PeerJ (Oct 2017)
Framework for community functioning: synthesis of stress gradient and resource partitioning concepts
Abstract
To understand how communities function and generate abundance, I develop a framework integrating elements from the stress gradient and resource partitioning concepts. The framework suggests that guild abundance depends on environmental and spatial factors but also on inter-guild interactions (competitor or facilitator richness), which can alter the fundamental niche of constituent species in negative (competition) or positive direction (facilitation). Consequently, the environmental and spatial mechanisms driving guild abundance would differ across guilds and interaction modes. Using continental data on stream diatoms and physico-chemistry, the roles of these mechanisms were tested under three interaction modes—shared preference, distinct preference, and facilitative, whereby pairs of guilds exhibited, respectively, a dominance-tolerance tradeoff along a eutrophication gradient, specialization along a pH gradient, or a donor-recipient relationship along a nitrogen gradient. Representative of the shared preference mode were the motile (dominant) and low profile (tolerant) guilds, of the distinct preference mode—the acidophilous and alkaliphilous (low profile) guilds, and of the facilitative mode—nitrogen fixers (donors) and motile species (recipients). In each mode, the influences of environment, space (latitude and longitude), and competitor or facilitator richness on guild density were assessed by variance partitioning. Pure environment constrained most strongly the density of the dominant, the acidophilous, and the recipient guild in the shared preference, distinct preference, and facilitative mode, respectively, while spatial effects were important only for the low profile guild. Higher competitor richness was associated with lower density of the tolerant guild in the shared preference mode, both guilds in the distinct preference mode, and the donor guild in the facilitative mode. Conversely, recipient density in the facilitative mode increased with donor richness in stressful nitrogen-poor environments. Thus, diatom guild abundance patterns were determined primarily by biotic and/or environmental impacts and, with the exception of the low profile guild, were insensitive to spatial effects. This framework identifies major sources of variability in diatom guild abundance with implications for the understanding of biodiversity-ecosystem functioning.
Keywords
