title: Ecological processes can synchronize marine population dynamics over continental scales.
abstract: Determining the relative importance of local and regional processes for the distribution of population abundance is a fundamental but contentious issue in ecology. In marine systems, classical theory holds that the influence of demographic processes and dispersal is confined to local populations whereas the environment controls regional patterns of abundance. Here, we use spatial synchrony to compare the distribution of population abundance of the dominant mussel Mytilus californianus observed along the West Coast of the United States to that predicted by dynamical models undergoing different dispersal and environmental treatments to infer the relative influence of local and regional processes. We reveal synchronized fluctuations in the abundance of mussel populations across a whole continent despite limited larval dispersal and strong environmental forcing. We show that dispersal among neighboring populations interacts with local demographic processes to generate characteristic patterns of spatial synchrony that can govern the dynamic distribution of mussel abundance over 1,800 km of coastline. Our study emphasizes the importance of dispersal and local dynamics for the distribution of abundance at the continental scale. It further highlights potential limits to the use of "climate envelope" models for predicting the response of large-scale ecosystems to global climate change.
authors.affiliation: Department of Zoology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA. tarik.gouhier@gmail.com
authors.forename: Tarik C
authors.initials: TC
authors.lastname: Gouhier
authors.forename: Frédéric
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Guichard
authors.forename: Bruce A
authors.initials: BA
authors.lastname: Menge
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D017753:Ecosystem; D049878:Mytilus / Q000502:physiology*; D011157:Population Dynamics; D013997:Time Factors
references.citation: Nature. 1998 Feb 19;391(6669):783-6
references.pmid: 9486646
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2005 Aug 7;272(1572):1571-6
references.pmid: 16048772
references.citation: Science. 2006 Apr 21;312(5772):447-51
references.pmid: 16574822
references.citation: Nature. 2002 Nov 14;420(6912):168-71
references.pmid: 12432390
references.citation: Am Nat. 1998 Apr;151(4):311-26
references.pmid: 18811323
references.citation: Science. 2007 Feb 2;315(5812):640-2
references.pmid: 17272720
references.citation: Science. 2002 Nov 1;298(5595):1020-3
references.pmid: 12411704
references.citation: Nature. 2008 Dec 11;456(7223):792-4
references.pmid: 18931656
references.citation: Nature. 2009 Aug 20;460(7258):1007-10
references.pmid: 19626006
references.citation: Bull Math Biol. 1999 Jul;61(4):625-49
references.pmid: 17883218
references.citation: Am Nat. 2003 Jun;161(6):889-904
references.pmid: 12858274
references.citation: Science. 2008 Oct 31;322(5902):739-42
references.pmid: 18974353
references.citation: Science. 1994 Feb 25;263(5150):1133-6
references.pmid: 17831627
references.citation: J Theor Biol. 2008 Jan 7;250(1):113-24
references.pmid: 17963785
references.citation: Nature. 2001 Jul 26;412(6845):436-8
references.pmid: 11473317
references.citation: Trends Ecol Evol. 1999 Jan;14(1):22-26
references.pmid: 10234243
references.citation: Theor Popul Biol. 2004 May;65(3):299-315
references.pmid: 15139366
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Jul 26;102(30):10534-9
references.pmid: 16027356
references.citation: Trends Ecol Evol. 2008 Mar;23(3):169-75
references.pmid: 18255188
references.citation: Ecology. 2008 May;89(5):1308-22
references.pmid: 18543624
references.citation: Nature. 1999 May 27;399(6734):354-9
references.pmid: 10360572