Do abundance distributions and species aggregation correctly predict macroecological biodiversity patterns in tropical forests?
It has been recently suggested that different 'unified theories of biodiversity and biogeography' can be characterized by three common 'minimal sufficient rules': (1) species abundance distributions follow a hollow curve, (2) species show intraspecific aggregation, and (3) species are independently placed with respect to other species. Here, we translate these qualitative rules into a quantitative framework and assess if these minimal rules are indeed sufficient to predict multiple macroecological biodiversity patterns simultaneously.



Tropical forest plots in Barro Colorado Island (BCI), Panama, and in Sinharaja, Sri Lanka.



We assess the predictive power of the three rules using dynamic and spatial simulation models in combination with census data from the two forest plots. We use two different versions of the model: (1) a neutral model and (2) an extended model that allowed for species differences in dispersal distances. In a first step we derive model parameterizations that correctly represent the three minimal rules (i.e. the model quantitatively matches the observed species abundance distribution and the distribution of intraspecific aggregation). In a second step we applied the parameterized models to predict four additional spatial biodiversity patterns.



Species-specific dispersal was needed to quantitatively fulfil the three minimal rules. The model with species-specific dispersal correctly predicted the species-area relationship, but failed to predict the distance decay, the relationship between species abundances and aggregations, and the distribution of a spatial co-occurrence index of all abundant species pairs. These results were consistent over the two forest plots.



The three 'minimal sufficient' rules only provide an incomplete approximation of the stochastic spatial geometry of biodiversity in tropical forests. The assumption of independent interspecific placements is most likely violated in many forests due to shared or distinct habitat preferences. Furthermore, our results highlight missing knowledge about the relationship between species abundances and their aggregation.
Department of Ecological Modelling Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ Permoserstraße 1504318 Leipzig Germany; German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig Biodiversity Synthesis Deutscher Platz 5e04103 Leipzig Germany; Institute of Computer Science Martin-Luther University Halle-Wittenberg 06099 Halle (Saale) Germany.
Felix
F
May
Department of Ecological Modelling Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ Permoserstraße 1504318 Leipzig Germany; German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig Biodiversity Synthesis Deutscher Platz 5e04103 Leipzig Germany.
Thorsten
T
Wiegand
Department of Ecological Modelling Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ Permoserstraße 15 04318 Leipzig Germany.
Sebastian
S
Lehmann
Department of Ecological Modelling Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ Permoserstraße 1504318 Leipzig Germany; German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig Biodiversity Synthesis Deutscher Platz 5e04103 Leipzig Germany; Institute of Environmental Systems Research University of Osnabrück Barbarastraße 1249076 Osnabrück Germany.
Andreas
A
Huth
Department of Ecological Modelling Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ Permoserstraße 15 04318 Leipzig Germany.
Marie-Josée
MJ
Fortin
Dispersal limitation; distance decay of similarity; pattern‐oriented modelling; point pattern analysis; spatially explicit simulation model; species–area relationship; unified theory
Ecology. 2009 Nov;90(11):3033-41
19967859
Proc Biol Sci. 2015 Mar 7;282(1802):
25631991
Ecol Lett. 2009 Mar;12(3):239-48
19170729
Am Nat. 2007 Oct;170(4):E77-95
17891727
Science. 2002 Jan 25;295(5555):666-9
11809969
Science. 2006 Jul 7;313(5783):98-101
16763113
J Theor Biol. 2000 Nov 7;207(1):81-99
11027481
Science. 2010 Jul 16;329(5989):330-2
20576853
Ecology. 2008 Oct;89(10):2700-11
18959308
Science. 2005 Nov 11;310(5750):987-91
16284171
Ecol Lett. 2007 Oct;10(10):995-1015
17845298
Proc Biol Sci. 2012 Aug 22;279(1741):3312-20
22593112
Nature. 2007 Nov 1;450(7166):45-9
17972874
Ecol Lett. 2008 Sep;11(9):904-17
18494792
Science. 2000 May 26;288(5470):1414-8
10827950
Trends Ecol Evol. 2011 Jul;26(7):340-8
21561679
Ecol Lett. 2005 Nov;8(11):1147-56
21352438
Ecology. 2014 Feb;95(2):376-86
24669731
Ecol Lett. 2011 Aug;14(8):816-27
21679289
Science. 1999 Jan 22;283(5401):554-7
9915706
Theor Popul Biol. 2002 Sep;62(2):153-68
12167354
PLoS Biol. 2006 Oct;4(11):e344
17048988
Ecology. 2015 Apr;96(4):1062-73
26230026
Ecol Lett. 2010 May;13(5):627-42
20337695
J Theor Biol. 2010 Aug 21;265(4):517-23
20561975
Ecology. 2009 Jul;90(7):1743-50
19694124
Am Nat. 2002 Jan;159(1):1-23
18707398