Martha F. Hoopes

Bio: Martha F. Hoopes is an academic researcher from Mount Holyoke College. The author has contributed to research in topics: Ecology (disciplines) & Metapopulation. The author has an hindex of 13, co-authored 18 publications receiving 5121 citations. Previous affiliations of Martha F. Hoopes include University of California, Davis & University of California, Berkeley.

The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology

Abstract: The metacommunity concept is an important way to think about linkages between different spatial scales in ecology. Here we review current understanding about this concept. We first investigate issues related to its definition as a set of local communities that are linked by dispersal of multiple potentially interacting species. We then identify four paradigms for metacommunities: the patch-dynamic view, the species-sorting view, the mass effects view and the neutral view, that each emphasizes different processes of potential importance in metacommunities. These have somewhat distinct intellectual histories and we discuss elements related to their potential future synthesis. We then use this framework to discuss why the concept is useful in modifying existing ecological thinking and illustrate this with a number of both theoretical and empirical examples. As ecologists strive to understand increasingly complex mechanisms and strive to work across multiple scales of spatio-temporal organization, concepts like the metacommunity can provide important insights that frequently contrast with those that would be obtained with more conventional approaches based on local communities alone.

Progress toward understanding the ecological impacts of nonnative species

Abstract: A predictive understanding of the ecological impacts of nonnative species has been slow to develop, owing largely to an apparent dearth of clearly defined hypotheses and the lack of a broad theoretical framework. The context dependency of impact has fueled the perception that meaningful generalizations are nonexistent. Here, we identified and reviewed 19 testable hypotheses that explain temporal and spatial variation in impact. Despite poor validation of most hypotheses to date, evidence suggests that each can explain at least some impacts in some situations. Several hypotheses are broad in scope (applying to plants and animals in virtually all contexts) and some of them, intriguingly, link processes of colonization and impact. Collectively, these hypotheses highlight the importance of the functional ecology of the nonnative species and the structure, diversity, and evolutionary experience of the recipient community as general determinants of impact; thus, they could provide the foundation for a theoretical framework for understanding and predicting impact. Further substantive progress toward this goal requires explicit consideration of within-taxon and across-taxa variation in the per capita effect of invaders, and analyses of complex interactions between invaders and their biotic and abiotic environments.

Mechanisms of coexistence in competitive metacommunities

Abstract: Although there is a large body of theory on spatial competitive coexistence, very little of it involves comparative analyses of alternative mechanisms. We thus have limited knowledge of the conditions under which multiple spatial mechanisms can operate or of emergent properties arising from interactions between mechanisms. Here we present a mathematical framework that allows for comparative analysis of spatial coexistence mechanisms. The basis for comparison is mechanisms operating in spatially homogeneous competitive environments (e.g., life‐history trade‐offs) versus mechanisms operating in spatially heterogeneous competitive environments (e.g., source‐sink dynamics). Our comparative approach leads to several new insights about spatial coexistence. First, we show that spatial variation in the expression of a life‐history trade‐off leads to a unique regional pattern that cannot be predicted by considering trade‐offs or source‐sink dynamics alone. This result represents an instance where spatial...

The Theory of Island Biogeography

Abstract: Preface to the Princeton Landmarks in Biology Edition vii Preface xi Symbols Used xiii 1. The Importance of Islands 3 2. Area and Number of Speicies 8 3. Further Explanations of the Area-Diversity Pattern 19 4. The Strategy of Colonization 68 5. Invasibility and the Variable Niche 94 6. Stepping Stones and Biotic Exchange 123 7. Evolutionary Changes Following Colonization 145 8. Prospect 181 Glossary 185 References 193 Index 201

The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology

Abstract: The metacommunity concept is an important way to think about linkages between different spatial scales in ecology. Here we review current understanding about this concept. We first investigate issues related to its definition as a set of local communities that are linked by dispersal of multiple potentially interacting species. We then identify four paradigms for metacommunities: the patch-dynamic view, the species-sorting view, the mass effects view and the neutral view, that each emphasizes different processes of potential importance in metacommunities. These have somewhat distinct intellectual histories and we discuss elements related to their potential future synthesis. We then use this framework to discuss why the concept is useful in modifying existing ecological thinking and illustrate this with a number of both theoretical and empirical examples. As ecologists strive to understand increasingly complex mechanisms and strive to work across multiple scales of spatio-temporal organization, concepts like the metacommunity can provide important insights that frequently contrast with those that would be obtained with more conventional approaches based on local communities alone.

Rebuilding community ecology from functional traits.

Abstract: There is considerable debate about whether community ecology will ever produce general principles. We suggest here that this can be achieved but that community ecology has lost its way by focusing on pairwise species interactions independent of the environment. We assert that community ecology should return to an emphasis on four themes that are tied together by a two-step process: how the fundamental niche is governed by functional traits within the context of abiotic environmental gradients; and how the interaction between traits and fundamental niches maps onto the realized niche in the context of a biotic interaction milieu. We suggest this approach can create a more quantitative and predictive science that can more readily address issues of global change.

Impact: Toward a Framework for Understanding the Ecological Effects of Invaders

Abstract: Although ecologists commonly talk about the impacts of nonindigenous species, little formal attention has been given to defining what we mean by impact, or connecting ecological theory with particular measures of impact. The resulting lack of generalizations regarding invasion impacts is more than an academic problem; we need to be able to distinguish invaders with minor effects from those with large effects in order to prioritize management efforts. This paper focuses on defining, evaluating, and comparing a variety of measures of impact drawn from empirical examples and theoretical reasoning. We begin by arguing that the total impact of an invader includes three fundamental dimensions: range, abundance, and the per-capita or per-biomass effect of the invader. Then we summarize previous approaches to measuring impact at different organizational levels, and suggest some new approaches. Reviewing mathematical models of impact, we argue that theoretical studies using community assembly models could act as a basis for better empirical studies and monitoring programs, as well as provide a clearer understanding of the relationship among different types of impact. We then discuss some of the particular challenges that come from the need to prioritize invasive species in a management or policy context. We end with recommendations about how the field of invasion biology might proceed in order to build a general framework for understanding and predicting impacts. In particular, we advocate studies designed to explore the correlations among different measures: Are the results of complex multivariate methods adequately captured by simple composite metrics such as species richness? How well are impacts on native populations correlated with impacts on ecosystem functions? Are there useful bioindicators for invasion impacts? To what extent does the impact of an invasive species depend on the system in which it is measured? Three approaches would provide new insights in this line of inquiry: (1) studies that measure impacts at multiple scales and multiple levels of organization, (2) studies that synthesize currently available data on different response variables, and (3) models designed to guide empirical work and explore generalities.