Suppr超能文献

重访克莱门茨和格里森:皮克斯峰植物分布的启示,这是克莱门茨毕生的研究地点。

Revisiting Clements and Gleason: Insights from Plant Distributions on Pikes Peak, Clements's Life-Long Study Site.

出版信息

Am Nat. 2024 Dec;204(6):533-545. doi: 10.1086/732808. Epub 2024 Oct 14.

Abstract

AbstractHow do species' distributions respond to their environments? This question was at the heart of the Clements-Gleason controversy, ecology's most famous debate. Do species respond to the environment in concerted ways, leading to distinct and cohesive assemblages (the Clementsian paradigm), or do species respond to the environment independently (the Gleasonian paradigm)? Using plant occurrences along the elevation gradient of Pikes Peak (Colorado) as a lens through which to gain insight into Clements's perspectives on the debate, we formally test for community patterns along this gradient using a modern framework unavailable at the time of Clements and Gleason. The Pikes Peak region was Clements's study area for more than 40 years, where he established a research lab and distributed sites along the elevational gradient. His investigations of plant distributions on this mountain likely influenced his views on communities. We found mixed support for the paradigms, with neither the Gleasonian paradigm nor the Clementsian paradigm fully supported. While distributions along the gradient showed evidence of clustering of species range edges, considered to be consistent with the Clementsian paradigm, the pattern was weak, and neither range edges nor species turnover peaked at ecotone elevations, as expected under the Clementsian paradigm. Our results illuminate the Clements-Gleason debate by allowing us to probe issues that complicate conclusively testing the paradigms, such as deciding on how we quantify environmental gradients and determining the appropriate scales for community patterns and processes that might generate them. Revisiting the debate also revealed that Clements's and Gleason's views had more in common than we realize. The debate may be less neatly resolved than we assume from mythos, and it continues to have relevance to basic and applied ecology today, as its legacy has shaped our (still tenuous) notion of ecological communities and the trajectory of our field.

摘要

摘要物种的分布如何响应其环境?这个问题是生态学界最著名的争论——克莱门茨-格莱森之争的核心。物种是否以协调一致的方式对环境做出反应,导致独特而凝聚的组合(克莱门茨范式),还是物种独立地对环境做出反应(格莱森范式)?我们以派克峰(科罗拉多州)海拔梯度上的植物出现为视角,深入了解克莱门茨对这场争论的看法,并用现代框架来检验该梯度上的群落模式,而这一框架在克莱门茨和格莱森的时代是不可用的。派克峰地区是克莱门茨超过 40 年的研究区域,他在那里建立了一个研究实验室,并沿着海拔梯度分布了站点。他对这座山上植物分布的研究很可能影响了他对群落的看法。我们发现,这两种范式都得到了一定程度的支持,既没有完全支持格莱森范式,也没有完全支持克莱门茨范式。虽然沿梯度的分布显示出物种分布范围边缘聚类的证据,这被认为与克莱门茨范式一致,但这种模式很弱,而且范围边缘和物种更替都没有在生态交错带的海拔处达到峰值,这与克莱门茨范式的预期不符。我们的结果通过允许我们探究使范式的结论性测试复杂化的问题,如决定如何量化环境梯度以及确定可能产生这些梯度的群落模式和过程的适当尺度,从而阐明了克莱门茨-格莱森之争。重新审视这场争论还揭示了克莱门茨和格莱森的观点比我们意识到的更有共同之处。这场争论可能没有我们从神话中假设的那样简单,它今天仍然与基础和应用生态学相关,因为它的遗产塑造了我们(仍然脆弱)对生态群落的概念和我们领域的发展轨迹。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验