Species partitioning in a temperate mountain chain: Segregation by habitat vs. interspecific competition.
Species partitioning in a temperate mountain chain: Segregation by habitat vs. interspecific competition.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/ece3.2883
复制
发表时间：
2017-04
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Laiolo P
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bastianelli G;Wintle BA;Martin EH;Seoane J;Laiolo P
在确定物种共存模式时，解开环境和生物相互作用的相对影响是生态学的一个主要挑战。沿着海拔梯度或在生物气候接触带发生的分区为提高这种理解提供了一个很好的机会，因为分区发生的小尺度有利于基于实验和生态模型的推理。本文研究了非生物梯度、生境类型和种间竞争对西班牙西北部两种栖木和两种猎木间空间转换的影响。我们探索了两条独立的证据线，以推断环境和生物相互作用在驱动范围沿海拔，纬度和经度划分中的相对重要性。我们将发生数据与环境数据相结合，建立了联合物种分布模型（JSDM），以将共发生（或排斥）归因于共同（或不同）的环境反应和相互作用（吸引或排斥）。在同一区域，我们通过接触区回放实验来测试干扰竞争。尽管我们在回放实验中没有发现种间攻击性的直接证据，但JSDMs强调了两种物种对的不同反应。在pipit中，分区可以用不同的气候和生境要求来解释，也可以用物种之间的负相关来解释，而环境不能解释这种负相关。尽管我们不能完全排除未测量的环境预测因素的影响，但这种显著的剩余相关性可能反映了竞争形式而不是直接干扰。当狩猎物种共同发生时，这是由于共同的栖息地偏好，而可能的分散限制可能导致它们的分裂。我们的研究结果表明，没有单一的机制在驱动我们研究物种的分布中占主导地位，而是由许多小力量的组合决定，包括生态位的生物和非生物决定因素，其相对强度因物种而异。
Disentangling the relative influence of the environment and biotic interactions in determining species coexistence patterns is a major challenge in ecology. The zonation occurring along elevation gradients, or at bioclimatic contact zones, offers a good opportunity to improve such understanding because the small scale at which the partitioning occurs facilitates inference based on experiments and ecological modelling. We studied the influence of abiotic gradients, habitat types, and interspecific competition in determining the spatial turnover between two pipit and two bunting species in NW Spain. We explored two independent lines of evidence to draw inference about the relative importance of environment and biotic interactions in driving range partitioning along elevation, latitude, and longitude. We combined occurrence data with environmental data to develop joint species distribution models (JSDM), in order to attribute co‐occurrence (or exclusion) to shared (or divergent) environmental responses and to interactions (attraction or exclusion). In the same region, we tested for interference competition by means of playback experiments in the contact zone. The JSDMs highlighted different responses for the two species pairs, although we did not find direct evidence of interspecific aggressiveness in our playback experiments. In pipits, partitioning was explained by divergent climate and habitat requirements and also by the negative correlations between species not explained by the environment. This significant residual correlation may reflect forms of competition others than direct interference, although we could not completely exclude the influence of unmeasured environmental predictors. When bunting species co‐occurred, it was because of shared habitat preferences, and a possible limitation to dispersal might cause their partitioning. Our results indicate that no single mechanism dominates in driving the distribution of our study species, but rather distributions are determined by the combination of many small forces including biotic and abiotic determinants of niche, whose relative strengths varied among species.