Joint species distribution models unveil co‐occurrences between freshwater mussels and their fish hosts

Freshwater mussels are among the most threatened taxa in the world, partially due to the dependence on fish hosts to complete their life cycle. Knowledge about the role of environmental and biotic drivers in determining mussels' distribution is currently lacking. We aimed to assess the role of environmental and biotic drivers in determining the distribution of mussels and their fish hosts and to test if co‐occurrence patterns were able to identify mussel‐host interactions.

[1]  A. S. Vaz,et al.  A global synthesis of ecosystem services provided and disrupted by freshwater bivalve molluscs , 2022, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[2]  A. Filipe,et al.  Predicting climatic threats to an endangered freshwater mussel in Europe: The need to account for fish hosts , 2022, Freshwater Biology.

[3]  D. Macmillan,et al.  Utility of Human Footprint Pressure Mapping for Large Carnivore Conservation: The Kafue-Zambezi Interface , 2021, Sustainability.

[4]  N. Golding,et al.  Modelling temperature‐driven changes in species associations across freshwater communities , 2021, Global change biology.

[5]  F. Köhler,et al.  Major shortfalls impairing knowledge and conservation of freshwater molluscs , 2021, Hydrobiologia.

[6]  S. Varandas,et al.  Trophic niche overlap between native freshwater mussels (Order: Unionida) and the invasive Corbicula fluminea , 2021, Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.

[7]  Rafael O. Wüest,et al.  Scale dependency of joint species distribution models challenges interpretation of biotic interactions , 2021, Journal of Biogeography.

[8]  L. S. Sanches Fernandes,et al.  Is it safe to remove a dam at the risk of a sprawl by exotic fish species? , 2021, The Science of the total environment.

[9]  Yiwen Zeng,et al.  Predictor complexity and feature selection affect Maxent model transferability: Evidence from global freshwater invasive species , 2020, Diversity and Distributions.

[10]  O. Ovaskainen,et al.  Communities in high definition: Spatial and environmental factors shape the micro‐distribution of aquatic invertebrates , 2020 .

[11]  Nerea Abrego,et al.  Joint Species Distribution Modelling: With Applications in R , 2020 .

[12]  P. Somervuo,et al.  Accounting for environmental variation in co‐occurrence modelling reveals the importance of positive interactions in root‐associated fungal communities , 2020, Molecular ecology.

[13]  Andrew E. Honsey,et al.  Improved understanding and prediction of freshwater fish communities through the use of joint species distribution models , 2020, Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences.

[14]  Nerea Abrego,et al.  Joint Species Distribution Modelling , 2020, Joint Species Distribution Modelling.

[15]  S. Varandas,et al.  From the lab to the river: Determination of ecological hosts of Anodonta anatina , 2020, Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.

[16]  P. Beja,et al.  Setting the stage for new ecological indicator species: A holistic case study on the Iberian dolphin freshwater mussel Unio delphinus Spengler, 1793 , 2020 .

[17]  H. Kling,et al.  From topography to hydrology—The modifiable area unit problem impacts freshwater species distribution models , 2020, Ecology and evolution.

[18]  J. Radinger,et al.  The role of spatial units in modelling freshwater fish distributions: Comparing a subcatchment and river network approach using MaxEnt , 2020 .

[19]  Jari Oksanen,et al.  Joint species distribution modelling with the r‐package Hmsc , 2020, Methods in ecology and evolution.

[20]  D. Gravel,et al.  Co-occurrence is not evidence of ecological interactions. , 2020, Ecology letters.

[21]  M. Thieme,et al.  Global hydro-environmental sub-basin and river reach characteristics at high spatial resolution , 2019, Scientific Data.

[22]  D. Dudgeon.  Multiple threats imperil freshwater biodiversity in the Anthropocene , 2019, Current Biology.

[23]  S. Varandas,et al.  Freshwater conservation assessments in (semi-)arid regions: Testing river intermittence and buffer strategies using freshwater mussels (Bivalvia, Unionida) in Morocco , 2019, Biological Conservation.

[24]  Damaris Zurell,et al.  Testing species assemblage predictions from stacked and joint species distribution models , 2019, Journal of Biogeography.

[25]  Laura J. Pollock,et al.  Do joint species distribution models reliably detect interspecific interactions from co‐occurrence data in homogenous environments? , 2018 .

[26]  A. Berg,et al.  Present and future Köppen-Geiger climate classification maps at 1-km resolution , 2018, Scientific Data.

[27]  Maria Teresa Ferreira,et al.  The River Network Toolkit - RivTool , 2018, Ecography.

[28]  L. Amorim,et al.  Physical legacy of freshwater bivalves: Effects of habitat complexity on the taxonomical and functional diversity of invertebrates. , 2018, The Science of the total environment.

[29]  Antoine Guisan,et al.  Disentangling biotic interactions, environmental filters, and dispersal limitation as drivers of species co‐occurrence , 2018 .

[30]  M. Clavero,et al.  Fish and mussels: Importance of fish for freshwater mussel conservation , 2018 .

[31]  Anna Norberg,et al.  How to make more out of community data? A conceptual framework and its implementation as models and software. , 2017, Ecology letters.

[32]  Kentaro Inoue,et al.  Joint species models reveal the effects of environment on community assemblage of freshwater mussels and fishes in European rivers , 2017 .

[33]  V. Simić,et al.  Conservation status of freshwater mussels in Europe: state of the art and future challenges , 2017, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[34]  Robert P. Anderson,et al.  When and how should biotic interactions be considered in models of species niches and distributions? , 2017 .

[35]  M. Vilà,et al.  Fine-scale determinants of conservation value of river reaches in a hotspot of native and non-native species diversity. , 2017, The Science of the total environment.

[36]  M. Servos,et al.  Freshwater mussels in an urban watershed: Impacts of anthropogenic inputs and habitat alterations on populations. , 2017, The Science of the total environment.

[37]  Darren C. J. Yeo,et al.  Novel methods to select environmental variables in MaxEnt: A case study using invasive crayfish , 2016 .

[38]  Kendall R. Jones,et al.  Global terrestrial Human Footprint maps for 1993 and 2009 , 2016, Scientific Data.

[39]  Mário Ferreira,et al.  Modeling stream fish distributions using interval‐censored detection times , 2016, Ecology and evolution.

[40]  S. Varandas,et al.  Phylogeny, phylogeography, and evolution in the Mediterranean region: News from a freshwater mussel (Potomida, Unionida). , 2016, Molecular phylogenetics and evolution.

[41]  David B. Roy,et al.  Uncovering hidden spatial structure in species communities with spatially explicit joint species distribution models , 2016 .

[42]  Francis K. C. Hui,et al.  So Many Variables: Joint Modeling in Community Ecology. , 2015, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[43]  J. C. de Almeida,et al.  Concluding Remarks , 2015, Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH.

[44]  S. Domisch,et al.  Application of species distribution models in stream ecosystems: the challenges of spatial and temporal scale, environmental predictors and species occurrence data , 2015 .

[45]  Sabela Lois,et al.  Spatial extent of biotic interactions affects species distribution and abundance in river networks: the freshwater pearl mussel and its hosts , 2015 .

[46]  S. Varandas,et al.  Conservation status of the freshwater pearl mussel Margaritifera margaritifera in Portugal , 2015 .

[47]  S. Varandas,et al.  Genetic diversity of the pan‐European freshwater mussel Anodonta anatina (Bivalvia: Unionoida) based on CO1: new phylogenetic insights and implications for conservation , 2014 .

[48]  Kai Zhu,et al.  More than the sum of the parts: forest climate response from joint species distribution models. , 2014, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[49]  S. Varandas,et al.  Biology and conservation of freshwater bivalves: past, present and future perspectives , 2014, Hydrobiologia.

[50]  Laura J. Pollock,et al.  Understanding co‐occurrence by modelling species simultaneously with a Joint Species Distribution Model (JSDM) , 2014 .

[51]  Robert P. Guralnick,et al.  EarthEnv-DEM90: A nearly-global, void-free, multi-scale smoothed, 90m digital elevation model from fused ASTER and SRTM data , 2014 .

[52]  V. Prié,et al.  French naiad (Bivalvia: Margaritiferidae, Unionidae) species distribution models: prediction maps as tools for conservation , 2014, Hydrobiologia.

[53]  Alejandro F. Rozenfeld,et al.  The geographic scaling of biotic interactions , 2013 .

[54]  S. Varandas,et al.  Biotic homogenization as a threat to native affiliate species: fish introductions dilute freshwater mussel's host resources , 2013 .

[55]  S. Varandas,et al.  Reproductive cycle and strategy of Anodonta anatina (L., 1758): notes on hermaphroditism. , 2013, Journal of experimental zoology. Part A, Ecological genetics and physiology.

[56]  Bernhard Lehner,et al.  Global river hydrography and network routing: baseline data and new approaches to study the world's large river systems , 2013 .

[57]  W. D. Kissling,et al.  The role of biotic interactions in shaping distributions and realised assemblages of species: implications for species distribution modelling , 2012, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[58]  N. Mandrak,et al.  Distribution of unionid freshwater mussels depends on the distribution of host fishes on a regional scale , 2013 .

[59]  Carsten F. Dormann,et al.  Towards novel approaches to modelling biotic interactions in multispecies assemblages at large spatial extents , 2012 .

[60]  W. Haag.  North American Freshwater Mussels: Natural History, Ecology, and Conservation , 2012 .

[61]  A. Filipe,et al.  Vulnerability of stream biota to climate change in mediterranean climate regions: a synthesis of ecological responses and conservation challenges , 2012, Hydrobiologia.

[62]  R. Sousa,et al.  Corbicula fluminea Müller (Asian clam) , 2012 .

[63]  R. Francis.  A Handbook of Global Freshwater Invasive Species , 2012 .

[64]  A. Karatayev,et al.  Biogeography and conservation of freshwater mussels (Bivalvia: Unionidae) in Texas: patterns of diversity and threats , 2011 .

[65]  Patricia Ramos.  Estudo das populações de bivalves (Unionidae) de rios do norte de Portugal: importância da qualidade ambiental na conservação de espécies ameaçadas , 2011 .

[66]  J. Ragle,et al.  IUCN Red List of Threatened Species , 2010 .

[67]  J. Geist.  Strategies for the conservation of endangered freshwater pearl mussels (Margaritifera margaritifera L.): a synthesis of Conservation Genetics and Ecology , 2010, Hydrobiologia.

[68]  J. Velasco,et al.  Las náyades de la península Ibérica , 2009 .

[69]  L. Guilhermino,et al.  Ecology of the invasive Asian clam Corbicula fluminea (Müller, 1774) in aquatic ecosystems: an overview , 2008 .

[70]  Jorge Soberón.  Grinnellian and Eltonian niches and geographic distributions of species. , 2007, Ecology letters.

[71]  R. Naiman,et al.  Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges , 2006, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[72]  I. Doadrio,et al.  Paleobiogeography of two Iberian endemic cyprinid fishes (Chondrostoma arcasii-Chondrostoma macrolepidotus) inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequence data. , 2006, The Journal of heredity.

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

[74]  J. Allan,et al.  Reach‐ and catchment‐scale determinants of the distribution of freshwater mussels (Bivalvia: Unionidae) in south‐eastern Michigan, U.S.A. , 2004 .

[75]  D. Beeson.  Effects of Pollution on Freshwater Aquatic Organisms , 2003 .

[76]  P. Cosgrove,et al.  The Threat of Climate Change to Freshwater Pearl Mussel Populations , 2003, Ambio.

[77]  Ian G. Cowx,et al.  Spatial modelling of freshwater fish in semi‐arid river systems: a tool for conservation , 2002 .

[78]  N. Ramankutty,et al.  Estimating historical changes in global land cover: Croplands from 1700 to 1992 , 1999 .

[79]  David L. Strayer,et al.  Use of Flow Refuges by Unionid Mussels in Rivers , 1999, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[80]  J. Evans.  Straightforward Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 1995 .

[81]  Charles C. Elton.  Animal Ecology , 1927, Nature.

[82]  J. Grinnell.  The Niche-Relationships of the California Thrasher , 1917 .