The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology

The metacommunity concept is an important way to think about linkages between different spatial scales in ecology. Here we review current understanding about this concept. We first investigate issues related to its definition as a set of local communities that are linked by dispersal of multiple potentially interacting species. We then identify four paradigms for metacommunities: the patch-dynamic view, the species-sorting view, the mass effects view and the neutral view, that each emphasizes different processes of potential importance in metacommunities. These have somewhat distinct intellectual histories and we discuss elements related to their potential future synthesis. We then use this framework to discuss why the concept is useful in modifying existing ecological thinking and illustrate this with a number of both theoretical and empirical examples. As ecologists strive to understand increasingly complex mechanisms and strive to work across multiple scales of spatio-temporal organization, concepts like the metacommunity can provide important insights that frequently contrast with those that would be obtained with more conventional approaches based on local communities alone.

[1]  T. Dobzhansky Genetics and the Origin of Species , 1937 .

[2]  R. Macarthur,et al.  Population Ecology of Some Warblers of Northeastern Coniferous Forests , 1958 .

[3]  E. Pianka Latitudinal Gradients in Species Diversity: A Review of Concepts , 1966, The American Naturalist.

[4]  R. Macarthur,et al.  The Theory of Island Biogeography , 1969 .

[5]  R. Levins Some Demographic and Genetic Consequences of Environmental Heterogeneity for Biological Control , 1969 .

[6]  R. Levins,et al.  Regional Coexistence of Species and Competition between Rare Species. , 1971, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  J. Vandermeer On the regional stabilization of locally unstable predator-prey relationships. , 1973, Journal of theoretical biology.

[8]  S. Boorman,et al.  Group selection on the boundary of a stable population. , 1972, Theoretical population biology.

[9]  S. Levin Dispersion and Population Interactions , 1974, The American Naturalist.

[10]  W. Murdoch,et al.  Predation and Population Stability , 1975 .

[11]  Hal Caswell,et al.  Community Structure: A Neutral Model Analysis , 1976 .

[12]  P. Grubb THE MAINTENANCE OF SPECIES‐RICHNESS IN PLANT COMMUNITIES: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE REGENERATION NICHE , 1977 .

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

[14]  R. Holt Predation, apparent competition, and the structure of prey communities. , 1977, Theoretical population biology.

[15]  J. Lawton,et al.  On feeding on more than one trophic level , 1978, Nature.

[16]  R. May,et al.  Stability and Complexity in Model Ecosystems , 1976, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[17]  Hal Caswell,et al.  Predator-Mediated Coexistence: A Nonequilibrium Model , 1978, The American Naturalist.

[18]  A. Hastings Disturbance, coexistence, history, and competition for space , 1980 .

[19]  P. Crowley Dispersal and the Stability of Predator-Prey Interactions , 1981, The American Naturalist.

[20]  L. Oksanen,et al.  Exploitation Ecosystems in Gradients of Primary Productivity , 1981, The American Naturalist.

[21]  D. Tilman Resource competition and community structure. , 1983, Monographs in population biology.

[22]  R. Holt Population dynamics in two-patch environments: Some anomalous consequences of an optimal habitat distribution , 1985 .

[23]  A. Shmida,et al.  Biological determinants of species diversity , 1985 .

[24]  Peter Chesson,et al.  Coexistence of Competitors in Spatially and Temporally Varying Environments: A Look at the Combined Effects of Different Sorts of Variability , 1985 .

[25]  Yoh Iwasa,et al.  Interspecific competition among metapopulations with space-limited subpopulations , 1986 .

[26]  Thomas W. Schoener,et al.  High population persistence in a system with high turnover , 1987, Nature.

[27]  E. Kuno Principles of Predator–Prey Interaction in Theoretical, Experimental, and Natural Population Systems , 1987 .

[28]  H. Pulliam,et al.  Sources, Sinks, and Population Regulation , 1988, The American Naturalist.

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

[30]  P. Kareiva Population dynamics in spatially complex environments: theory and data , 1990 .

[31]  Andrew D. Taylor Metapopulations, Dispersal, and Predator‐Prey Dynamics: An Overview , 1990 .

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

[33]  James A. Drake,et al.  Community-Assembly Mechanics and the Structure of an Experimental Species Ensemble , 1991, The American Naturalist.

[34]  B. Danielson Communities in a Landscape: The Influence of Habitat Heterogeneity on the Interactions between Species , 1991, The American Naturalist.

[35]  David Sloan Wilson,et al.  Complex Interactions in Metacommunities, with Implications for Biodiversity and Higher Levels of Selection , 1992 .

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

[37]  W. Wilson,et al.  Dynamics of Age-Structured and Spatially Structured Predator-Prey Interactions: Individual-Based Models and Population-Level Formulations , 1993, The American Naturalist.

[38]  David Tilman,et al.  The maintenance of species richness in plant communities , 1993 .

[39]  Peter A. Abrams,et al.  Effect of Increased Productivity on the Abundances of Trophic Levels , 1993, The American Naturalist.

[40]  Richard Law,et al.  Alternative Permanent States of Ecological Communities , 1993 .

[41]  Robert M. May,et al.  Species coexistence and self-organizing spatial dynamics , 1994, Nature.

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

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

[44]  James P. Grover,et al.  Assembly Rules for Communities of Nutrient-Limited Plants and Specialist Herbivores , 1994, The American Naturalist.

[45]  M. Rosenzweig,et al.  Species Diversity in Space and Time , 1995 .

[46]  Richard Law,et al.  PERMANENCE AND THE ASSEMBLY OF ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES , 1996 .

[47]  N. Gotelli,et al.  NULL MODELS IN ECOLOGY , 1996 .

[48]  B. Husband,et al.  A METAPOPULATION PERSPECTIVE IN PLANT POPULATION BIOLOGY , 1996 .

[49]  Mathew A. Leibold,et al.  A Graphical Model of Keystone Predators in Food Webs: Trophic Regulation of Abundance, Incidence, and Diversity Patterns in Communities , 1996, The American Naturalist.

[50]  Carl J. Walters,et al.  Invulnerable Prey and the Paradox of Enrichment , 1996 .

[51]  T. Schoener,et al.  Devastation of prey diversity by experimentally introduced predators in the field , 1996, Nature.

[52]  Jonathan M. Chase,et al.  Species Turnover and the Regulation of Trophic Structure , 1997 .

[53]  Andrew D. Taylor,et al.  Empirical Evidence for Metapopulation Dynamics , 1997 .

[54]  C. Roberts,et al.  Connectivity and management of caribbean coral reefs , 1997, Science.

[55]  Robert D. Holt,et al.  7 – From Metapopulation Dynamics to Community Structure: Some Consequences of Spatial Heterogeneity , 1997 .

[56]  S. Harrison How natural habitat patchiness affects the distribution of diversity in Californian serpentine chaparral , 1997 .

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

[58]  P. Chesson,et al.  The Roles of Harsh and Fluctuating Conditions in the Dynamics of Ecological Communities , 1997, The American Naturalist.

[59]  F. Gilbert,et al.  Corridors maintain species richness in the fragmented landscapes of a microecosystem , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

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

[61]  A. Hastings,et al.  Weak trophic interactions and the balance of nature , 1998, Nature.

[62]  M. Holyoak,et al.  A roadmap for metapopulation research. , 1999, Ecology letters.

[63]  P. Mumby Can Caribbean coral populations be modelled at metapopulation scales , 1999 .

[64]  J. Lancaster,et al.  Assembly rules within a contingent ecology , 1999 .

[65]  M. Leibold Biodiversity and nutrient enrichment in pond plankton communities , 1999 .

[66]  Peter A. Abrams,et al.  IS PREDATOR‐MEDIATED COEXISTENCE POSSIBLE INUNSTABLE SYSTEMS? , 1999 .

[67]  Brian A. Maurer,et al.  Untangling Ecological Complexity: The Macroscopic Perspective , 1999 .

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

[69]  J. Shurin DISPERSAL LIMITATION, INVASION RESISTANCE, AND THE STRUCTURE OF POND ZOOPLANKTON COMMUNITIES , 2000 .

[70]  M. Kessler Upslope-Directed Mass Effect in Palms along an Andean Elevational Gradient: A Cause for High Diversity at Mid-Elevations?1 , 2000 .

[71]  H. Cornell,et al.  Coral species richness: ecological versus biogeographical influences , 2000, Coral Reefs.

[72]  Graham Bell,et al.  The Distribution of Abundance in Neutral Communities , 2000, The American Naturalist.

[73]  M. McPeek,et al.  BUILDING A REGIONAL SPECIES POOL: DIVERSIFICATION OF THE ENALLAGMA DAMSELFLIES IN EASTERN NORTH AMERICA , 2000 .

[74]  M. Holyoak Habitat subdivision causes changes in food web structure , 2000 .

[75]  P. Amarasekare The geometry of coexistence , 2000 .

[76]  Jonathan M. Chase,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF PRODUCTIVITY, HERBIVORY, AND PLANT SPECIES TURNOVER IN GRASSLAND FOOD WEBS , 2000 .

[77]  M. Leibold,et al.  LOCAL AND REGIONAL ZOOPLANKTON SPECIES RICHNESS: A SCALE‐INDEPENDENT TEST FOR SATURATION , 2000 .

[78]  J. Shurin,et al.  Effects of Competition, Predation, and Dispersal on Species Richness at Local and Regional Scales , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[79]  Priyanga Amarasekare,et al.  Spatial Heterogeneity, Source‐Sink Dynamics, and the Local Coexistence of Competing Species , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[80]  Katherine L. Gross,et al.  WHAT IS THE OBSERVED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SPECIES RICHNESS AND PRODUCTIVITY , 2001 .

[81]  S. Hubbell,et al.  The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography at age ten. , 2011, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[82]  C. Klausmeier Habitat destruction and extinction in competitive and mutualistic metacommunities , 2001 .

[83]  G. Bell Neutral macroecology. , 2001, Science.

[84]  J. Shurin INTERACTIVE EFFECTS OF PREDATION AND DISPERSAL ON ZOOPLANKTON COMMUNITIES , 2001 .

[85]  Douglas W. Yu,et al.  AN EMPIRICAL MODEL OF SPECIES COEXISTENCE IN A SPATIALLY STRUCTURED ENVIRONMENT , 2001 .

[86]  R. Kitching,et al.  Food webs in phytotelmata: "bottom-up" and "top-down" explanations for community structure. , 2001, Annual review of entomology.

[87]  Douglas W. Yu,et al.  The Competition‐Colonization Trade‐off Is Dead; Long Live the Competition‐Colonization Trade‐off , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[88]  Michel Loreau,et al.  Coexistence in Metacommunities: The Regional Similarity Hypothesis , 2002, The American Naturalist.

[89]  T. Miller,et al.  RESOURCE AND TOP‐PREDATOR REGULATION IN THE PITCHER PLANT (SARRACENIA PURPUREA) INQUILINE COMMUNITY , 2002 .

[90]  I. Hanski,et al.  Multitrophic Level Interactions: Multitrophic interactions in space: metacommunity dynamics in fragmented landscapes , 2002 .

[91]  Jonathan M. Chase,et al.  The role of habitat connectivity and landscape geometry in experimental zooplankton metacommunities , 2002 .

[92]  Robert D. Holt,et al.  Food webs in space: On the interplay of dynamic instability and spatial processes , 2002, Ecological Research.

[93]  Andrew Gonzalez,et al.  Heterotroph species extinction, abundance and biomass dynamics in an experimentally fragmented microecosystem , 2002 .

[94]  David K. Skelly,et al.  EXPERIMENTAL VENUE AND ESTIMATION OF INTERACTION STRENGTH , 2002 .

[95]  Jonathan M. Chase,et al.  Spatial scale dictates the productivity–biodiversity relationship , 2002, Nature.

[96]  J. H. Burns,et al.  EFFECT OF COMMUNITY STRUCTURE ON INVASION SUCCESS AND RATE , 2002 .

[97]  M. Loreau,et al.  Plant species richness and community productivity: why the mechanism that promotes coexistence matters , 2002 .

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

[99]  T. Miller,et al.  Dispersal Rates Affect Species Composition in Metacommunities of Sarracenia purpurea Inquilines , 2003, The American Naturalist.

[100]  Jonathan M. Chase Community assembly: when should history matter? , 2003, Oecologia.

[101]  L. Meester,et al.  ZOOPLANKTON METACOMMUNITY STRUCTURE: REGIONAL VS. LOCAL PROCESSES IN HIGHLY INTERCONNECTED PONDS , 2003 .

[102]  Vlastimil Křivan,et al.  CONNECTING THEORETICAL AND EMPIRICAL STUDIES OF TRAIT‐MEDIATED INTERACTIONS , 2003 .

[103]  R. Holt,et al.  Impacts of environmental variability in open populations and communities: "inflation" in sink environments. , 2003, Theoretical population biology.

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

[105]  Jonathan M. Chase,et al.  Alternative stable states and regional community structure. , 2004, Journal of theoretical biology.

[106]  Jon Norberg,et al.  Biodiversity in metacommunities: Plankton as complex adaptive systems? , 2004 .

[107]  Jonathan M. Chase,et al.  Trade‐offs in community ecology: linking spatial scales and species coexistence , 2004 .

[108]  W. Worthen,et al.  Nested subset structure of larval mycophagous fly assemblages: nestedness in a non-island system , 1996, Oecologia.

[109]  M. Leibold Similarity and local co-existence of species in regional biotas , 2004, Evolutionary Ecology.

[110]  T. Miller,et al.  From Metapopulations to Metacommunities , 2004 .

[111]  Mathew A. Leibold,et al.  CYCLIC ASSEMBLY TRAJECTORIES AND SCALE‐DEPENDENT PRODUCTIVITY–DIVERSITY RELATIONSHIPS , 2004 .

[112]  H. Caswell,et al.  Local and Regional Regulation of Species-Area Relations : A Patch-Occupancy Model , 2005 .