Advertisement

Community Ecology

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 9–20 | Cite as

Interaction between habitat limitation and dispersal limitation is modulated by species life history and external conditions: a stochastic matrix model approach

  • P. FibichEmail author
  • A. Vítová
  • J. Lepš
Article

Abstract

Traditionally, species absence in a community is ascribed either to dispersal limitation (i.e., the inability of propagules of a species to reach a site) or to habitat limitation (abiotic or biotic conditions of a site prevent species from forming a viable population); sowing experiments can then distinguish between these two mechanisms. In our view, the situation is even more complicated. To demonstrate the complexity of the problem, we designed and applied simulations based on an extension of matrix models covering effects of propagule pressure and habitat limitation, and reflecting various characteristics of a species and of a habitat. These included life history, fecundity, seed bank viability of a species, habitat carrying capacity and disturbances. All the investigated factors affected proportion of occupied habitats. Whereas they can, to a large extent, compensate for each other, simultaneous decrease of habitat suitability and propagule input can be detrimental to the survival of a population. Our model demonstrated that in many cases, the absence of a species in a community is of stochastic nature, and result of interaction of species life history and various external conditions, and thus cannot be simply attributed to a single cause. The model results are supported with examples of case studies. The results also explain some well-known ecological phenomena, as decrease of niche breadth from the center to the margins of area of distribution. Finally, the model also suggests some caveats in interpretation of the results of sowing experiments.

Keywords

Annuals Carrying capacity Dispersal limitation Habitat limitation Perennials Seed bank 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Our work is supported by the Czech Science Foundation, project GB14-36079G (Centre of Excellence PLADIAS) and grant 17-05506S. Access to computing and storage facilities owned by parties and projects contributing to the National Grid Infrastructure MetaCentrum provided under the programme “Projects of Large Research, Development, and Innovations Infrastructures” (CESNET LM2015042), is greatly appreciated. We thank to F. de Bello for highly valuable comments and suggestions to the manuscript and to C. Redmond for language improvement.

Supplementary material

42974_2018_19010009_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (3.3 mb)
Interaction between habitat limitation and dispersal limitation is modulated by species life history and external conditions: a stochastic matrix model approach

References

  1. Baeten, L., Hermy, M. and Verheyen, K. 2009. Environmental limitation contributes to the differential colonization capacity of two forest herbs. J. Veg. Sci. 20:209–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blažek, P. and Lepš, J. 2015. Victims of agricultural intensification: mowing date affects Rhinanthus spp. regeneration and fruit ripening. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 211:10–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown, J.H. 1984. On the relationship between abundance and distribution of species. Am. Nat. 124:255–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Candeias, M. and Warren, R.J. II 2016. Rareness starts early for disturbance-dependent grassland plant species. Biodivers.Conserv. 25:2771–2785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caswell, H. 2001. Matrix Population Models: Construction, Analysis and Interpretation, 2nd Edition. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  6. Clark, C.J., Poulsen, J.R., Levey, D.J. and Osenberg, C.W. 2007. Are plant populations seed limited? A critique and meta-analysis of seed addition experiments. Am. Nat. 170:128–142.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Clark, J.S., Lewis, M. and Horvath, M. 2001. Invasion by extremes: variation in dispersal and reproduction retards population spread. Am. Nat. 157:537–554.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Dubois, D. and Prade, H. 1988. Fuzzy Sets and Systems. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Dupré, C. and Ehrlén, J. 2002. Habitat configuration, species traits and plant distributions. J. Ecol. 90:796–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ehrlén, J., Münzbergová, Z., Diekmann, M. and Eriksson, O. 2006. Long-term assessment of seed limitation in plants: results from an 11-year experiment. J. Ecol. 94:1224–1232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fibich, P., Vítová, A., Macek, P. and Lepš, J. 2013. Establishment and spatial associations of recruits in meadow gaps. J. Veg. Sci. 24:496–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Foster, B.L. 2001. Constraints on colonization and species richness along a grassland productivity gradient: the role of propagule availability. Ecol. Letters 4:530–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Foster, B.L. and Tilman, D. 2003. Seed limitation and the regulation of community structure in oak savanna grassland. J. Ecol. 91:999–1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gaston, K.J. and Lawton, J.H. 1990. Effects of scale and habitat on the relationship between regional distribution and local abundance. Oikos 58:329–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gómez-Aparicio, L. 2008. Spatial patterns of recruitment in Mediterranean plant species: linking the fate of seeds, seedlings and saplings in heterogeneous landscapes at different scales. J. Ecol. 96:1128–1140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grime, J.P. 1998. Benefits of plant diversity to ecosystems: immediate, filter and founder effects. J. Ecol. 86:902–910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grubb, P.J. 1977. The maintenance of species-richness in plant communities – importance of regeneration niche. Biol. Rev. 52:107–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gustafsson, C.H. and Ehrlén, J. 2002. Seed availability and recruitment of the perennial herb Sanicula europea. Ecoscience 9:526–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hanski, I. 1997. Metapopulation dynamics: from concepts and observations to predictive models. In.: Hanski, I., Gilpin, M. (eds) Metapopulation Biology. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 69–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hanski, I. 2004. Metapopulation theory, its use and misuse. Basic Appl. Ecol. 5:225–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harper, J.L. 1977. Population Biology of Plants. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  22. Hellström, K., Ari-Pekka, H., Pasi, R. and Juha, T. 2009. Seed introduction and gap creation facilitate restoration of meadow species richness. J. Nature Cons. 17:236–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Herben, T. Nováková, Z. and Klimešová, J. 2014. Clonal growth and plant species abundance. Ann. Bot. 114:377–388.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Hölzel, N. 2005. Seedling recruitment in flood-meadow species: The effects of gaps, litter and vegetation matrix. Appl. Veg. Sci. 8:115–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jakobsson, A. and Eriksson, O. 2000. A comparative study of seed number, seed size, seedling size and recruitment in grassland plants. Oikos 88:494–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Karrenberg, S., Edwards, P.J. and Kollmann, J. 2002. The life history of Salicaceae living in the active zone of floodplains. Freshwater Biol. 47:733–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kelemen, A., Lazzaro, L., Besnyői, V., Albert, Á. J., Konečná, M., Dobay, G., Memelink, I., Adamec, V., Götzenberger, L., de Bello, F., Le Bagousse-Pinguet, Y. and Lepš, J. 2015. Net outcome of competition and facilitation in a wet meadow changes with plant’s life stage and community productivity. Preslia 87:347–361.Google Scholar
  28. Klimeš, L. 2005. A transient expansion of sown plants and diaspore limitation. Folia Geobot. 40:69–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Krahulec, F. and Lepš, J. 1994. Establishment success of plant immigrants in a new water reservoir. Folia Geobot. 29:3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lewis, R. J., Bello, F., Bennett, J. A., Fibich, P., Finerty, G. E., Götzenberger, L., Hiiesalu, I., Kasari, L., Lepš, J., Májeková, M., Mudrák, O., Riibak, K., Ronk, A., Rychtecká, T., Vitová, A. and Pärtel, M. 2017. Applying the dark diversity concept to nature conservation. Conservation Biol., 31, 40–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lowry, E., Rollinson, E.J., Laybourn, A.J., Scott, T.E., Aiello-Lammens, M.E., Gray, S.M., Mickley, J. and Gurevitch, J. 2013. Biological invasions: a field synopsis, systematic review, and database of the literature. Ecol. Evol. 3:182–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Moles, A.T. and Westoby, M. 2002. Seed addition experiments are more likely to increase recruitment in larger-seeded species. Oikos 99:241–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Moles, A.T. and Westoby, M. 2004. What do seedlings die from and what are the implications for evolution of seed size? Oikos 106:193–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Moore, K.A. and Elmendorf, S.C. 2006. Propagule vs. niche limitation: untangling the mechanisms behind plant species distributions. Ecol. Lett. 9:797–804.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Mudrák, O., Mládek, J., Blažek, P., Lepš, J., Doležal, J., Nekvapilová, E. and Těšitel, J. 2014. Establishment of hemiparasitic Rhinanthus spp. in grassland restoration: lessons learned from sowing experiments. Appl. Veg. Sci. 17:274–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Münzbergová, Z. 2004 Effect of spatial scale on factors limiting species distributions in dry grassland fragments. J. Ecol. 92:854–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Münzbergová, Z. 2012. Seed density significantly affects species richness and composition in experimental plant communities. PLoS ONE 7:e46704.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Münzbergová, Z. and Herben, T. 2005. Seed, dispersal, microsite, habitat and recruitment limitation: identification of terms and concepts in studies of limitations. Oecologia 145:1–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Orrock, J.L., Levey, D.J., Danielson, B.J. and Damschen, E.I. 2006. Seed predation, not seed dispersal, explains the landscape-level abundance of an early-successional plant. J. Ecol. 94:838–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Öster, M. and Eriksson, O. 2012. Recruitment in species-rich grasslands: the effects of functional traits and propagule pressure. J. Plant Ecol. 5:260–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Öster, M., Ask, K., Cousins, S.A.O. and Eriksson, O. 2009. Dispersal and establishment limitation reduces the potential for successful restoration of semi-natural grassland communities on former arable fields. J. Appl. Ecol. 46:1266–1274.Google Scholar
  42. Pärtel, M. 2014. Community ecology of absent species: hidden and dark diversity. J. Veg. Sci. 25:1154–1159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pärtel, M., Szava-Kovats, R. and Zobel, M. 2011. Dark diversity: shedding light on absent species. Trends in Ecol. & Evol. 26:124–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pásztor, L., Botta-Dukát, Z., Magyar, G., Czárán, T. and Meszéna, G. 2016. Theory-Based Ecology: a Darwinian Approach. Oxford University Press, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Primack, R.B. and Miao, S.L. 1992. Dispersal can limit local plant distribution. Cons. Biol. 6: 513–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sádlo, J. 2009. Erythronium dens-canis v Čechách: uvěříme původnosti? [Erythronium dens-canis in Bohemia: can we accept its native origin? In Czech.] Zprávy České Botanické Společnosti 44:1–10.Google Scholar
  47. Silvertown, J. and Charlesworth, D. 2001. Introduction to Plant Population Biology. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  48. Šourek, J. 1969. Květena Krkonoš. [Flora of the Krkonoše Mts. In Czech.] Academia, Praha.Google Scholar
  49. Špačková, I. and Lepš, J. 2004. Variability of seedling recruitment under dominant, moss and litter removal over four years. Folia Geobot 39:41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stampfli, A. and Zeiter, M. 2008. Mechanisms of structural change derived from patterns of seedling emergence and mortality in a semi-natural meadow. J. Veg. Sci. 19:563–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Švamberková, E., Vítová, A. and Lepš, J. 2017. The role of biotic interactions in plant community assembly: What is the community species pool? Acta Oecologica 85:150–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tanentzap, A.J. and Bazely, D.R. 2009. Propagule pressure and resource availability determine plant community invasibility in a temperate forest understorey Oikos 118:300–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Thompson, K., Bakker, J.P., Bekker, R.M. and Hodgson, J.G. 1998. Ecological correlates of seed persistence in soil in the north-west European flora. J. Ecol. 86:163–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Turnbull, L.A., Crawley, M.J. and Rees, M. 2000. Are plant populations seed-limited? A review of seed sowing experiments. Oikos 88:225–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Vellend, M. 2016. The Theory of Ecological Communities. Princeton University Press, Princeton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Vítová, A. and Lepš, J. 2011. Experimental assessment of dispersal and habitat limitation in an oligotrophic wet meadow. Plant Ecol. 212:1231–1242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Vítová, A., Macek, P. and Lepš, J. 2017. Disentangling the interplay of generative and vegetative propagation among different functional groups during gap colonization in meadows. Funct. Ecol. 31:458–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wellstein, C, Campetella, G., Spada, F., Chelli, S., Mucina, L., Canullo, R. and Bartha, S. 2014. Context-dependent assembly rules and the role of dominating grasses in semi-natural abandoned sub-Mediterranean grasslands. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ 182:113–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zobel, M. Otsus, M., Liira, J., Moora, M. and Möls, T. 2000. Is smallscale species richness limited by seed availability or microsite availability? Ecology 81:3274–3282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2018

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Botany, Faculty of ScienceUniversity of South BohemiaBudějoviceCzech Republic
  2. 2.Institute of Entomology, Biology Centre CASČeské BudějoviceCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations