Scaling issues of neutral theory reveal violations of ecological equivalence for dominant Amazonian tree species

Edwin Pos; Juan Ernesto Guevara; Jean François Molino; Daniel Sabatier; Olaf S. Bánki; Nigel C.A. Pitman; Hugo F. Mogollón; Roosevelt García-Villacorta; David Neill; Oliver L. Phillips; Carlos Cerón; Marcos Ríos Paredes; Percy Núñez Vargas; Nállarett Dávila; Anthony Di Fiore; Gonzalo Rivas-Torres; Raquel Thomas-Caesar; Corine Vriesendorp; Kenneth R. Young; Milton Tirado; Ophelia Wang; Rodrigo Sierra; Italo Mesones; Roderick Zagt; Rodolfo Vasquez; Manuel A. Ahuite Reategui; Walter Palacios Cuenca; Elvis H. Valderrama Sandoval; Hans ter Steege

doi:10.1111/ele.13264

Scaling issues of neutral theory reveal violations of ecological equivalence for dominant Amazonian tree species

Edwin Pos^*, Juan Ernesto Guevara, Jean François Molino, Daniel Sabatier, Olaf S. Bánki, Nigel C.A. Pitman, Hugo F. Mogollón, Roosevelt García-Villacorta, David Neill, Oliver L. Phillips, Carlos Cerón, Marcos Ríos Paredes, Percy Núñez Vargas, Nállarett Dávila, Anthony Di Fiore, Gonzalo Rivas-Torres, Raquel Thomas-Caesar, Corine Vriesendorp, Kenneth R. Young, Milton TiradoOphelia Wang, Rodrigo Sierra, Italo Mesones, Roderick Zagt, Rodolfo Vasquez, Manuel A. Ahuite Reategui, Walter Palacios Cuenca, Elvis H. Valderrama Sandoval, Hans ter Steege

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to Journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

Neutral models are often used as null models, testing the relative importance of niche versus neutral processes in shaping diversity. Most versions, however, focus only on regional scale predictions and neglect local level contributions. Recently, a new formulation of spatial neutral theory was published showing an incompatibility between regional and local scale fits where especially the number of rare species was dramatically under-predicted. Using a forward in time semi-spatially explicit neutral model and a unique large-scale Amazonian tree inventory data set, we show that neutral theory not only underestimates the number of rare species but also fails in predicting the excessive dominance of species on both regional and local levels. We show that although there are clear relationships between species composition, spatial and environmental distances, there is also a clear differentiation between species able to attain dominance with and without restriction to specific habitats. We conclude therefore that the apparent dominance of these species is real, and that their excessive abundance can be attributed to fitness differences in different ways, a clear violation of the ecological equivalence assumption of neutral theory.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1072-1082
Number of pages	11
Journal	Ecology Letters
Volume	22
Issue number	7
Early online date	2 Apr 2019
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.13264
Publication status	Published - Jul 2019

Funding

Daniel Sabatier and Jean-Fran?ois Molino are supported by an ?Investissement d'Avenir? grant managed by Agence Nationale de la Recherche (CEBA, ref. ANR-10-LABX-0025). We thank Pablo Stevenson for contributing data on dispersal syndromes used in estimating dispersal distances. We thank two anonymous reviewers and in particular Stephen Hubbell for providing very thorough reviews that not only improved the manuscript greatly, but especially helped in the structuring of the discussion and opened up new doors for future research. We also thank Jari Oksanen for discussions on the calculation of the Morisita index and in memoriam gratefully acknowledge the contribution of the late Henry Horn, for valuable feedback during the writing process.

Funders	Funder number
Agence Nationale de la Recherche	ANR-10-LABX-0025

Keywords

Amazon
betadiversity
neutral theory
species composition

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1111/ele.13264

Persistent URL (handle)

Persistent link

Cite this

Pos, E., Guevara, J. E., Molino, J. F., Sabatier, D., Bánki, O. S., Pitman, N. C. A., Mogollón, H. F., García-Villacorta, R., Neill, D., Phillips, O. L., Cerón, C., Ríos Paredes, M., Núñez Vargas, P., Dávila, N., Fiore, A. D., Rivas-Torres, G., Thomas-Caesar, R., Vriesendorp, C., Young, K. R., ... ter Steege, H. (2019). Scaling issues of neutral theory reveal violations of ecological equivalence for dominant Amazonian tree species. Ecology Letters, 22(7), 1072-1082. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.13264

@article{5c941cd5c98e4a9eb5204b71bf5d3722,

title = "Scaling issues of neutral theory reveal violations of ecological equivalence for dominant Amazonian tree species",

abstract = "Neutral models are often used as null models, testing the relative importance of niche versus neutral processes in shaping diversity. Most versions, however, focus only on regional scale predictions and neglect local level contributions. Recently, a new formulation of spatial neutral theory was published showing an incompatibility between regional and local scale fits where especially the number of rare species was dramatically under-predicted. Using a forward in time semi-spatially explicit neutral model and a unique large-scale Amazonian tree inventory data set, we show that neutral theory not only underestimates the number of rare species but also fails in predicting the excessive dominance of species on both regional and local levels. We show that although there are clear relationships between species composition, spatial and environmental distances, there is also a clear differentiation between species able to attain dominance with and without restriction to specific habitats. We conclude therefore that the apparent dominance of these species is real, and that their excessive abundance can be attributed to fitness differences in different ways, a clear violation of the ecological equivalence assumption of neutral theory.",

keywords = "Amazon, betadiversity, neutral theory, species composition",

author = "Edwin Pos and Guevara, {Juan Ernesto} and Molino, {Jean Fran{\c c}ois} and Daniel Sabatier and B{\'a}nki, {Olaf S.} and Pitman, {Nigel C.A.} and Mogoll{\'o}n, {Hugo F.} and Roosevelt Garc{\'i}a-Villacorta and David Neill and Phillips, {Oliver L.} and Carlos Cer{\'o}n and {R{\'i}os Paredes}, Marcos and {N{\'u}{\~n}ez Vargas}, Percy and N{\'a}llarett D{\'a}vila and Fiore, {Anthony Di} and Gonzalo Rivas-Torres and Raquel Thomas-Caesar and Corine Vriesendorp and Young, {Kenneth R.} and Milton Tirado and Ophelia Wang and Rodrigo Sierra and Italo Mesones and Roderick Zagt and Rodolfo Vasquez and {Ahuite Reategui}, {Manuel A.} and {Palacios Cuenca}, Walter and {Valderrama Sandoval}, {Elvis H.} and {ter Steege}, Hans",

year = "2019",

month = jul,

doi = "10.1111/ele.13264",

language = "English",

volume = "22",

pages = "1072--1082",

journal = "Ecology Letters",

issn = "1461-023X",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

number = "7",

}

Pos, E, Guevara, JE, Molino, JF, Sabatier, D, Bánki, OS, Pitman, NCA, Mogollón, HF, García-Villacorta, R, Neill, D, Phillips, OL, Cerón, C, Ríos Paredes, M, Núñez Vargas, P, Dávila, N, Fiore, AD, Rivas-Torres, G, Thomas-Caesar, R, Vriesendorp, C, Young, KR, Tirado, M, Wang, O, Sierra, R, Mesones, I, Zagt, R, Vasquez, R, Ahuite Reategui, MA, Palacios Cuenca, W, Valderrama Sandoval, EH & ter Steege, H 2019, 'Scaling issues of neutral theory reveal violations of ecological equivalence for dominant Amazonian tree species', Ecology Letters, vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 1072-1082. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.13264

TY - JOUR

T1 - Scaling issues of neutral theory reveal violations of ecological equivalence for dominant Amazonian tree species

AU - Pos, Edwin

AU - Guevara, Juan Ernesto

AU - Molino, Jean François

AU - Sabatier, Daniel

AU - Bánki, Olaf S.

AU - Pitman, Nigel C.A.

AU - Mogollón, Hugo F.

AU - García-Villacorta, Roosevelt

AU - Neill, David

AU - Phillips, Oliver L.

AU - Cerón, Carlos

AU - Ríos Paredes, Marcos

AU - Núñez Vargas, Percy

AU - Dávila, Nállarett

AU - Fiore, Anthony Di

AU - Rivas-Torres, Gonzalo

AU - Thomas-Caesar, Raquel

AU - Vriesendorp, Corine

AU - Young, Kenneth R.

AU - Tirado, Milton

AU - Wang, Ophelia

AU - Sierra, Rodrigo

AU - Mesones, Italo

AU - Zagt, Roderick

AU - Vasquez, Rodolfo

AU - Ahuite Reategui, Manuel A.

AU - Palacios Cuenca, Walter

AU - Valderrama Sandoval, Elvis H.

AU - ter Steege, Hans

PY - 2019/7

Y1 - 2019/7

N2 - Neutral models are often used as null models, testing the relative importance of niche versus neutral processes in shaping diversity. Most versions, however, focus only on regional scale predictions and neglect local level contributions. Recently, a new formulation of spatial neutral theory was published showing an incompatibility between regional and local scale fits where especially the number of rare species was dramatically under-predicted. Using a forward in time semi-spatially explicit neutral model and a unique large-scale Amazonian tree inventory data set, we show that neutral theory not only underestimates the number of rare species but also fails in predicting the excessive dominance of species on both regional and local levels. We show that although there are clear relationships between species composition, spatial and environmental distances, there is also a clear differentiation between species able to attain dominance with and without restriction to specific habitats. We conclude therefore that the apparent dominance of these species is real, and that their excessive abundance can be attributed to fitness differences in different ways, a clear violation of the ecological equivalence assumption of neutral theory.

AB - Neutral models are often used as null models, testing the relative importance of niche versus neutral processes in shaping diversity. Most versions, however, focus only on regional scale predictions and neglect local level contributions. Recently, a new formulation of spatial neutral theory was published showing an incompatibility between regional and local scale fits where especially the number of rare species was dramatically under-predicted. Using a forward in time semi-spatially explicit neutral model and a unique large-scale Amazonian tree inventory data set, we show that neutral theory not only underestimates the number of rare species but also fails in predicting the excessive dominance of species on both regional and local levels. We show that although there are clear relationships between species composition, spatial and environmental distances, there is also a clear differentiation between species able to attain dominance with and without restriction to specific habitats. We conclude therefore that the apparent dominance of these species is real, and that their excessive abundance can be attributed to fitness differences in different ways, a clear violation of the ecological equivalence assumption of neutral theory.

KW - Amazon

KW - betadiversity

KW - neutral theory

KW - species composition

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85063727801&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85063727801&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/ele.13264

DO - 10.1111/ele.13264

M3 - Article

C2 - 30938488

SN - 1461-023X

VL - 22

SP - 1072

EP - 1082

JO - Ecology Letters

JF - Ecology Letters

IS - 7

ER -

Scaling issues of neutral theory reveal violations of ecological equivalence for dominant Amazonian tree species

Abstract

Funding

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Persistent URL (handle)

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this