| Literature DB >> 26508413 |
Zhiyong Yang1, Xueqi Liu1, Mohua Zhou1, Dexiecuo Ai1, Gang Wang1, Youshi Wang2, Chengjin Chu1,3, Jeremy T Lundholm4.
Abstract
Environmental heterogeneity is among the most important factors governing community structure. Besides the widespread evidence supporting positive relationships between richness and environmental heterogeneity, negative and unimodal relationships have also been reported. However, few studies have attempted to test the role of the heterogeneity on species richness after removing the confounding effect of resource availability or environmental severity. Here we constructed an individual-based spatially explicit model incorporating a long-recognized tradeoff between competitive ability and stress-tolerance ability of species. We explored the impact of the level of resource availability (i.e. the position of the community along a gradient of environmental severity) on the heterogeneity-diversity relationship (HDR). The results indicate that the shape of HDR depends on the community position along the environmental gradient: at either end of the gradient of environmental severity, a positive HDR occurred, whereas at the intermediate levels of the gradient, a unimodal HDR emerged. Our exploration demonstrates that resource availability/environmental severity should be considered as a potential factor influencing the shape of the HDR. Our theoretical predictions represent hypotheses in need of further empirical study.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26508413 PMCID: PMC4623746 DOI: 10.1038/srep15723
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Change of species richness along the environmental severity gradient.
Landscapes were homogeneous with the size of 100 × 100 cells. Each data point represents the mean ± SE (N = 10). The parameter values used in models are r = 1, r = 0.2, r = 0.1 and c = 1.
Figure 2Comparison of species richness-environmental heterogeneity relationships.
Environmental heterogeneity was represented by the standard deviation of S values across patches. The environmental severity () was 0.25 in (a), 0.75 in (b), 0.40 in (c), and 0.50 in (d). The whole landscape was divided into 400 patch types. Each data point represents the mean ± SE (N = 10).