| Literature DB >> 30801010 |
A L Hargreaves1,2, Esteban Suárez3, Klaus Mehltreter4, Isla Myers-Smith5, Sula E Vanderplank6,7, Heather L Slinn8, Yalma L Vargas-Rodriguez9, Sybille Haeussler10, Santiago David2, Jenny Muñoz2, R Carlos Almazán-Núñez11, Deirdre Loughnan2, John W Benning12, David A Moeller12, Jedediah F Brodie13, Haydn J D Thomas5, P A Morales M14.
Abstract
Species interactions have long been predicted to increase in intensity toward the tropics and low elevations because of gradients in climate, productivity, or biodiversity. Despite their importance for understanding global ecological and evolutionary processes, plant-animal interaction gradients are particularly difficult to test systematically across large geographic gradients, and evidence from smaller, disparate studies is inconclusive. By systematically measuring postdispersal seed predation using 6995 standardized seed depots along 18 mountains in the Pacific cordillera, we found that seed predation increases by 17% from the Arctic to the Equator and by 17% from 4000 meters above sea level to sea level. Clines in total predation, likely driven by invertebrates, were consistent across treeline ecotones and within continuous forest and were better explained by climate seasonality than by productivity, biodiversity, or latitude. These results suggest that species interactions play predictably greater ecological and evolutionary roles in tropical, lowland, and other less seasonal ecosystems.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30801010 PMCID: PMC6382403 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aau4403
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Adv ISSN: 2375-2548 Impact factor: 14.136
Fig. 1Photos illustrating depot setup at field sites.
Depots were not overly visible from >1 m away (A; arrow), as care was taken not to disturb litter and vegetation around depots (B). Invertebrate seed predation was assessed by excluding vertebrates from some sunflower seed depots using wire mesh cages (C). Photos are from 49°N in Canada at 880 meters above sea level (masl) (A) and 80 masl (B) and from 5°N in Colombia at 2120 masl (C). Photo credits: (A and B) A. Hargreaves, McGill University, and (C) S. David, University of British Colombia.
Fig. 2Latitudinal and elevational declines in seed predation.
(A) Sampling transects from the Arctic to the Equator; the Tropic of Cancer (23.5°N) divides the temperate versus tropical zones. Circle area is proportional to the mean times the experiment was run at each site on the transect (1 to 6), and pie slices show the proportion of sites per biome: above upper treeline, forest, and below lower treeline. Seed predation differed among latitudinal zones (B; model 1) and biomes (C; model 4); different letters indicate significant differences; and dots, boxes, and whiskers show the means, 1 SE, and 95% confidence interval (CI), respectively, extracted from generalized linear mixed-effects models (GLMMs). (D to G) Continuous geographic trends in seed predation (±95% CIs) fitted by GLMMs. Elevational trends (D and F) are shown for the median latitude (31°N, black), median tropical latitude (10.5°N, red), and median temperate latitude (47.7°N, blue; models 2 and 3). Dashed trend lines show model extrapolations for temperate sites above 2500 masl. Latitudinal trends (E and G) are shown for the median elevation (1500 m) across biomes (black; models 2 and 3, respectively) and in forests specifically (green; model 5). Points are partial residuals for the all-site model (black) in each panel. (B to E) Total seed predation (56 experimental runs across 79 sites). (F and G) Seed predation by invertebrates only (25 experimental runs across 60 sites). Note that the steeper slopes in (F) and (G) compared to (D) and (E) are due to the different sites and dates included; among sites and dates where vertebrates were experimentally excluded, total and invertebrate predation showed the same geographic patterns (Fig. 3). Results are shown for sunflower seeds: Geographic patterns did not differ for oat seeds (fig. S3). Statistical results are shown in Table 1.
Fig. 3Excluding vertebrate granivores reduced seed predation but did not change geographic patterns.
The figure compares invertebrate seed predation (light gray) and total seed predation (dark gray) from sites and dates that included the vertebrate exclusion treatment (25 experimental runs across 60 sites). The latitudinal trend in invertebrate seed predation is as strong as the trend in total seed predation (trends shown for the median site elevation ±95% CI; note that invertebrate predation is as shown in Fig. 2G), although vertebrate exclusion reduced seed predation overall (right); different letters indicate significant differences; and center line, boxes, and whiskers show the means, 1 SE, and 95% CI, respectively. Data were extracted from GLMM model 3 (Table 1).
Results from GLMMs analyzing latitudinal and elevational patterns in seed predation.
Models are described in the text. Model 4 (effect of biome) and model 5 (forests only) were run twice, first on total predation (uncaged depots only) and then on invertebrate predation (caged depots only). Initial models (gray rows) included all possible interactions (indicated by “×”), but nonsignificant interactions were dropped from final models (white rows), improving model convergence. Significance of factors and interactions was obtained from testing the final model against a model without that factor or interaction. Effect sizes are given for noninteracting effects in the final model; for categorical variables, these are categorical latitude = temperate versus tropical, seed type = sunflower versus oat, cage treatment = uncaged (total predation) versus caged (invertebrate predation), and biome = below trees versus above trees (top) and within forest versus above trees (bottom).
| 1—Total, All | Initial: | |||||||
| Final: categorLat | 20.6(1)*** | 8.0(1)** | 50.5*** | 1.6, | — | 1500(464) | 0.053 | |
| 2—Total, All | Initial: lat × elev | |||||||
| Final: lat + elev | 17.5(1)*** | 7.0(1)** | 55.2*** | 2.6, | — | 1501(464) | 0.058 | |
| 3—Tot vs. Invert‡, | Initial: lat × elev | Cage treat: | ||||||
| Final: lat × elev | 39.0(2)*** | 21.8(2)*** | — | 7.5 ** | 13.7(1)*** | 704(195) | 0.083 | |
| 4t—Total, All | Initial: lat × elev | Biome: | ||||||
| Final: lat + elev | 6.4(1)* | 2.6(1) | 54.7*** | 2.6, | 8.0(2)* | 1493(462) | 0.057 | |
| 4i—Invert‡, All | Initial: lat × elev | Biome: | ||||||
| Final: lat + elev | 10.0(1)** | 6.3(1)* | — | 2.2, | 8.1(2)* | 350(94) | 0.123 | |
| 5 t—Total, Forest | Initial: lat × elev | |||||||
| Final: lat × elev + seed.sp | 8.6(2)* | 8.0(2)* | 45.6*** | 4.3* | — | 1177(361) | 0.039 | |
| 5i—Invert‡, Forest | Initial: lat × elev | |||||||
| Final: lat + elev | 10.9(1)*** | 5.4(1)* | — | 3.7, | — | 253(65) | 0.036 | |
*P < 0.05.
**P < 0.01.
***P < 0.001.
†Pseudo conditional R2 (variance explained by both fixed and random effects) for GLMMs with link-specific theoretical variances, calculated via the r.squaredGLMM function in the R MuMIn package () according to ().
‡Sunflower seeds only, including only sites and dates that included the vertebrate exclusion treatment.
Explanatory power of top SEMs.
Summary of top SEMs explaining predation intensity for each seed × predator type (from table S2). Data were arcsin-transformed and standardized to means = 0 and SD = 1 before analyses; hence, estimates are for relative comparison only. Full ranking of all 15 SEMs is shown in table S2.
| Total | 13: Annual | −0.63 (−0.81, −0.44)**** | 0.366 |
| Total | 13: Annual | −0.32 (−0.54, −0.10)** | 0.095 |
| 15: Latitude | −0.21 (−0.44, 0.02)* | 0.042 | |
| Invert | 15: Latitude | −0.68 (−0.90, −0.46)**** | 0.39 |
*P < 0.05.
**P < 0.01.
****P < 0.0001.