Effects of Disturbance on Species Diversity: A Multitrophic Perspective

Models of the effects of disturbance on ecological communities have largely considered communities of competing species at a single trophic level. In contrast, most real communities have multiple interacting trophic levels. I explored several versions of simple single‐ and multitrophic models to determine whether predictions of the intermediate disturbance hypothesis (IDH), derived from considering only a single trophic level, apply to multitrophic situations. The IDH was predicted by models of competing species at a single trophic level but did not hold in many situations with more natural trophic structure. In general, basal species in a food web tended to follow the IDH, whereas competitors at top trophic levels did not. Additional analyses indicated that outside immigration interacted with trophic structure to produce widely differing predictions about the consequences of disturbance and intermethat density‐dependent disturbance events could recapture the IDH in some multiple trophic level situations. Model predictions matched the results of empirical studies to date: the IDH has generally been supported for species competing for nondynamic basal resources but not for mobile aquatic invertebrates at higher trophic levels. The model analysis also verified basic predictions of inverbal models addressing the effects of physical stress. Three different aspects of disturbance and their contributions to species coexistence were identified: changes in average mortality rates, changes in temporal variability, and changes in spatial heterogeneity. The results indicate that the IDH should be applied with caution to real multitrophic communities.

[1]  J. Denslow Chapter 17 – Disturbance-Mediated Coexistence of Species , 1985 .

[2]  M. Power,et al.  Productivity, consumers, and the structure of a river food chain. , 1993, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  R. Paine,et al.  Intertidal Landscapes: Disturbance and the Dynamics of Pattern , 1981 .

[4]  D. DeAngelis,et al.  Equilibrium and Nonequilibrium Concepts in Ecological Models , 1987 .

[5]  J. Keeley,et al.  Postfire Succession of the Herbaceous Flora in Southern California Chaparral , 1981 .

[6]  J. Diamond,et al.  Ecology and Evolution of Communities , 1976, Nature.

[7]  M. Dethier Disturbance and Recovery in Intertidal Pools: Maintenance of Mosaic Patterns , 1984 .

[8]  M. Power,et al.  Effects of Fish in River Food Webs , 1990, Science.

[9]  James H. Brown,et al.  GRANIVORY IN A DESERT ECOSYSTEM: EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE FOR INDIRECT FACILITATION OF ANTS BY RODENTS' , 1984 .

[10]  C. Huffaker Experimental studies on predation : dispersion factors and predator-prey oscillations , 1958 .

[11]  John Vandermeer,et al.  Indirect Mutualism: Variations on a Theme by Stephen Levine , 1980, The American Naturalist.

[12]  P. White,et al.  The Ecology of Natural Disturbance and Patch Dynamics , 1986 .

[13]  J. Connell Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs. , 1978, Science.

[14]  J. McAuliffe Competition for Space, Disturbance, and the Structure of a Benthic Stream Community , 1984 .

[15]  A. Watt,et al.  Pattern and process in the plant community , 1947 .

[16]  A. Ives Aggregation and Coexistence in a Carrion Fly Community , 1991 .

[17]  Stephen R. Carpenter,et al.  Cascading Trophic Interactions and Lake Productivity , 1985 .

[18]  P. Petraitis,et al.  The Maintenance of Species Diversity by Disturbance , 1989, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[19]  J. Lubchenco Plant Species Diversity in a Marine Intertidal Community: Importance of Herbivore Food Preference and Algal Competitive Abilities , 1978, The American Naturalist.

[20]  B. Menge,et al.  Indirect Effects in Marine Rocky Intertidal Interaction Webs: Patterns and Importance , 1995 .

[21]  R. Paine Food Web Complexity and Species Diversity , 1966, The American Naturalist.