The spatial scales of species coexistence

Understanding how species diversity is maintained is a foundational problem in ecology and an essential requirement for the discipline to be effective as an applied science. Ecologists’ understanding of this problem has rapidly matured, but this has exposed profound uncertainty about the spatial scales required to maintain species diversity. Here we define and develop this frontier by proposing the coexistence–area relationship—a real relationship in nature that can be used to understand the determinants of the scale-dependence of diversity maintenance. The coexistence–area relationship motivates new empirical techniques for addressing important, unresolved problems about the influence of demographic stochasticity, environmental heterogeneity and dispersal on scale-dependent patterns of diversity. In so doing, this framework substantially reframes current approaches to spatial community ecology. Quantifying the spatial scales of species coexistence will permit the next important advance in our understanding of the maintenance of diversity in nature, and should improve the contribution of community ecology to biodiversity conservation.Our understanding of how species diversity is maintained depends on spatial scale. Here, the coexistence–area relationship is developed to understand scale dependence and increase community ecology’s contribution to biodiversity conservation.

[1]  Peter Chesson,et al.  How the Spatial Scales of Dispersal, Competition, and Environmental Heterogeneity Interact to Affect Coexistence , 2004, The American Naturalist.

[2]  Robert A. Laird,et al.  Competitive Intransitivity Promotes Species Coexistence , 2006, The American Naturalist.

[3]  P. Chesson,et al.  Environmental Variability Promotes Coexistence in Lottery Competitive Systems , 1981, The American Naturalist.

[4]  Simon A. Levin,et al.  Designing marine reserves for interacting species: Insights from theory , 2007 .

[5]  P. Chesson,et al.  Scale-Dependent Community Theory for Streams and Other Linear Habitats , 2016, The American Naturalist.

[6]  S. Levin.  THE PROBLEM OF PATTERN AND SCALE IN ECOLOGY , 1992 .

[7]  G. Somero.  Thermal Physiology and Vertical Zonation of Intertidal Animals: Optima, Limits, and Costs of Living1 , 2002, Integrative and comparative biology.

[8]  Sebastian J Schreiber,et al.  How variation between individuals affects species coexistence. , 2016, Ecology letters.

[9]  Lauren G. Shoemaker,et al.  Linking metacommunity paradigms to spatial coexistence mechanisms. , 2016, Ecology.

[10]  E. Connor,et al.  The Species-Area Relationship , 2001 .

[11]  R. Whittaker,et al.  GRADIENT ANALYSIS OF VEGETATION* , 1967, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[12]  Peter B. Adler,et al.  Large niche differences emerge at the recruitment stage to stabilize grassland coexistence , 2015 .

[13]  Mathew A. Leibold,et al.  Metacommunities: Spatial Dynamics and Ecological Communities , 2005 .

[14]  S. Dobrowski,et al.  The theory behind, and the challenges of, conserving nature's stage in a time of rapid change , 2015, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[15]  H. Mooney,et al.  Physiological Ecology of North American Plant Communities , 1987, Springer Netherlands.

[16]  Peter Chesson,et al.  The scale transition: scaling up population dynamics with field data. , 2006, Ecology.

[17]  H. Tuomisto.  A diversity of beta diversities: straightening up a concept gone awry. Part 1. Defining beta diversity as a function of alpha and gamma diversity , 2010 .

[18]  J. Drake,et al.  Speed of expansion and extinction in experimental populations. , 2009, Ecology letters.

[19]  Peter Chesson,et al.  Scale transition theory: Its aims, motivations and predictions , 2012 .

[20]  James Rosindell,et al.  Unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography , 2010, Scholarpedia.

[21]  John L. Orrock,et al.  Local community size mediates ecological drift and competition in metacommunities , 2010, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[22]  Robin E. Snyder.  Spatiotemporal population distributions and their implications for species coexistence in a variable environment. , 2007, Theoretical population biology.

[23]  M. Hunter,et al.  Why geodiversity matters in valuing nature's stage , 2015, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[24]  Gonzalez,et al.  Metapopulation dynamics, abundance, and distribution in a microecosystem , 1998, Science.

[25]  Robert D. Holt,et al.  A Theoretical Framework for Intraguild Predation , 1997, The American Naturalist.

[26]  K. Mach,et al.  Thermal stress and morphological adaptations in limpets , 2009 .

[27]  Brett A. Melbourne,et al.  Extinction risk depends strongly on factors contributing to stochasticity , 2008, Nature.

[28]  P. Amarasekare.  Competitive coexistence in spatially structured environments: a synthesis , 2003 .

[29]  S. Hubbell,et al.  Geometry and scale in species–area relationships , 2012, Nature.

[30]  M. Ritchie.  Scale, Heterogeneity, and the Structure and Diversity of Ecological Communities , 2009 .

[31]  Peter Chesson,et al.  Functional tradeoffs determine species coexistence via the storage effect , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[32]  Nathan J B Kraft,et al.  Plant functional traits and the multidimensional nature of species coexistence , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[33]  R. Gardner,et al.  Landscape Ecology in Theory and Practice , 2015, Springer New York.

[34]  B. Bolker,et al.  Spatial Moment Equations for Plant Competition: Understanding Spatial Strategies and the Advantages of Short Dispersal , 1999, The American Naturalist.

[35]  Hugh P Possingham,et al.  Objectives for Multiple‐Species Conservation Planning , 2006, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[36]  Mark A McPeek,et al.  On the evidence for species coexistence: a critique of the coexistence program. , 2010, Ecology.

[37]  Helmut Hillebrand,et al.  Empirical approaches to metacommunities: a review and comparison with theory. , 2011, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[38]  H. Possingham,et al.  Bolder science needed now for protected areas , 2016, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[39]  Janneke HilleRisLambers,et al.  The importance of niches for the maintenance of species diversity , 2009, Nature.

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

[41]  P. Chesson.  Mechanisms of Maintenance of Species Diversity , 2000 .

[42]  J. Wiens.  Spatial Scaling in Ecology , 1989 .

[43]  S. Levin.  The problem of pattern and scale in ecology , 1992 .

[44]  S. Hubbell.  The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography (MPB-32) , 2011 .

[45]  Mark V. Lomolino,et al.  Ecology’s most general, yet protean 1 pattern: the species‐area relationship , 2000 .

[46]  Peter Chesson,et al.  Local dispersal can facilitate coexistence in the presence of permanent spatial heterogeneity , 2003 .

[47]  D. Tilman,et al.  Resource Use Patterns Predict Long‐Term Outcomes of Plant Competition for Nutrients and Light , 2007, The American Naturalist.

[48]  H. Olff,et al.  Spatial scaling laws yield a synthetic theory of biodiversity , 1999, Nature.

[49]  James P. Grover,et al.  Simple Rules for Interspecific Dominance in Systems with Exploitative and Apparent Competition , 1994, The American Naturalist.

[50]  H. Hillebrand,et al.  The imprint of the geographical, evolutionary and ecological context on species-area relationships. , 2006, Ecology letters.

[51]  Karin Frank,et al.  A new method for conservation planning for the persistence of multiple species. , 2006, Ecology letters.

[52]  Andrew Gonzalez.  Community relaxation in fragmented landscapes: the relation between species richness, area and age , 2000 .

[53]  J. Diez,et al.  When Climate Reshuffles Competitors: A Call for Experimental Macroecology. , 2016, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[54]  G. E. Hutchinson,et al.  The Balance of Nature and Human Impact: The paradox of the plankton , 2013 .

[55]  Peter Chesson,et al.  New methods for quantifying the spatial storage effect: an illustration with desert annuals. , 2007, Ecology.

[56]  P. Chesson.  General theory of competitive coexistence in spatially-varying environments. , 2000, Theoretical population biology.

[57]  Andrew Gonzalez,et al.  STABLE COEXISTENCE IN A FLUCTUATING ENVIRONMENT: AN EXPERIMENTAL DEMONSTRATION , 2005 .

[58]  H. Décamps,et al.  Landscape ecology in theory and practice , 2003 .

[59]  Paul Beier,et al.  Use of Land Facets to Plan for Climate Change: Conserving the Arenas, Not the Actors , 2010, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[60]  J. Franklin,et al.  Planning, implementing, and monitoring multiple-species habitat conservation plans. , 2011, American journal of botany.

[61]  Robin E. Snyder.  When does environmental variation most influence species coexistence? , 2008, Theoretical Ecology.

[62]  J. Nørskov,et al.  Farming and the Fate of Wild Nature , 2009 .

[63]  C. Thompson,et al.  Logic for Designing Nature Reserves for Multiple Species , 2006, The American Naturalist.

[64]  A. Krämer.  Insights from theory , 2015 .

[65]  F. Diederich.  Stochastic Population Dynamics In Ecology And Conservation , 2016 .

[66]  William S. Curran,et al.  A/I: a synthesis , 1982, ACM-SE 20.

[67]  Paul R. Martin,et al.  Impacts of climate warming on terrestrial ectotherms across latitude , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[68]  R. Whittaker,et al.  The species–area relationship: an exploration of that ‘most general, yet protean pattern’ 1 , 2012 .

[69]  J. Silvertown,et al.  Hydrologically defined niches reveal a basis for species richness in plant communities , 1999, Nature.

[70]  D. Burslem,et al.  The Enigma of Soil Animal Species Diversity Revisited: The Role of Small-Scale Heterogeneity , 2010, PloS one.

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

[72]  Orie L. Loucks,et al.  Scaling and uncertainty analysis in ecology : methods and applications , 2006 .

[73]  Mark Vellend,et al.  Assessing the relative importance of neutral stochasticity in ecological communities , 2014 .

[74]  W. Bond,et al.  Tropical grassy biomes: misunderstood, neglected, and under threat. , 2014, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[75]  J. Huisman,et al.  Biodiversity of plankton by species oscillations and chaos , 1999, Nature.

[76]  Jonathan M. Chase,et al.  Navigating the multiple meanings of β diversity: a roadmap for the practicing ecologist. , 2011, Ecology letters.

[77]  D. Marshall,et al.  Environmental stress, facilitation, competition, and coexistence. , 2013, Ecology.

[78]  Jonathan Silvertown,et al.  Plant coexistence and the niche , 2004 .

[79]  Jianguo Wu,et al.  CONCEPTS OF SCALE AND SCALING , 2006 .

[80]  Benjamin Gilbert,et al.  Experimental dispersal reveals characteristic scales of biodiversity in a natural landscape , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[81]  Roger Jones,et al.  Ecological processes: A key element in strategies for nature conservation , 2009 .