Münkemüller Tamara, Gallien Laure, Lavergne Sébastien, Renaud Julien, Roquet Cristina, Abdulhak Sylvain, Dullinger Stefan, Garraud Luc, Guisan Antoine, Lenoir Jonathan, Svenning Jens-Christian, Van Es Jérémie, Vittoz Pascal, Willner Wolfgang, Wohlgemuth Thomas, Zimmermann Niklaus E, Thuiller Wilfried
Laboratoire d'Ecologie Alpine, UMR CNRS 5553, University Joseph Fourier, Grenoble 1, BP 53, 38041 Grenoble Cedex 9, France.
Domaine de Charance, Conservatoire Botanique National Alpin, Gap, 05000, France.
Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2014 Jun 1;23(6):620-632. doi: 10.1111/geb.12137.
Phylogenetic diversity patterns are increasingly being used to better understand the role of ecological and evolutionary processes in community assembly. Here, we quantify how these patterns are influenced by scale choices in terms of spatial and environmental extent and organismic scales.
European Alps.
We applied 42 sampling strategies differing in their combination of focal scales. For each resulting sub-dataset, we estimated the phylogenetic diversity of the species pools, phylogenetic α-diversities of local communities, and statistics commonly used together with null models in order to infer non-random diversity patterns (i.e. phylogenetic clustering versus over-dispersion). Finally, we studied the effects of scale choices on these measures using regression analyses.
Scale choices were decisive for revealing signals in diversity patterns. Notably, changes in focal scales sometimes reversed a pattern of over-dispersion into clustering. Organismic scale had a stronger effect than spatial and environmental extent. However, we did not find general rules for the direction of change from over-dispersion to clustering with changing scales. Importantly, these scale issues had only a weak influence when focusing on regional diversity patterns that change along abiotic gradients.
Our results call for caution when combining phylogenetic data with distributional data to study how and why communities differ from random expectations of phylogenetic relatedness. These analyses seem to be robust when the focus is on relating community diversity patterns to variation in habitat conditions, such as abiotic gradients. However, if the focus is on identifying relevant assembly rules for local communities, the uncertainty arising from a certain scale choice can be immense. In the latter case, it becomes necessary to test whether emerging patterns are robust to alternative scale choices.
系统发育多样性模式正越来越多地被用于更好地理解生态和进化过程在群落组装中的作用。在此,我们量化这些模式如何受到空间和环境范围以及生物体尺度方面的尺度选择的影响。
欧洲阿尔卑斯山。
我们应用了42种在焦点尺度组合上不同的采样策略。对于每个得到的子数据集,我们估计了物种库的系统发育多样性、当地群落的系统发育α多样性,以及通常与零模型一起使用的统计量,以便推断非随机多样性模式(即系统发育聚类与过度分散)。最后,我们使用回归分析研究了尺度选择对这些度量的影响。
尺度选择对于揭示多样性模式中的信号具有决定性作用。值得注意的是,焦点尺度的变化有时会将过度分散模式转变为聚类模式。生物体尺度比空间和环境范围具有更强的影响。然而,我们没有找到随着尺度变化从过度分散到聚类的变化方向的一般规则。重要的是,当关注沿非生物梯度变化的区域多样性模式时,这些尺度问题影响较弱。
我们的结果表明,在将系统发育数据与分布数据相结合以研究群落如何以及为何不同于系统发育相关性的随机预期时需要谨慎。当重点是将群落多样性模式与栖息地条件的变化(如非生物梯度)联系起来时,这些分析似乎是稳健的。然而,如果重点是确定当地群落的相关组装规则,特定尺度选择产生的不确定性可能非常大。在后一种情况下,有必要测试出现的模式对替代尺度选择是否稳健。