Distance decay 2.0-A global synthesis of taxonomic and functional turnover in ecological communities
Type | Article | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Date | 2022-07 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Language | English | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Author(s) | Graco-Roza Caio1, 2, Aarnio Sonja1, Abrego Nerea3, 4, Acosta Alicia T. R.5, 59, Alahuhta Janne6, 7, Altman Jan8, 9, Angiolini Claudia10, Aroviita Jukka7, Attorre Fabio11, Baastrup-Spohr Lars12, Barrera-Alba Jose J.13, Belmaker Jonathan14, 15, Biurrun Idoia16, Bonari Gianmaria17, Bruelheide Helge18, 19, Burrascano Sabina11, Carboni Marta5, Cardoso Pedro20, Carvalho Jose C.20, 21, Castaldelli Giuseppe22, Christensen Morten23, Correa Gilsineia2, Dembicz Iwona24, 25, Dengler Jurgen19, 25, 26, Dolezal Jiri8, 27, Domingos Patricia28, Eros Tibor29, Ferreira Carlos E. L., Filibeck Goffredo31, Floeter Sergio R.32, Friedlander Alan M.33, 34, Gammal Johanna35, Gavioli Anna22, Gossner Martin M.36, 37, Granot Itai14, Guarino Riccardo38, Gustafsson Camilla35, Hayden Brian39, He Siwen1, 40, Heilmann-Clausen Jacob41, Heino Jani7, Hunter John T.42, Huszar Vera L. M.43, Janisova Monika44, Jyrkankallio-Mikkola Jenny1, Kahilainen Kimmo K.45, Kemppinen Julia1, Kozub Lukasz24, Kruk Carla46, 47, Kulbiki Michel48, Kuzemko Anna49, 50, Christiaan Le Roux Peter51, Lehikoinen Aleksi52, Teixeira De Lima Domenica53, Lopez-Urrutia Angel54, Lukacs Balazs A.55, Luoto Miska1, Mammola Stefano20, 56, Marinho Marcelo M.2, Menezes Luciana S.57, Milardi Marco58, Miranda Marcela59, Moser Gleyci A. O.53, Mueller Joerg60, 61, Niittynen Pekka1, Norkko Alf35, 62, Nowak Arkadiusz63, 64, Ometto Jean P.59, Ovaskainen Otso4, 65, 66, Overbeck Gerhard E.67, Pacheco Felipe S.59, Pajunen Virpi1, Palpurina Salza68, Picazo Felix69, 70, Prieto Juan A. C.16, Rodil Ivan F.35, 71, Sabatini Francesco M.18, 19, 72, Salingre Shira14, de Sanctis Michele73, Segura Angel M.74, Da Silva Lucia H. S.75, Stevanovic Zora D.76, Swacha Grzegorz77, Teittinen Anette1, Tolonen Kimmo T.78, Tsiripidis Ioannis79, Virta Leena1, 35, Wang Beixin40, Wang Jianjun70, Weisser Wolfgang80, Xu Yuan81, Soininen Janne1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Affiliation(s) | 1 : Univ Helsinki, Dept Geosci & Geog, POB 64, FI-00014 Helsinki, Finland. 2 : Univ Estado Rio De Janeiro, Dept Plant Biol, Lab Ecol & Physiol Phytoplankton, Rio De Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. 3 : Univ Helsinki, Dept Agr Sci, Helsinki, Finland. 4 : Univ Jyvaskyla, Dept Biol & Environm Sci, Jyvaskyla, Finland. 5 : Univ Roma Tre, Dept Sci, Rome, Italy. 6 : Univ Oulu, Geog Res Unit, Oulu, Finland. 7 : Finnish Environm Inst, Freshwater Ctr, Oulu, Finland. 8 : Czech Acad Sci, Inst Bot, Pruhonice, Czech Republic. 9 : Czech Univ Life Sci, Fac Forestry & Wood Sci, Prague, Czech Republic. 10 : Univ Siena, Dept Life Sci, Siena, Italy. 11 : Sapienza Univ Rome, Dept Environm Biol, Rome, Italy. 12 : Univ Copenhagen, Dept Biol, Freshwater Biol Lab, Univ Pk, Copenhagen O, Denmark. 13 : Univ Fed Sao Paulo, Inst Mar, Dept Ciencias Mar, Santos, SP, Brazil. 14 : Tel Aviv Univ, Sch Zool, George S Wise Fac Life Sci, Tel Aviv, Israel. 15 : Tel Aviv Univ, Steinhardt Museum Nat Hist, Tel Aviv, Israel. 16 : Univ Basque Country, UPV EHU, Dept Plant Biol & Ecol, Bilbao, Spain. 17 : Free Univ Bozen Bolzano, Fac Sci & Technol, Bozen Bolzano, Italy. 18 : Martin Luther Univ Halle Wittenberg, Inst Biol Geobot & Bot Garden, Halle, Germany. 19 : German Ctr Integrat Biodivers Res iDiv, Leipzig, Germany. 20 : Univ Helsinki, Finnish Museum Nat Hist Luomus, Lab Integrat Biodivers Res LIBRe, Helsinki, Finland. 21 : Univ Minho, CBMA Ctr Mol & Environm Biol, Dept Biol, Braga, Portugal. 22 : Univ Ferrara, Dept Life Sci & Biotechnol, Ferrara, Italy. 23 : Morten Chr Consult, Soro, Denmark. 24 : Univ Warsaw, Inst Environm Biol, Fac Biol, Dept Ecol & Environm Conservat, Warsaw, Poland. 25 : Zurich Univ Appl Sci ZHAW, Inst Nat Resource Sci IUNR, Vegetat Ecol, Wadenswil, Switzerland. 26 : Bayreuth Ctr Ecol & Environm Res BayCEER, Plant Ecol, Bayreuth, Germany. 27 : Univ South Bohemia, Fac Sci, Dept Bot, Ceske Budejovice, Czech Republic. 28 : Univ Estado Rio De Janeiro, Dept Plant Biol, Lab Phycol & Environm Educ, Rio De Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. 29 : ELKH, Balaton Limnol Res Inst, Tihany, Hungary. 30 : Univ Fed Fluminense, Dept Biol Marinha, Reef Syst Ecol & Conservat Lab, Niteroi, RJ, Brazil. 31 : Univ Tuscia, Dept Agr & Forest Sci DAFNE, Viterbo, Italy. 32 : Univ Fed Santa Catarina, CCB, Dept Ecol & Zool, Marine Macroecol & Biogeog Lab, Florianopolis, SC, Brazil. 33 : Univ Hawaii, Hawaii Inst Marine Biol, Kaneohe, HI USA. 34 : Natl Geog Soc, Pristine Seas, Washington, DC USA. 35 : Univ Helsinki, Tvarminne Zool Stn, Hango, Finland. 36 : Swiss Fed Res Inst WSL, Forest Entomol, Birmensdorf, Switzerland. 37 : Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Inst Terr Ecosyst, Dept Environm Syst Sci, Zurich, Switzerland. 38 : Univ Palermo, Bot Unit, Dept STEBICEF, Palermo, Italy. 39 : Univ New Brunswick, Dept Biol, Canadian Rivers Inst, Fredericton, NB, Canada. 40 : Nanjing Agr Univ, Coll Plant Protect, Dept Entomol, Nanjing, Peoples R China. 41 : Univ Copenhagen, Ctr Macroecol Evolut & Climate, Copenhagen O, Denmark. 42 : Univ New England, Sch Rural & Environm Sci, Armidale, NSW, Australia. 43 : Univ Fed Rio de Janeiro, Natl Museum, Dept Bot, Phycol Lab, Rio De Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. 44 : Slovak Acad Sci, Inst Bot, Plant Sci & Biodivers Ctr, Banska Bystrica, Slovakia. 45 : Univ Helsinki, Lammi Biol Stn, Lammi, Finland. 46 : Univ Republica, Fac Ciencias, IECA, Secc Limnol, Montevideo, Uruguay. 47 : Univ Republica, CURE Rocha, Ecol Func Sistemas Acuat, Montevideo, Uruguay. 48 : Univ Perpignan, Lab Excellence Labex Corail, IRD Inst Rech Dev, UMR IRD UR CNRS ENTROPIE, Perpignan, France. 49 : Natl Acad Sci Ukraine, MG Kholodny Inst Bot, Kiev, Ukraine. 50 : Masaryk Univ, Dept Bot & Zool, Brno, Czech Republic. 51 : Univ Pretoria, Dept Plant & Soil Sci, Pretoria, South Africa. 52 : Univ Helsinki, Finnish Museum Nat Hist, Helsinki, Finland. 53 : Univ Estado Rio de Janeiro UERJ, Fac Oceanog, Dept Oceanog Biol DOB, Rio De Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. 54 : Inst Espanol Oceanog IEO, Ctr Oceanog Gijon, Gijon, Asturias, Spain. 55 : Wetland Ecol Res Grp, Ctr Ecol Res, Debrecen, Hungary. 56 : Water Res Inst IRSA, Mol Ecol Grp MEG, Natl Res Council CNR, Pallanza, Italy. 57 : Univ Fed Rio Grande do Sul, Lab Grassland Vegetat, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. 58 : Minist Primary Ind, Tini Tangaroa, Fisheries New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand. 59 : Natl Inst Space Res, CCST INPE, Earth Syst Sci Ctr, Sao Jose Dos Campos, SP, Brazil. 60 : Univ Potsdam, Inst Biochem & Biol, Potsdam, Germany. 61 : Heinz Sielmann Fdn, Nat Conservat Dept, Wustermark, Germany. 62 : Stockholm Univ, Balt Sea Ctr, Stockholm, Sweden. 63 : Polish Acad Sci, Bot Garden, Ctr Biol Divers Conservat Powsin, Warsaw, Poland. 64 : Univ Opole, Inst Biol, Opole, Poland. 65 : Univ Helsinki, Fac Biol & Environm Sci, Organismal & Evolutionary Biol Res Programme, Helsinki, Finland. 66 : Norwegian Univ Sci & Technol, Ctr Biodivers Dynam, Dept Biol, Trondheim, Norway. 67 : Univ Fed Rio Grande do Sul, Dept Bot, Alegre, RS, Brazil. 68 : Bulgarian Acad Sci, Natl Museum Nat Hist, Sofia, Bulgaria. 69 : Univ Granada, Fac Sci, Res Unit Modeling Nat MNat, Dept Ecol, Granada, Spain. 70 : Chinese Acad Sci, Nanjing Inst Geog & Limnol, State Key Lab Lake Sci & Environm, Nanjing, Peoples R China. 71 : Univ Cadiz, INMAR, Int Campus Excellence Sea CEIMAR, Dept Biol, Puerto Real, Cadiz, Spain. 72 : Alma Mater Studiorum Univ Bologna, Dept Biol Geol & Environm Sci BiGeA, BIOME Lab, Bologna, Italy. 73 : Univ Sapienza Rome, Dept Environm Biol, Rome, Italy. 74 : Univ Republica, CURE Rocha, Modelizac & Anal Recursos Nat, Montevideo, Uruguay. 75 : Univ Fed Rio de Janeiro, Natl Museum, Dept Bot, Phycol Lab, Rio De Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. 76 : Univ Belgrade, Fac Agr, Dept Agrobot, Belgrade, Serbia. 77 : Univ Wroclaw, Bot Garden, Wroclaw, Poland. 78 : Univ Jyvaskyla, Jyvaskyla Off, Finnish Environm Inst, Freshwater Ctr, Jyvaskyla, Finland. 79 : Aristotle Univ Thessaloniki, Sch Biol, Dept Bot, Thessaloniki, Greece. 80 : Tech Univ Munich, Dept Ecol & Ecosyst Management, Terr Ecol Res Grp, Freising Weihenstephan, Germany. 81 : East China Normal Univ, State Key Lab Estuarine & Coastal Res, Shanghai, Peoples R China. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Source | Global Ecology And Biogeography (1466-822X) (Wiley), 2022-07 , Vol. 31 , N. 7 , P. 1399-1421 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DOI | 10.1111/geb.13513 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WOS© Times Cited | 37 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Keyword(s) | beta-diversity, biogeography, environmental gradient, spatial distance, trait | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Abstract | Aim: Understanding the variation in community composition and species abundances (i.e., beta-diversity) is at the heart of community ecology. A common approach to examine beta-diversity is to evaluate directional variation in community composition by measuring the decay in the similarity among pairs of communities along spatial or environmental distance. We provide the first global synthesis of taxonomic and functional distance decay along spatial and environmental distance by analysing 148 datasets comprising different types of organisms and environments. Location: Global. Time period: 1990 to present. Major taxa studied: From diatoms to mammals. Method: We measured the strength of the decay using ranked Mantel tests (Mantel r) and the rate of distance decay as the slope of an exponential fit using generalized linear models. We used null models to test whether functional similarity decays faster or slower than expected given the taxonomic decay along the spatial and environmental distance. We also unveiled the factors driving the rate of decay across the datasets, including latitude, spatial extent, realm and organismal features. Results: Taxonomic distance decay was stronger than functional distance decay along both spatial and environmental distance. Functional distance decay was random given the taxonomic distance decay. The rate of taxonomic and functional spatial distance decay was fastest in the datasets from mid-latitudes. Overall, datasets covering larger spatial extents showed a lower rate of decay along spatial distance but a higher rate of decay along environmental distance. Marine ecosystems had the slowest rate of decay along environmental distances. Main conclusions: In general, taxonomic distance decay is a useful tool for biogeographical research because it reflects dispersal-related factors in addition to species responses to climatic and environmental variables. Moreover, functional distance decay might be a cost-effective option for investigating community changes in heterogeneous environments. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Licence | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Full Text |
|