, and eventually stress tolerators. Changes in species dominance result from autogenic changes in resource availability as a direct result of resource consumption by the plants with resource availability decreasing as succession progresses.
  • Resource-ratio model (Tilman 1985, 1988)- based on the trade-off in characteristics that enable plants to compete for the essential resources of nitrogen and light. The ability to effectively compete for light is associated with allocation of carbon to the production of above-ground tissues—leaves and stems. Conversely, the ability to effectively compete for nitrogen is associated with the production of root tissues. According to the resource-ratio model, succession comes about as the relative availability of nitrogen and light change through time. In Tilman’s model, the availability of these two essential plant resources is inversely related. Environmental conditions range from habitats with soils poor in nutrients but with a high availability of light at the soil surface to habitats with nutrient-rich soils and low availability of light. Community composition changes along this gradient as the ratio of nitrogen and light change. Species reach an equilibrium with the supply rates of the limiting resources. In doing so, they lower the available resources to a point at which other species cannot invade.
  • Individual-based model (Huston and Smith 1987)- based on the cost-benefit concept that plant adaptations for the simultaneous use of two or more resources are limited by physiological and life history constraints. Their model focuses on the resources of light and water. The plants themselves largely influence variations in available light within the community (autogenic), while the availability of water is largely a function of climate and soils (allogenic). The following three premises summarize the consequences of constraints on the simultaneous use of light and water by individual plants:
    1. There is an inverse relationship between the ability to survive and grow under low-light conditions and the ability to photosynthesize and grow at high rates when the availability of light is high.
    2. There is an inverse relationship between the ability to survive and grow under low-water conditions and the ability to photosynthesize and grow at high rates when water is freely available.
    3. Tolerances to conditions of low light and low water are interdependent. The set of physiological and morphological characteristics that enable a plant to survive and grow under shaded conditions (e.g., allocation of carbon to the production of leaves and stem) is in direct conflict with its ability to tolerate low water availability (e.g., high allocation to the production of roots).
  • Individual-based model (Huston and Smith 1987)- based on the cost-benefit concept that plant adaptations for the simultaneous use of two or more resources are limited by physiological and life history constraints. Their model focuses on the resources of light and water. The plants themselves largely influence variations in available light within the community (autogenic), while the availability of water is largely a function of climate and soils (allogenic). The following three premises summarize the consequences of constraints on the simultaneous use of light and water by individual plants:
    1. There is an inverse relationship between the ability to survive and grow under low-light conditions and the ability to photosynthesize and grow at high rates when the availability of light is high.
    2. There is an inverse relationship between the ability to survive and grow under low-water conditions and the ability to photosynthesize and grow at high rates when water is freely available.
    3. Tolerances to conditions of low light and low water are interdependent. The set of physiological and morphological characteristics that enable a plant to survive and grow under shaded conditions (e.g., allocation of carbon to the production of leaves and stem) is in direct conflict with its ability to tolerate low water availability (e.g., high allocation to the production of roots).
  • Allogenic (abiotic environmental) change can produce patterns of succession over time scales ranging from days to millennia or longer. Fluctuations in the environment that occur repeatedly over the lifetime of an individual are unlikely to influence patterns of succession among species with that general life span. In contrast, shifts in environmental conditions that occur at periods as long or longer than the organism’s life span are likely to result in shifts in species dominance—succession.
    During succession, two opposing forces affect species richness. Colonization increases species richness and species replacement decreases species richness, resulting in a pattern of increasing and decreasing species diversity from early to late successional stages. The particular pattern can be influenced by factors such as the growth rate of a population and disturbance. At both high and low disturbance frequencies, species diversity remains low. However, at an intermediate frequency of disturbance, species diversity remains high.
    Herbivory influences community dynamics both directly and indirectly.
  • The focus on succession thus far has been on shifting patterns of community structure in response to autogenic changes in environmental conditions. However, purely abiotic environmental (allogenic) change can produce patterns of succession over time scales ranging from days to millennia or longer. Fluctuations in the environment that occur repeatedly over the lifetime of an organism are unlikely to influence patterns of succession among species with that general life span. For example, annual fluctuations in temperature and precipitation will influence the relative growth responses of different species in a forest community, but they will have little influence on the general patterns of secondary succession outlined earlier. In contrast, shifts in environmental conditions that occur at periods as long or longer than the organism’s life span are likely to result in shifts in species dominance—succession. For example, seasonal changes in temperature, photoperiod, and light intensity produce well-known succession of dominant phytoplankton in freshwater lakes, which is repeated with very little variation each year. Seasonal succession of phytoplankton in Lawrence Lake, a small temperate lake in Michigan, is presented in this figure. Periods of dominance are correlated with species’ optimal temperature, nutrient, and light requirements. Competition and seasonal patterns of predation by herbivorous zooplankton also interact to influence the temporal patterns of species composition.
    Over a much longer time scale of decades to centuries patterns of sediment deposition can have a major influence on the successional dynamics of coastal estuarine communities.
  • Allogenic (abiotic environmental) change can produce patterns of succession over time scales ranging from days to millennia or longer. Fluctuations in the environment that occur repeatedly over the lifetime of an individual are unlikely to influence patterns of succession among species with that general life span. In contrast, shifts in environmental conditions that occur at periods as long or longer than the organism’s life span are likely to result in shifts in species dominance—succession.
    During succession, two opposing forces affect species richness. Colonization increases species richness and species replacement decreases species richness, resulting in a pattern of increasing and decreasing species diversity from early to late successional stages. The particular pattern can be influenced by factors such as the growth rate of a population and disturbance. At both high and low disturbance frequencies, species diversity remains low. However, at an intermediate frequency of disturbance, species diversity remains high.
    Herbivory influences community dynamics both directly and indirectly.
  • The organismal view of Clements stressed the community as an entity made up of interdependent species.
    In the individualistic or continuum view of Gleason, the community is an arbitrary concept. Each species responds independently to the underlying features of the environment.
    The organismal community is a spatial concept. The continuum view is a population concept, focusing on the responses of the component species to the underlying features of the environment.
    This simple example is a transect up a mountain in an area with four plant species present. The distribution of the four plant species is presented in two ways. In one view, the species distribution is plotted as a function of altitude or elevation. Note that the four plants exhibit a continuum of species regularly replacing each other in a sequence of A, B, C, and D with increasing altitude. The second view of species distribution is a function of distance along the altitudinal gradient. As you move up the mountainside, the distributions of the four species are not continuous. As a result, a number of species associations might be recognized as you walk along the transect. These associations are identified by different symbols representing the combination of species. These communities composed of coexisting species are a consequence of the spatial pattern of the landscape.
    The two views are quite different yet consistent. Each species has a continuous response along an environmental gradient, elevation. Yet it is the spatial distribution of that environmental variable across the landscape that determines the overlapping patterns of distribution—the composition of the community.
    The simple example presented here examines only one feature of the environment—elevation. Yet the structure of communities is the product of a complex interaction of pattern and process. Species respond to a wide array of environmental factors that vary spatially and temporally across the landscape, and the interactions among organisms influence the nature of those responses.
  • The organismal view of Clements stressed the community as an entity made up of interdependent species.
    In the individualistic or continuum view of Gleason, the community is an arbitrary concept. Each species responds independently to the underlying features of the environment.
    The organismal community is a spatial concept. The continuum view is a population concept, focusing on the responses of the component species to the underlying features of the environment.
    This simple example is a transect up a mountain in an area with four plant species present. The distribution of the four plant species is presented in two ways. In one view, the species distribution is plotted as a function of altitude or elevation. Note that the four plants exhibit a continuum of species regularly replacing each other in a sequence of A, B, C, and D with increasing altitude. The second view of species distribution is a function of distance along the altitudinal gradient. As you move up the mountainside, the distributions of the four species are not continuous. As a result, a number of species associations might be recognized as you walk along the transect. These associations are identified by different symbols representing the combination of species. These communities composed of coexisting species are a consequence of the spatial pattern of the landscape.
    The two views are quite different yet consistent. Each species has a continuous response along an environmental gradient, elevation. Yet it is the spatial distribution of that environmental variable across the landscape that determines the overlapping patterns of distribution—the composition of the community.
    The simple example presented here examines only one feature of the environment—elevation. Yet the structure of communities is the product of a complex interaction of pattern and process. Species respond to a wide array of environmental factors that vary spatially and temporally across the landscape, and the interactions among organisms influence the nature of those responses.

×