Metacommunity, mainland-island system or island communities? Assessing the regional dynamics of plant communities in a fragmented landscape

Understanding the regional dynamics of plant communities is crucial for predicting the response of plant diversity to habitat fragmentation. However, for fragmented landscapes the importance of regional processes, such as seed dispersal among isolated habitat patches, has been controversially debated. Due to the stochasticity and rarity of among-patch dispersal and colonization events, we still lack a quantitative understanding of the consequences of these processes at the landscape-scale. In this study, we used extensive field data from a fragmented, semi-arid landscape in Israel to parameterize a multi-species incidence-function model. This model simulates species occupancy pattern based on patch areas and habitat configuration and explicitly considers the locations and the shapes of habitat patches for the derivation of patch connectivity. We implemented an approximate Bayesian computation approach for parameter inference and uncertainty assessment. We tested which of the three types of regional dynamics – the metacommunity, the mainland-island, or the island communities type – best represents the community dynamics in the study area and applied the simulation model to estimate the extinction debt in the investigated landscape. We found that the regional dynamics in the patch-matrix study landscape is best represented as a system of highly isolated ‘island’ communities with low rates of propagule exchange among habitat patches and consequently low colonization rates in local communities. Accordingly, the extinction rates in the local communities are the main drivers of community dynamics. Our findings indicate that the landscape carries a significant extinction debt and in model projections 33–60% of all species went extinct within 1000 yr. Our study demonstrates that the combination of dynamic simulation models with field data provides a promising approach for understanding regional community dynamics and for projecting community responses to habitat fragmentation. The approach bears the potential for efficient tests of conservation activities aimed at mitigating future losses of biodiversity.

[1]  R. Kadmon,et al.  Testing for source-sink population dynamics : an experimental approach exemplified with desert annuals , 1999 .

[2]  R. Freckleton,et al.  Large‐scale spatial dynamics of plants: metapopulations, regional ensembles and patchy populations , 2002 .

[3]  Ran Nathan,et al.  Spatial patterns of seed dispersal, their determinants and consequences for recruitment. , 2000, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[4]  M. Rosenzweig,et al.  Effects of interactive scale-dependent variables on beetle diversity patterns in a semi-arid agricultural landscape , 2007, Landscape Ecology.

[5]  Corey J A Bradshaw,et al.  Synergies among extinction drivers under global change. , 2008, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[6]  Janneke HilleRisLambers,et al.  Seed Dispersal Near and Far: Patterns Across Temperate and Tropical Forests , 1999 .

[7]  E. Petit,et al.  Molecular Estimation of Dispersal for Ecology and Population Genetics , 2009 .

[8]  S. Levin,et al.  Comparing Classical Community Models: Theoretical Consequences for Patterns of Diversity , 2002, The American Naturalist.

[9]  William F. Laurance,et al.  Theory meets reality: How habitat fragmentation research has transcended island biogeographic theory , 2008 .

[10]  R. B. Jackson,et al.  Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. , 2000, Science.

[11]  Y. Osem,et al.  Size traits and site conditions determine changes in seed bank structure caused by grazing exclusion in semiarid annual plant communities , 2006 .

[12]  O. François,et al.  Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC) in practice. , 2010, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[13]  K. Tielbörger,et al.  Dispersal-Dormancy Relationships in Annual Plants: Putting Model Predictions to the Test , 2010, The American Naturalist.

[14]  Stephen P. Hubbell,et al.  Beta-Diversity in Tropical Forest Trees , 2002, Science.

[15]  M. Nowak,et al.  Habitat destruction and the extinction debt , 1994, Nature.

[16]  Robert D. Holt,et al.  Island theory, matrix effects and species richness patterns in habitat fragments , 2002 .

[17]  O. Eriksson,et al.  Large‐scale spatial dynamics of plants: a response to Freckleton & Watkinson , 2003 .

[18]  O. Eriksson.  Regional dynamics of plants : a review of evidence for remnant, source-sink and metapopulations , 1996 .

[19]  David B. Dunson,et al.  Bayesian Data Analysis , 2010 .

[20]  S. Jackson,et al.  Balancing biodiversity in a changing environment: extinction debt, immigration credit and species turnover. , 2010, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[21]  Rampal S Etienne,et al.  A neutral sampling formula for multiple samples and an 'exact' test of neutrality. , 2007, Ecology letters.

[22]  S. Cousins.  Extinction debt in fragmented grasslands: paid or not? , 2009 .

[23]  C. Dytham,et al.  On the approximation of continuous dispersal kernels in discrete‐space models , 2011 .

[24]  Zev Naveh,et al.  The Human Degradation of Mediterranean Landscapes in Israel , 1973 .

[25]  James S. Clark,et al.  Why environmental scientists are becoming Bayesians , 2004 .

[26]  Ron Smith,et al.  Bayesian calibration of process-based forest models: bridging the gap between models and data. , 2005, Tree physiology.

[27]  O. Honnay,et al.  The relative importance of local, regional and historical factors determining the distribution of plants in fragmented riverine forests: an emergent group approach , 2005 .

[28]  Adriana Bruggeman,et al.  Impact of climate change on the water resources of the eastern Mediterranean and Middle East region: Modeled 21st century changes and implications , 2011 .

[29]  Marcus Vinícius Vieira,et al.  Does the type of matrix matter? A quantitative review of the evidence , 2010, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[30]  C. Parmesan.  Ecological and Evolutionary Responses to Recent Climate Change , 2006 .

[31]  M. B. Shapiro,et al.  Soils of Israel , 2006 .

[32]  V. Vandvik,et al.  Sources of Diversity in a Grassland Metacommunity: Quantifying the Contribution of Dispersal to Species Richness , 2006, The American Naturalist.

[33]  Mats Gyllenberg,et al.  Uniting Two General Patterns in the Distribution of Species , 1997, Science.

[34]  Franck Jabot,et al.  Inferring the parameters of the neutral theory of biodiversity using phylogenetic information and implications for tropical forests. , 2009, Ecology letters.

[35]  I. Hanski.  A Practical Model of Metapopulation Dynamics , 1994 .

[36]  F. Schurr,et al.  Estimating demographic models for the range dynamics of plant species , 2010 .

[37]  M. Pärtel,et al.  Effect of habitat area and isolation on plant trait distribution in European forests and grasslands , 2012 .

[38]  J. Gamarra,et al.  Metapopulation Ecology , 2007 .

[39]  James S. Clark,et al.  Invasion by Extremes: Population Spread with Variation in Dispersal and Reproduction , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[40]  Atte Moilanen,et al.  SIMPLE CONNECTIVITY MEASURES IN SPATIAL ECOLOGY , 2002 .

[41]  Atte Moilanen,et al.  METAPOPULATION DYNAMICS: EFFECTS OF HABITAT QUALITY AND LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE , 1998 .

[42]  F. Jeltsch,et al.  Scale‐dependent determinants of plant species richness in a semi‐arid fragmented agro‐ecosystem , 2011 .

[43]  Orr Spiegel,et al.  Mechanisms of long-distance seed dispersal. , 2008, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[44]  Florian Jeltsch,et al.  Simulating direct and indirect effects of climatic changes on rare perennial plant species in fragmented landscapes , 2010 .

[45]  H. Muller‐Landau,et al.  Seed dispersal of desert annuals. , 2008, Ecology.

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

[47]  Helen M. Alexander,et al.  Metapopulations and metacommunities: combining spatial and temporal perspectives in plant ecology , 2012 .

[48]  T. Hovestadt,et al.  Dispersal and establishment: spatial patterns and species–area relationships , 2005 .

[49]  Robert J. Wilson,et al.  Minimum viable metapopulation size, extinction debt, and the conservation of a declining species. , 2007, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[50]  W. Thuiller,et al.  Predicting species distribution: offering more than simple habitat models. , 2005, Ecology letters.

[51]  Michel Loreau,et al.  Community Patterns in Source‐Sink Metacommunities , 2003, The American Naturalist.

[52]  M. Pärtel,et al.  Extinction debt: a challenge for biodiversity conservation. , 2009, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[53]  Rampal S. Etienne,et al.  IMPROVED BAYESIAN ANALYSIS OF METAPOPULATION DATA WITH AN APPLICATION TO A TREE FROG METAPOPULATION , 2003 .

[54]  Damaris Zurell,et al.  The virtual ecologist approach: simulating data and observers , 2010 .

[55]  Martin Hermy,et al.  Extinction debt of forest plants persists for more than a century following habitat fragmentation. , 2006, Ecology.

[56]  O. Eriksson,et al.  Long‐term spatial dynamics of Succisa pratensis in a changing rural landscape: linking dynamical modelling with historical maps , 2006 .

[57]  Andreas Huth,et al.  Statistical inference for stochastic simulation models--theory and application. , 2011, Ecology letters.

[58]  R. Freckleton,et al.  Are all plant populations metapopulations? , 2003 .

[59]  Ilkka Hanski,et al.  Slow response of plant species richness to habitat loss and fragmentation. , 2005, Ecology letters.

[60]  Johan Ehrlén,et al.  Habitat configuration, species traits and plant distributions , 2002 .

[61]  James H. Brown,et al.  Turnover Rates in Insular Biogeography: Effect of Immigration on Extinction , 1977 .

[62]  Perry De Valpine,et al.  A robust-design formulation of the incidence function model of metapopulation dynamics applied to two species of rails. , 2011, Ecology.