Literature DB >> 26054613

Spatial asymmetries in connectivity influence colonization-extinction dynamics.

Miguel A Acevedo1,2, Robert J Fletcher3, Raymond L Tremblay4,5, Elvia J Meléndez-Ackerman6,5.   

Abstract

Movement has broad implications for many areas of biology, including evolution, community and population ecology. Movement is crucial in metapopulation ecology because it facilitates colonization and reduces the likelihood of local extinction via rescue effects. Most metapopulation modeling approaches describe connectivity using pair-wise Euclidean distances resulting in the simplifying assumption of a symmetric connectivity pattern. Yet, assuming symmetric connectivity when populations show net asymmetric movement patterns may result in biased estimates of colonization and extinction, and may alter interpretations of the dynamics and conclusions regarding the viability of metapopulations. Here, we use a 10-year time series on a wind-dispersed orchid Lepanthes rupestris that anchors its roots in patches of moss growing on trees or boulders along streams, to test for the role of connectivity asymmetries in explaining the colonization-extinction dynamics of this orchid in a network of 975 patches. We expected that wind direction could highly alter dispersal direction in this orchid. To account for this potential asymmetry, we modified the connectivity measure traditionally used in metapopulation models to allow for asymmetric effective distances between patches and subsequently estimated colonization and extinction probabilities using a dynamic occupancy modeling approach. Asymmetric movement was prevalent in the L. rupestris metapopulation and incorporating potential dispersal asymmetries resulted in higher colonization estimates in larger patches and more accurate models. Accounting for dispersal asymmetries may reveal connectivity effects where they were previously assumed to be negligible and may provide more reliable conclusions regarding the role of connectivity in patch dynamics.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Asymmetric dispersal; Lepanthes; Metapopulation; Movement; Target effects

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26054613     DOI: 10.1007/s00442-015-3361-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oecologia        ISSN: 0029-8549            Impact factor:   3.225


  14 in total

1.  Limitations on orchid recruitment: not a simple picture.

Authors:  Melissa K McCormick; D Lee Taylor; Katarina Juhaszova; Robert K Burnett; Dennis F Whigham; John P O'Neill
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2012-01-24       Impact factor: 6.185

2.  Effects of colonization asymmetries on metapopulation persistence.

Authors:  Séverine Vuilleumier; Benjamin M Bolker; Olivier Lévêque
Journal:  Theor Popul Biol       Date:  2010-07-06       Impact factor: 1.570

3.  Does colonization asymmetry matter in metapopulations?

Authors:  Séverine Vuilleumier; Hugh P Possingham
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2006-07-07       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Testing simple indices of habitat proximity.

Authors:  Rachael Winfree; Jonathan Dushoff; Elizabeth E Crone; Cheryl B Schultz; Robert V Budny; Neal M Williams; Claire Kremen
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2005-03-30       Impact factor: 3.926

5.  A large-scale deforestation experiment: effects of patch area and isolation on Amazon birds.

Authors:  Gonçalo Ferraz; James D Nichols; James E Hines; Philip C Stouffer; Richard O Bierregaard; Thomas E Lovejoy
Journal:  Science       Date:  2007-01-12       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Evolutionary consequences of asymmetric dispersal rates.

Authors:  Tadeusz J Kawecki; Robert D Holt
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.926

7.  Effects of asymmetric dispersal on the coexistence of competing species.

Authors:  Yacov Salomon; Sean R Connolly; Lance Bode
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2010-01-21       Impact factor: 9.492

8.  On the impact of dispersal asymmetry on metapopulation persistence.

Authors:  David Kleinhans; Per R Jonsson
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  2011-09-10       Impact factor: 2.691

9.  Do all inter-patch movements represent dispersal? A mixed kernel study of butterfly mobility in fragmented landscapes.

Authors:  Thomas Hovestadt; Birgit Binzenhöfer; Piotr Nowicki; Josef Settele
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2011-05-18       Impact factor: 5.091

10.  Anthropogenic landscape change promotes asymmetric dispersal and limits regional patch occupancy in a spatially structured bird population.

Authors:  David C Pavlacky; Hugh P Possingham; Andrew J Lowe; Peter J Prentis; David J Green; Anne W Goldizen
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2012-04-10       Impact factor: 5.091

View more
  1 in total

1.  Tumors Are Evolutionary Island-Like Ecosystems.

Authors:  Antonia Chroni; Sudhir Kumar
Journal:  Genome Biol Evol       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 3.416

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.