Svensson J Robin, Lindegarth Mats, Pavia Henrik
Department of Marine Ecology-Tjärnö, University of Gothenburg, 452 96 Strömstad, Sweden.
Ecology. 2009 Feb;90(2):496-505. doi: 10.1890/07-1628.1.
Empirical evidence suggests that disturbance has profound effects on the species diversity of aquatic and terrestrial assemblages. Conceptual ecological theories, such as the intermediate disturbance hypothesis (IDH), predict maximum diversity at intermediate levels of disturbance. Tests of the predictive power and generality of these models are, however, hampered by the fact that the meaning and units of "disturbance" are not clearly defined. For example, it is seldom recognized that the rate of disturbance is the product of both frequency and extent (e.g., area or volume) of disturbance events. This has important consequences for the design and interpretation of experiments on disturbance. Here we present, for the first time, an experimental design that allows for unconfounded testing of combinations of area and frequency (i.e., regimes) for a given rate of disturbance. We tested the prediction that species richness responds differently to equal rates of disturbance, depending on the specific combination of frequency and area, on marine hard-substratum assemblages. Five different rates of disturbance and two regimes (small frequent or large infrequent disturbances) were applied at three sites. The results showed that the effect of a certain rate of disturbance (1) varies strongly among assemblages and (2) also depends on the specific combination of frequency and area of disturbance events. Maximum species richness was observed at intermediate rates of disturbance at site 1 (i.e., support for the IDH), whereas there was a monotonic decline at site 2 and there was no evident pattern at site 3. The variable responses among sites were explained by differences in degree of competitive exclusion and rates of recruitment. At the site where the IDH was supported, the regime with a large proportion of the area disturbed infrequently showed higher richness, compared to the regime with a small proportion disturbed frequently. This was likely due to a stronger decrease of dominants, which allowed for the recruitment of new colonizing species. In summary, we conclude that tests and general syntheses of models of disturbance-diversity patterns would benefit from more explicit definitions of the components of disturbance, as well as a stronger focus on the importance of variation in inherent properties of natural assemblages.
实证证据表明,干扰对水生和陆地生物群落的物种多样性具有深远影响。概念性生态理论,如中度干扰假说(IDH),预测在中等干扰水平下物种多样性最高。然而,这些模型的预测能力和普遍性的检验受到“干扰”的含义和单位未明确界定这一事实的阻碍。例如,很少有人认识到干扰速率是干扰事件的频率和程度(如面积或体积)的乘积。这对干扰实验的设计和解释具有重要影响。在此,我们首次提出一种实验设计,该设计允许在给定干扰速率下对面积和频率(即模式)的组合进行无混淆测试。我们在海洋硬底质生物群落上测试了这样一个预测:物种丰富度对相同干扰速率的反应因频率和面积的具体组合而异。在三个地点应用了五种不同的干扰速率和两种模式(小频率或大频率干扰)。结果表明,一定干扰速率的影响(1)在不同生物群落之间差异很大,(2)还取决于干扰事件的频率和面积的具体组合。在地点1,在中等干扰速率下观察到最大物种丰富度(即支持IDH),而在地点2物种丰富度呈单调下降,在地点3则没有明显模式。各地点之间的不同反应是由竞争排斥程度和补充率的差异所解释的。在支持IDH的地点,与频繁干扰小面积的模式相比,不频繁干扰大面积的模式显示出更高的丰富度。这可能是由于优势种的更强减少,从而允许新的定居物种的补充。总之,我们得出结论,干扰 - 多样性模式模型的检验和综合将受益于对干扰成分更明确的定义,以及更加强调自然生物群落固有属性变化的重要性。