Fluvial network topology shapes communities of native and non-native amphipods

Habitat connectivity crucially influences dispersal of organisms. It is especially seen as an important driver of the spatial structuring of biological communities in ecosystems that have intrinsic and general connectivity patterns, such as the universal dendritic structure of fluvial networks. These networks not only define dispersal of native species, but also represent corridors of biological invasions, making understanding network topology effects on invasion dynamics and subsequent diversity patterns of high interest. We studied amphipod community diversity and structure in the upper 27,882-km2 drainage basin of the river Rhine in Central Europe, focusing on differences between native and non-native species. Overall, species richness increased along the network from headwaters to the outlet nodes. We found, however, contrasting patterns of native and non-native amphipod richness along the network, with headwater nodes representing refugia for native species and more downstream nodes being hotspots of biological invasions. Importantly, while species turnover (b-diversity) of native species increased with distance between nodes in the network, this was not the case for non-native species, indicating a much lower dispersal limitation of the latter. Finally, the overall amphipod community structure closely mirrored the topological modularity of the network, highlighting the network’s imprint on community structure. Our results underpin the importance of connectivity for community formation and the significance of rivers for biological invasions and suggest that empirically observed matches of diversity patterns in rivers predicted by null models are the long-term outcome of species invasions and species sorting.

[1]  F. Leese,et al.  Molecular evidence for further overlooked species within the Gammarus fossarum complex (Crustacea: Amphipoda) , 2013, Hydrobiologia.

[2]  Enrico Bertuzzo,et al.  Hydrologic controls and anthropogenic drivers of the zebra mussel invasion of the Mississippi‐Missouri river system , 2011 .

[3]  Ilkka Hanski,et al.  Metapopulation dynamics : empirical and theoretical investigations , 1991 .

[4]  D. Simberloff,et al.  BIOTIC INVASIONS: CAUSES, EPIDEMIOLOGY, GLOBAL CONSEQUENCES, AND CONTROL , 2000 .

[5]  Tadeu Siqueira,et al.  Metacommunity structuring in stream networks: roles of dispersal mode, distance type, and regional environmental context , 2013, Ecology and evolution.

[6]  F. Altermatt,et al.  Description of a widely distributed but overlooked amphipod species in the European Alps , 2016 .

[7]  A. Baselga.  Partitioning the turnover and nestedness components of beta diversity , 2010 .

[8]  Robin Freeman,et al.  Emerging Network-Based Tools in Movement Ecology. , 2016, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[9]  F. Altermatt,et al.  Active colonization dynamics and diversity patterns are influenced by dendritic network connectivity and species interactions , 2014, Ecology and evolution.

[10]  F. Gherardi,et al.  Invasive alien Crustacea: dispersal, establishment, impact and control , 2011, BioControl.

[11]  Jonathan M. Chase,et al.  The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology , 2004 .

[12]  D. Williams,et al.  The recolonization mechanisms of stream benthos , 1976 .

[13]  V. Semenchenko,et al.  Assessing the Risks of Aquatic Species Invasions via European Inland Waterways: From Concepts to Environmental Indicators , 2009, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[14]  C. Delucchi.  Movement patterns of invertebrates in temporary and permanent streams , 1989, Oecologia.

[15]  Jonathan B. Shurin,et al.  Spatial autocorrelation and dispersal limitation in freshwater organisms , 2009, Oecologia.

[16]  Melissa A. Pavez-Fox,et al.  Correspondence between the habitat of the threatened pudú (Cervidae) and the national protected-area system of Chile , 2016, BMC Ecology.

[17]  Leonard M. Freeman,et al.  A set of measures of centrality based upon betweenness , 1977 .

[18]  C. Orme,et al.  betapart: an R package for the study of beta diversity , 2012 .

[19]  W. Fagan.  CONNECTIVITY, FRAGMENTATION, AND EXTINCTION RISK IN DENDRITIC METAPOPULATIONS , 2002 .

[20]  J. Olden,et al.  Dispersal strength determines meta‐community structure in a dendritic riverine network , 2015 .

[21]  Ellison,et al.  EcoSimR: Null Model Analysis for Ecological Data , 2015 .

[22]  G. van der Velde,et al.  Geographical patterns in range extension of Ponto-Caspian macroinvertebrate species in Europe , 2002 .

[23]  Tal Galili,et al.  dendextend: an R package for visualizing, adjusting and comparing trees of hierarchical clustering , 2015, Bioinform..

[24]  S. Levin,et al.  A neutral metapopulation model of biodiversity in river networks. , 2007, Journal of theoretical biology.

[25]  Robert I. McDonald,et al.  The distance decay of similarity in ecological communities , 2007 .

[26]  Mark Vellend,et al.  Conceptual Synthesis in Community Ecology , 2010, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[27]  G. Velde,et al.  Dispersal of invasive species by drifting , 2011 .

[28]  P. Šímová,et al.  Spatial spread of Eurasian beavers in river networks: a comparison of range expansion rates. , 2013, The Journal of animal ecology.

[29]  Enrico Bertuzzo,et al.  Metapopulation persistence and species spread in river networks. , 2014, Ecology letters.

[30]  W. Fagan,et al.  Living in the branches: population dynamics and ecological processes in dendritic networks. , 2007, Ecology letters.

[31]  M. Loreau.  Are communities saturated? On the relationship between α, β and γ diversity , 2000 .

[32]  Chemisch-physikalische Erhebungen,et al.  Methoden zur Untersuchung und Beurteilung der Fliessgewässer , 2010 .

[33]  Robert S Schick,et al.  Graph models of habitat mosaics. , 2009, Ecology letters.

[34]  A. Rinaldo,et al.  Dendritic connectivity controls biodiversity patterns in experimental metacommunities , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[35]  J. Jokela,et al.  Diversity and Distribution of Freshwater Amphipod Species in Switzerland (Crustacea: Amphipoda) , 2014, PloS one.

[36]  J. Prunier,et al.  Lessons from the fish: a multi-species analysis reveals common processes underlying similar species-genetic diversity correlations , 2016 .

[37]  J. Jokela,et al.  Hidden Biodiversity in an Ecologically Important Freshwater Amphipod: Differences in Genetic Structure between Two Cryptic Species , 2013, PloS one.

[38]  Rob S. E. W. Leuven,et al.  The river Rhine: a global highway for dispersal of aquatic invasive species , 2009, Biological Invasions.

[39]  R. Muneepeerakul,et al.  How restructuring river connectivity changes freshwater fish biodiversity and biogeography , 2011 .

[40]  G. Maier,et al.  Life history characteristics of the invasive freshwater gammarids Dikerogammarus villosus and Echinogammarus ischnus in the river Main and the Main-Donau canal , 2003 .

[41]  J. Heino.  A macroecological perspective of diversity patterns in the freshwater realm , 2011 .

[42]  Enrico Bertuzzo,et al.  River networks as ecological corridors: A complex systems perspective for integrating hydrologic, geomorphologic, and ecologic dynamics , 2009 .

[43]  F. Altermatt,et al.  Spatial patterns of genetic diversity, community composition and occurrence of native and non-native amphipods in naturally replicated tributary streams , 2016, BMC Ecology.

[44]  G. Hewitt.  Post-glacial re-colonization of European biota , 1999 .

[45]  C. Swan,et al.  Dendritic network structure constrains metacommunity properties in riverine ecosystems. , 2010, The Journal of animal ecology.

[46]  D. Strayer.  Alien species in fresh waters: ecological effects, interactions with other stressors, and prospects for the future , 2010 .

[47]  Emanuel A. Fronhofer,et al.  Classical metapopulation dynamics and eco‐evolutionary feedbacks in dendritic networks , 2017 .

[48]  Tom Kompas,et al.  Determinants of residential water consumption: Evidence and analysis from a 10‐country household survey , 2011 .

[49]  Florian Altermatt,et al.  Diversity in riverine metacommunities: a network perspective , 2013, Aquatic Ecology.

[50]  J. Jokela,et al.  Habitat requirements and ecological niche of two cryptic amphipod species at landscape and local scales , 2016 .

[51]  Florian Altermatt,et al.  Landscape-level predictions of diversity in river networks reveal opposing patterns for different groups of macroinvertebrates , 2016, Aquatic Ecology.

[52]  F. Altermatt,et al.  River network properties shape α‐diversity and community similarity patterns of aquatic insect communities across major drainage basins , 2013 .

[53]  J. Olden,et al.  The role of dispersal in river network metacommunities: Patterns, processes, and pathways , 2018 .

[54]  M. Grabowski,et al.  How to be an invasive gammarid (Amphipoda: Gammaroidea)–comparison of life history traits , 2007, Hydrobiologia.

[55]  Timothy H Keitt,et al.  Species diversity in neutral metacommunities: a network approach. , 2007, Ecology letters.

[56]  B. Šket,et al.  Global diversity of amphipods (Amphipoda; Crustacea) in freshwater , 2007, Hydrobiologia.

[57]  A. J. Crawford,et al.  Using historical biogeography to test for community saturation. , 2014, Ecology letters.

[58]  F. Pelicice,et al.  Riverine networks constrain β‐diversity patterns among fish assemblages in a large Neotropical river , 2016 .

[59]  G. Velde,et al.  Interference competition between alien invasive gammaridean species , 2009, Biological Invasions.

[60]  P. White,et al.  The distance decay of similarity in biogeography and ecology , 1999 .

[61]  J. Jokela,et al.  Spatial Distribution of Cryptic Species Diversity in European Freshwater Amphipods (Gammarus fossarum) as Revealed by Pyrosequencing , 2011, PloS one.