Which randomizations detect convergence and divergence in trait-based community assembly? A test of commonly used null models

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F60076658%3A12310%2F16%3A43890832" target="_blank" >RIV/60076658:12310/16:43890832 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/60077344:_____/16:00471162 RIV/67985939:_____/16:00471162

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jvs.12452/epdf" target="_blank" >http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jvs.12452/epdf</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jvs.12452" target="_blank" >10.1111/jvs.12452</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Which randomizations detect convergence and divergence in trait-based community assembly? A test of commonly used null models

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Questions: Mechanisms of community assembly are increasingly explored by combining community and species trait data with null models. By investigating if the traits of co-existing species are more similar (trait convergence) or more dissimilar (trait divergence) than expected by chance, these tests relate observed patterns to different co-existence mechanisms. Do null models accurately detect trait convergence and divergence? Are different null models equally good at detecting these two opposing patterns? How important are the species pool and other constraints that are considered by different null models? Methods: We applied ten common randomizations to communities that were simulated in a process-based model. Results: Null models good at detecting biotic processes differed from those null models that revealed abiotic processes. In particular, limiting similarity (detected through divergence) was better detected by randomizations that release the link between species abundance and trait values, whereas environmental filtering (detected through convergence of an environmental response trait) was identified by randomizations that keep this link. In general, using species abundance data provided better results than using presence-absence data, particularly within given limited environmental conditions. Weaker competitor exclusion (detected through convergence of a competition-related trait) was only detected when no environmental filtering was acting on the simulated assembly, which points to difficulties in disentangling biotic and abiotic convergence in natural communities, especially when data are randomized across habitats. Conclusions: Overall the results manifest the importance of the pool of species over which randomizations are applied; in particular whether randomizations are conducted across or within given habitats.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Which randomizations detect convergence and divergence in trait-based community assembly? A test of commonly used null models

Popis výsledku anglicky

Questions: Mechanisms of community assembly are increasingly explored by combining community and species trait data with null models. By investigating if the traits of co-existing species are more similar (trait convergence) or more dissimilar (trait divergence) than expected by chance, these tests relate observed patterns to different co-existence mechanisms. Do null models accurately detect trait convergence and divergence? Are different null models equally good at detecting these two opposing patterns? How important are the species pool and other constraints that are considered by different null models? Methods: We applied ten common randomizations to communities that were simulated in a process-based model. Results: Null models good at detecting biotic processes differed from those null models that revealed abiotic processes. In particular, limiting similarity (detected through divergence) was better detected by randomizations that release the link between species abundance and trait values, whereas environmental filtering (detected through convergence of an environmental response trait) was identified by randomizations that keep this link. In general, using species abundance data provided better results than using presence-absence data, particularly within given limited environmental conditions. Weaker competitor exclusion (detected through convergence of a competition-related trait) was only detected when no environmental filtering was acting on the simulated assembly, which points to difficulties in disentangling biotic and abiotic convergence in natural communities, especially when data are randomized across habitats. Conclusions: Overall the results manifest the importance of the pool of species over which randomizations are applied; in particular whether randomizations are conducted across or within given habitats.

Druh

J_x - Nezařazeno - Článek v odborném periodiku (Jimp, Jsc a Jost)

CEP obor

EH - Ekologie – společenstva

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/GAP505%2F12%2F1296" target="_blank" >GAP505/12/1296: Funkční zásobník druhů: vysvětlení nerealizované diverzity a její funkce</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2016

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Journal of Vegetation Science

ISSN

1100-9233

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

27

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

6

Stát vydavatele periodika

US - Spojené státy americké

Počet stran výsledku

13

Strana od-do

1275-1287

Kód UT WoS článku

000389066400019

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—