Co‐occurrence patterns of trees along macro‐climatic gradients and their potential influence on the present and future distribution of Fagus sylvatica L.

Aim  During recent and future climate change, shifts in large‐scale species ranges are expected due to the hypothesized major role of climatic factors in regulating species distributions. The stress‐gradient hypothesis suggests that biotic interactions may act as major constraints on species distributions under more favourable growing conditions, while climatic constraints may dominate under unfavourable conditions. We tested this hypothesis for one focal tree species having three major competitors using broad‐scale environmental data. We evaluated the variation of species co‐occurrence patterns in climate space and estimated the influence of these patterns on the distribution of the focal species for current and projected future climates.

[1]  M. Araújo,et al.  Biotic and abiotic variables show little redundancy in explaining tree species distributions , 2010 .

[2]  H. Ellenberg.  Vegetation Mitteleuropas mit den Alpen : in ökologischer ,dynamischer und historischer Sicht , 2010 .

[3]  Antoine Guisan,et al.  Importance of abiotic stress as a range‐limit determinant for European plants: insights from species responses to climatic gradients , 2009 .

[4]  S. Delzon,et al.  The role of biotic interactions in altering tree seedling responses to an extreme climatic event , 2009 .

[5]  M. Dietze,et al.  Estimating colonization potential of migrant tree species , 2009 .

[6]  Boris Rewald,et al.  Belowground competition in a broad-leaved temperate mixed forest: pattern analysis and experiments in a four-species stand , 2009, European Journal of Forest Research.

[7]  M. Araújo,et al.  Individualistic vs community modelling of species distributions under climate change. , 2009 .

[8]  A M Latimer,et al.  Hierarchical models facilitate spatial analysis of large data sets: a case study on invasive plant species in the northeastern United States. , 2009, Ecology letters.

[9]  S. Wood,et al.  Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R , 2006 .

[10]  D. Hodáňová.  Plant strategies and vegetation processes , 1981, Biologia Plantarum.

[11]  John L. Harper,et al.  Ecology from individuals to ecosystems 4th ed. , 2008 .

[12]  M. Luoto,et al.  Biotic interactions improve prediction of boreal bird distributions at macro‐scales , 2007 .

[13]  S. Jackson,et al.  Novel climates, no‐analog communities, and ecological surprises , 2007 .

[14]  M. Araújo,et al.  The importance of biotic interactions for modelling species distributions under climate change , 2007 .

[15]  A. Bolte,et al.  The north-eastern distribution range of European beech—a review , 2007 .

[16]  J. Blackard,et al.  Journal of Applied , 2006 .

[17]  T. Perkins,et al.  Multi-species interactions in competitive hierarchies: New methods and empirical test , 2007 .

[18]  Joseph A. Veech,et al.  A probability‐based analysis of temporal and spatial co‐occurrence in grassland birds , 2006 .

[19]  M. Araújo,et al.  Five (or so) challenges for species distribution modelling , 2006 .

[20]  R. Briers,et al.  Ecology: From Individuals to Ecosystems , 2006 .

[21]  Patrick Hostert,et al.  Cross-border comparison of land cover and landscape pattern in Eastern Europe using a hybrid classification technique , 2006 .

[22]  A. Bolte,et al.  Interspecific competition impacts on the morphology and distribution of fine roots in European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) and Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) , 2006, European Journal of Forest Research.

[23]  J. L. Parra,et al.  Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas , 2005 .

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

[25]  Per Angelstam,et al.  Functionality of riparian forest ecotones in the context of former Soviet Union and Swedish forest management histories , 2005 .

[26]  C. Lortie,et al.  Rethinking plant community theory , 2004 .

[27]  S. Dullinger,et al.  Modelling climate change‐driven treeline shifts: relative effects of temperature increase, dispersal and invasibility , 2004 .

[28]  G. Bell,et al.  The interpretation of biological surveys , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[29]  T. Dawson,et al.  Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: are bioclimate envelope models useful? , 2003 .

[30]  C. Lortie,et al.  Positive interactions among alpine plants increase with stress , 2002, Nature.

[31]  K. Bisang,et al.  Rethinking recent changes of forest regimes in Europe through property-rights theory and policy analysis , 2001 .

[32]  J. Leathwick,et al.  COMPETITIVE INTERACTIONS BETWEEN TREE SPECIES IN NEW ZEALAND'S OLD‐GROWTH INDIGENOUS FORESTS , 2001 .

[33]  D. Richardson,et al.  Determinants of distribution of six Pinus species in Catalonia, Spain , 2001 .

[34]  Antoine Guisan,et al.  Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology , 2000 .

[35]  N. Zimmermann,et al.  Predictive mapping of alpine grasslands in Switzerland: Species versus community approach , 1999 .

[36]  N. Welander,et al.  The influence of shading on growth and morphology in seedlings of Quercus robur L. and Fagus sylvatica L. , 1998 .

[37]  J. Lawton,et al.  Making mistakes when predicting shifts in species range in response to global warming , 1998, Nature.

[38]  L. Walker,et al.  Competition and facilitation: a synthetic approach to interactions in plant communities , 1997 .

[39]  Michael A. Huston,et al.  Hidden treatments in ecological experiments: re-evaluating the ecosystem function of biodiversity , 1997, Oecologia.

[40]  A. V. Hees.  Growth and morphology of pedunculate oak (Quercus robur L.) and beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) seedlings in relation to shading and drought , 1997 .

[41]  R. Bradshaw,et al.  The immigration of Fagus sylvatica L. and Picea abies (L.) Karst. into a natural forest stand in southern Sweden during the last 2000 years , 1996 .

[42]  M. Lorenz.  International Co-operative Programme on Assessment and Monitoring of Air Pollution Effects on Forests-ICP Forests- , 1995 .

[43]  John A. Silander,et al.  Juvenile Tree Survivorship as a Component of Shade Tolerance , 1995 .

[44]  M. Bertness,et al.  Positive interactions in communities. , 1994, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[45]  D. Tilman.  Competition and Biodiversity in Spatially Structured Habitats , 1994 .

[46]  Harald Bugmann,et al.  On the ecology of mountainous forests in a changing climate , 1994 .

[47]  A. O. Nicholls,et al.  Measurement of the realized qualitative niche: environmental niches of five Eucalyptus species , 1990 .

[48]  James P. Kimmins,et al.  Forest Ecology: A Foundation for Sustainable Forest Management and Environmental Ethics in Forestry , 1987 .

[49]  F. Woodward.  Climate and plant distribution , 1987 .

[50]  C. Smith,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF CUTTING AND FERTILIZER TREATMENTS ON THE YIELD AND BOTANICAL COMPOSITION OF CHALK TURF , 1971 .

[51]  A. Bradshaw,et al.  Population Differentiation within Plant Species in Response to Soil Factors , 1959, Nature.