Disturbance reinforces community assembly processes differentially across spatial scales
Annals of Botany, ISSN: 1095-8290, Vol: 127, Issue: 2, Page: 175-189
2021
- 13Citations
- 23Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations13
- Citation Indexes13
- 13
- CrossRef10
- Captures23
- Readers23
- 23
Article Description
Background and Aims: There is a paucity of empirical research and a lack of predictive models concerning the interplay between spatial scale and disturbance as they affect the structure and assembly of plant communities. We proposed and tested a trait dispersion-based conceptual model hypothesizing that disturbance reinforces assembly processes differentially across spatial scales. Disturbance would reinforce functional divergence at the small scale (neighbourhood), would not affect functional dispersion at the intermediate scale (patch) and would reinforce functional convergence at the large scale (site). We also evaluated functional and species richness of native and exotic plants to infer underlying processes. Native and exotic species richness were expected to increase and decrease with disturbance, respectively, at the neighbourhood scale, and to show similar associations with disturbance at the patch (concave) and site (negative) scales. Methods: In an arid shrubland, we estimated species richness and functional dispersion and richness within 1 m2 quadrats (neighbourhood) nested within 100 m2 plots (patch) along a small-scale natural disturbance gradient caused by an endemic fossorial rodent. Data for the site scale (2500 m2 plots) were taken from a previous study. We also tested the conceptual model through a quantitative literature review and a meta-analysis. Key Results: As spatial scale increased, disturbance sequentially promoted functional divergence, random trait dispersion and functional convergence. Functional richness was unaffected by disturbance across spatial scales. Disturbance favoured natives over exotics at the neighbourhood scale, while both decreased under high disturbance at the patch and site scales. Conclusions: The results supported the hypothesis that disturbance reinforces assembly processes differentially across scales and hampers plant invasion. The quantitative literature review and the meta-analysis supported most of the model predictions.
Bibliographic Details
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know