Analysis of neighborhood dynamics of forest ecosystems using likelihood methods and modeling.

Advances in computing power in the past 20 years have led to a proliferation of spatially explicit, individual-based models of population and ecosystem dynamics. In forest ecosystems, the individual-based models encapsulate an emerging theory of "neighborhood" dynamics, in which fine-scale spatial interactions regulate the demography of component tree species. The spatial distribution of component species, in turn, regulates spatial variation in a whole host of community and ecosystem properties, with subsequent feedbacks on component species. The development of these models has been facilitated by development of new methods of analysis of field data, in which critical demographic rates and ecosystem processes are analyzed in terms of the spatial distributions of neighboring trees and physical environmental factors. The analyses are based on likelihood methods and information theory, and they allow a tight linkage between the models and explicit parameterization of the models from field data. Maximum likelihood methods have a long history of use for point and interval estimation in statistics. In contrast, likelihood principles have only more gradually emerged in ecology as the foundation for an alternative to traditional hypothesis testing. The alternative framework stresses the process of identifying and selecting among competing models, or in the simplest case, among competing point estimates of a parameter of a model. There are four general steps involved in a likelihood analysis: (1) model specification, (2) parameter estimation using maximum likelihood methods, (3) model comparison, and (4) model evaluation. Our goal in this paper is to review recent developments in the use of likelihood methods and modeling for the analysis of neighborhood processes in forest ecosystems. We will focus on a single class of processes, seed dispersal and seedling dispersion, because recent papers provide compelling evidence of the potential power of the approach, and illustrate some of the statistical challenges in applying the methods.

[1]  S. Pacala,et al.  SEEDLING RECRUITMENT IN FORESTS: CALIBRATING MODELS TO PREDICT PATTERNS OF TREE SEEDLING DISPERSION' , 1994 .

[2]  Aaron M. Ellison,et al.  AN INTRODUCTION TO BAYESIAN INFERENCE FOR ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH AND ENVIRONMENTAL , 1996 .

[3]  C. Augspurger,et al.  Seed and Seedling Ecology of a Monocarpic Tropical Tree, Tachigalia Versicolor , 1989 .

[4]  Richard Condit,et al.  Tropical Forest Census Plots: Methods and Results from Barro Colorado Island, Panama and a Comparison with Other Plots , 1998 .

[5]  Michael C. Dietze,et al.  COEXISTENCE: HOW TO IDENTIFY TROPHIC TRADE-OFFS , 2003 .

[6]  D. Stoyan,et al.  Estimating the fruit dispersion of anemochorous forest trees , 2001 .

[7]  R. Freckleton,et al.  The Ecological Detective: Confronting Models with Data , 1999 .

[8]  Ulf Dieckmann,et al.  A DYNAMICAL SYSTEM FOR NEIGHBORHOODS INPLANT COMMUNITIES , 2000 .

[9]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model selection and multimodel inference : a practical information-theoretic approach , 2003 .

[10]  Jennifer A Hoeting,et al.  Model selection for geostatistical models. , 2006, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[11]  Wolf M. Mooij,et al.  Individual-based modelling as an integrative approach in theoretical and applied population dynamics and food web studies , 1999 .

[12]  Charles D. Canham,et al.  CANOPY TREE–SOIL INTERACTIONS WITHIN TEMPERATE FORESTS: SPECIES EFFECTS ON pH AND CATIONS , 1998 .

[13]  Shanshan Wu,et al.  Building statistical models to analyze species distributions. , 2006, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[14]  Charles D. Canham,et al.  Causes and consequences of resource heterogeneity in forests : interspecific variation in light transmission by canopy trees , 1994 .

[15]  Charles D. Canham,et al.  Non-additive effects of litter mixtures on net N mineralization in a southern New England forest , 1998 .

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

[17]  T. C. Chamberlin The Method of Multiple Working Hypotheses: With this method the dangers of parental affection for a favorite theory can be circumvented. , 1965, Science.

[18]  A. Robinson,et al.  Bias in the mean tree model as a consequence of Jensen’s inequality , 2003 .

[19]  Lieven Nachtergale,et al.  A model of wind-influenced leaf litterfall in a mixed hardwood forest , 2003 .

[20]  Graham K. Rand,et al.  Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences , 1983 .

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

[22]  Janneke HilleRisLambers,et al.  Seed Dispersal Near and Far: Patterns Across Temperate and Tropical Forests , 1999 .

[23]  J. Knops,et al.  Patterns of Annual Seed Production by Northern Hemisphere Trees: A Global Perspective , 2000, The American Naturalist.

[24]  C. Canham,et al.  A neighborhood analysis of canopy tree competition : effects of shading versus crowding , 2004 .

[25]  William L. Goffe,et al.  SIMANN: FORTRAN module to perform Global Optimization of Statistical Functions with Simulated Annealing , 1992 .

[26]  A. Edwards Likelihood (Expanded Edition) , 1972 .

[27]  S. Pacala,et al.  Forest models defined by field measurements : Estimation, error analysis and dynamics , 1996 .

[28]  James S. Clark,et al.  UNCERTAINTY AND VARIABILITY IN DEMOGRAPHY AND POPULATION GROWTH: A HIERARCHICAL APPROACH , 2003 .

[29]  J. Lawton,et al.  Linking Species and Ecosystems , 1996 .

[30]  Brendan A. Wintle,et al.  The Use of Bayesian Model Averaging to Better Represent Uncertainty in Ecological Models , 2003 .

[31]  F. Stuart Chapin,et al.  Functional Matrix: A Conceptual Framework for Predicting Multiple Plant Effects on Ecosystem Processes , 2003 .

[32]  Charles D. Canham,et al.  CANOPY TREE–SOIL INTERACTIONS WITHIN TEMPERATE FORESTS: SPECIES EFFECTS ON SOIL CARBON AND NITROGEN , 1998 .

[33]  Ran Nathan,et al.  Spatial patterns of seed dispersal, their determinants and consequences for recruitment. , 2000, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[34]  D. Binkley,et al.  Nutritional interactions in mixed species forests: a synthesis , 2001 .

[35]  D. DeAngelis,et al.  Error Propagation in Spatially Explicit Population Models: a Reassessment , 1999 .

[36]  Jensen's inequality and optimal life history strategies in stochastic environments. , 2000, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[37]  Christian P. Giardina,et al.  Why do Tree Species Affect Soils? The Warp and Woof of Tree-soil Interactions , 1998 .

[38]  Richard Law,et al.  Spatio‐temporal development of forests – current trends in field methods and models , 2004 .

[39]  James S. Clark,et al.  STAGES AND SPATIAL SCALES OF RECRUITMENT LIMITATION IN SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN FORESTS , 1998 .

[40]  Scott R. Eliason Maximum likelihood estimation: Logic and practice. , 1994 .

[41]  Charles D. Canham,et al.  Interspecific variation in susceptibility to windthrow as a function of tree size and storm severity for northern temperate tree species , 2001 .

[42]  S. Hubbell,et al.  Spatial and temporal variation of biomass in a tropical forest: results from a large census plot in Panama , 2003 .

[43]  S. P. Neuman,et al.  Maximum likelihood Bayesian averaging of uncertain model predictions , 2003 .

[44]  Thomas M. Smith,et al.  Spatial applications of gap models , 1991 .

[45]  R. Birdsey,et al.  National-Scale Biomass Estimators for United States Tree Species , 2003, Forest Science.

[46]  S. Beissinger,et al.  WATER LEVELS AFFECT NEST SUCCESS OF THE SNAIL KITE IN FLORIDA: AIC AND THE OMISSION OF RELEVANT CANDIDATE MODELS , 2002 .

[47]  D. Greene,et al.  An evaluation of alternative dispersal functions for trees , 2004 .

[48]  B. Danielson,et al.  Spatially Explicit Population Models: Current Forms and Future Uses , 1995 .

[49]  N Thompson Hobbs,et al.  Alternatives to statistical hypothesis testing in ecology: a guide to self teaching. , 2006, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[50]  D. Greene,et al.  Estimating the Mean Annual Seed Production of Trees , 1994 .

[51]  S. Hubbell,et al.  A spatially explicit model of sapling growth in a tropical forest: does the identity of neighbours matter? , 2004 .

[52]  W. Post,et al.  Linkages — an individual-based forest ecosystem model , 1996 .

[53]  S. Sugita,et al.  A spatially explicit model of leaf litter fall in hemlock-hardwood forests , 1996 .

[54]  Charles D. Canham,et al.  Seed abundance versus substrate limitation of seedling recruitment in northern temperate forests of British Columbia , 2000 .

[55]  P. Jordano,et al.  Annual Variability in Seed Production by Woody Plants and the Masting Concept: Reassessment of Principles and Relationship to Pollination and Seed Dispersal , 1998, The American Naturalist.

[56]  David A. Wardle,et al.  Can comparative approaches based on plant ecophysiological traits predict the nature of biotic interactions and individual plant species effects in ecosystems? , 1998 .

[57]  O P Judson,et al.  The rise of the individual-based model in ecology. , 1994, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[58]  S. Pacala,et al.  Linking Tree Population Dynamics and Forest Ecosystem Processes , 1995 .

[59]  Ulf Dieckmann,et al.  The Geometry of Ecological Interactions: Simplifying Spatial Complexity , 2000 .

[60]  Jerald B. Johnson,et al.  Model selection in ecology and evolution. , 2004, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[61]  R. Royall Statistical Evidence: A Likelihood Paradigm , 1997 .

[62]  D. DeAngelis,et al.  Individual-Based Models and Approaches in Ecology , 1992 .

[63]  Z. Cardon,et al.  Decomposition dynamics in mixed‐species leaf litter , 2004 .

[64]  T. C. Chamberlin The Method of Multiple Working Hypotheses , 1931, The Journal of Geology.

[65]  Michel Loreau,et al.  Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: recent theoretical advances , 2000 .

[66]  R. Paine,et al.  Disturbance, patch formation, and community structure. , 1974, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.