| Literature DB >> 26180636 |
Eric A Treml1, John R Ford1, Kerry P Black1, Stephen E Swearer1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Population connectivity, which is essential for the persistence of benthic marine metapopulations, depends on how life history traits and the environment interact to influence larval production, dispersal and survival. Although we have made significant advances in our understanding of the spatial and temporal dynamics of these individual processes, developing an approach that integrates the entire population connectivity process from reproduction, through dispersal, and to the recruitment of individuals has been difficult. We present a population connectivity modelling framework and diagnostic approach for quantifying the impact of i) life histories, ii) demographics, iii) larval dispersal, and iv) the physical seascape, on the structure of connectivity and metapopulation dynamics. We illustrate this approach using the subtidal rocky reef ecosystem of Port Phillip Bay, were we provide a broadly-applicable framework of population connectivity and quantitative methodology for evaluating the relative importance of individual factors in determining local and system outcomes.Entities:
Keywords: Dispersal; Life history; Local retention; Self-recruitment; Sensitivity analysis
Year: 2015 PMID: 26180636 PMCID: PMC4502943 DOI: 10.1186/s40462-015-0045-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mov Ecol ISSN: 2051-3933 Impact factor: 3.600
Fig. 1Conceptual framework of the processes and drivers of population connectivity. Population connectivity refers to the exchange of individuals resulting from their biophysical dispersal, retention, and post-settlement survival. This 4-stage process may impact local patch demographics, metapopulation dynamics, and gene flow, and is spatially and temporally context dependent. Drivers highlighted with (*) are included in the modelling example of Port Phillip Bay
Fig. 2Study area of Port Phillip Bay, Victoria, Australia, used in the case study. Rocky reefs are highlighted in red, with the eight patches used in the analysis labelled. Map in a Mercator projection
Model input parameters of interest used in the sensitivity analysis for the Port Phillip Bay marine population connectivity model
| Parameter | Description | Value range |
|---|---|---|
| RO | Reproductive output (larvae) per unit area | [100, 10,000] |
| A | Daily larval mortality (Weibull rate parameter) | [0.01, 0.50] |
| B | Daily larval mortality (Weibull shape parameter) | [0.50, 1.0] |
| PreP | Proportion of maxPLD required for competency | [0.05, 0.95] |
| ComR | Rate of transition to being competent for settlement | [0.05, 0.50] |
| DevP | Initial relative developmental time as passive w/initFV | [0.05, 0.95] |
| iFV | Fall velocity during DevT (ms−1, positive up) | [−0.001, 0.001] |
| K | Diffusivity, or the biological-physical repulsion among larvae (m2s−1) | [0.01, 1.00] |
| Behav | Vertical behaviour strategy: Passive, Benthic-seeking (1), or Diel migration (2). | [0, 1, 2] |
| Sp | Behaviour parameter: Swimming capacity Vertical swim speed is scaled at 5 % of this. (ms−1) | [0.001, 0.100] |
| TD | Behaviour parameter: Target depth (m) | [0.5, 20.0] |
| HmD | Behaviour parameter: Habitat detect distance (km) | [0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10] |
| PLD | Maximum duration of larval stage (days) | [1, 50] |
| Sr | Post-settlement survival prior to recruitment | [0, 1] |
| rf | Unique reefs within PPB system (ID) | [3, 10, 12, 16, 18, 23, 26, 32] |
| rls | Date of larval release | [July1 2009, October 1 2009, & January 1 2010] |
Intrinsic parameter value ranges were chosen to be as broad as possible, but still biologically realistic, in order to capture most of potential variability in early life histories among benthic marine organisms. Reefs and larval release dates were chosen to capture the full range of geographical and temporal variability in local oceanography
Model output variables and descriptions used in the sensitivity analysis
| Variable | Description |
|---|---|
| Per reef patch | |
| I. Local settlement | |
| LRa | Local retention |
| SR | Self-recruitment (with eight-patch metapopulation) |
| H’ | Shannon index of diversity of settlers (sensitive to weak connections) |
| II. Downstream connectivity | |
| mdGa | Median geographic distance of downstream connections |
| mxG | Maximum distance of downstream connections |
| S | Total proportion of larvae that settle downstream |
| dC | Out-degree, total number of downstream connections |
| Cw a | Weighted degree centrality as dC(1-α) x Sα; dp is d as proportion of total possible connections; α = 0.5 |
| III. Metapopulation consequences | |
| λM a | Metapopulation growth rate with variable population sizes, fecundity, & survival [6] |
| λmax | Metapopulation capacity [5] |
Selected parameters (marked with a) are presented in the Figures, with the remaining in the Additional file 1. The intrinsic and extrinsic drivers of larval dispersal Fig. 1, (Table 1) can influence population connectivity at three different scales. At a local scale, the magnitude of local settlement will depend on: (1) what proportion of locally spawned larvae are retained and settle to their natal reef (local retention); (2) what proportion of settling larva were spawned locally (self-recruitment); and (3) whether dispersing larvae come from a diversity of sources (Shannon H’). At a regional scale, how strongly connected populations are by larval dispersal will depend on: the distribution of dispersal distances (mdG and mxG), what proportion of spawned larvae survive to settle to another reef (S), how many downstream reefs receive these larvae (dC) and whether the strengths of these connections are even or skewed (Cw). At a metapopulation scale, connectivity patterns have important consequences for rates of replenishment (i.e., growth) across all patches (λM) and the ability of a species to persist in the landscape/seascape (λmax)
Fig. 3Model sensitivity for local retention (LR). Two-panel plot of the influence of model parameters (y-axis) on local retention. The regression tree GSA relative influence (left) and generalized linear regression beta coefficients (right) are plotted for all reefs (individual horizontal bars spread vertically in each parameter’s row) and release times (unique colours within each reef’s horizontal bar). Parameter means are shown as grey vertical bars
Fig. 4Model sensitivity for median geographic distance (mdG). Two-panel plot of the influence of model parameters (y-axis) on median geographic distance. The regression tree GSA relative influence (left) and generalized linear regression beta coefficients (right) are plotted for all reefs (individual horizontal bars spread vertically in each parameter’s row) and release times (unique colours within each reef’s horizontal bar). Parameter means are shown as grey vertical bars
Fig. 5Model sensitivity for downstream degree centrality (Cw). Two-panel plot of the influence of model parameters (y-axis) on downstream degree centrality. The regression tree GSA relative influence (left) and generalized linear regression beta coefficients (right) are plotted for all reefs (individual horizontal bars spread vertically in each parameter’s row) and release times (unique colours within each reef’s horizontal bar). Parameter means are shown as grey vertical bars
Fig. 6Model sensitivity for metapopulation growth rate (λM). Two-panel plot of the influence of model parameters (y-axis) on metapopulation growth rate. The regression tree GSA relative influence (left) and generalized linear regression beta coefficients (right) are plotted for all reefs (individual horizontal bars spread vertically in each parameter’s row) and release times (unique colours within each reef’s horizontal bar). Parameter means are shown as grey vertical bars
Mean importance values for each model input parameter across all ensembles (values plotted as grey vertical bars in Fig. 3)
| Parameter | LR* | SR | H | mdG* | mxG | S | dC | Cw* | λM * | λmax | Mean |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 | 0.66 | 0.80 | 0.84 | 0.86 | 0.89 | 0.88 | 0.88 | 0.89 | 0.79 | 0.81 | 0.83 |
| RO | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.18 | 0.03 | 0.38 | 0.00 | 0.07 |
| A |
| 0.05 | 0.20 | 0.01 | 0.05 |
|
|
|
|
| 0.37 |
| B | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.09 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.01 |
| 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.04 |
| PreP |
|
|
|
| 0.07 |
|
|
|
|
| 0.28 |
| ComR | 0.09 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.04 | 0.07 | 0.03 |
| DevP | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.07 | 0.15 | 0.06 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.04 |
| iFV |
|
|
|
|
| 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.14 |
| K | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.02 |
| Sp |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.04 |
| 0.09 | 0.19 |
| TD | 0.05 | 0.10 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.04 |
| HmD | 0.03 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.07 |
| 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.06 |
| PLD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.41 |
Importance values greater than 10 % are bolded. The mean R2 values from the regression tree analysis are reported per response variable in the first row. Selected parameters (marked with *) are presented in the Figures