TL;DR: It is suggested that earthworms form distinct assemblages within patches, mainly driven by deterministic responses to competition: ecologically similar species avoid competition through spatial segregation, whereas a minimal level of ecological segregation is required to allow co-existence in a given patch.
Abstract: Earthwormassemblagesareusuallyspatio-temporallystructuredinmosaicsofpatcheswithdifferentspecies composition. We re-analysed results of past research carried out in Eastern Colombia to explore how interspecific competition accounts for this pattern. In three sown pastures and three native savannas, density data matrices were obtained from spatially explicit samplings at several successive dates, and spatio-temporal patterns of species assemblages were described through partial triadic analyses and geostatistics. This first analysis detected assemblage patchiness in the six plots at spatial scales ranging from 6 to 33 m. Species richness ranged from 5 to 6 species per plot. Null models were further used to analyse niche overlap and morphometric distribution patterns at two different scales, i.e. at the 'plot level' and the 'patch level'. Seasonal and vertical niche overlaps were higher than expected by chance at both scales, indicating high environmental constraints on assemblage membership. Within-patch overlaps were lower than plot-scale overlaps. Biometric niche overlap was random at the plot level and was weakly lower than that expected by chance in patches. Body weight was significantly overdispersed and constant whatever the scale, while body length and diameter showed a similar trend within patches. These results suggest that earthworms form distinct assemblages within patches, mainly driven by deterministic responses to competition: ecologically similar speciesavoidcompetitionthroughspatialsegregation,whereasaminimallevelofecologicalsegregationisrequiredto allow co-existence in a given patch.
The study of the spatial pattern of soil biota and the factors by which they are governed is a key research area in understanding the structure and function of soil biodiversity and their relationships with above-ground processes (Ettema & Wardle 2002, Ettema et al. 2000).
To date however, soil communities have been minimally considered in spatial ecology when compared with aboveground biota (Ettema & Wardle 2002).
Earthworm spatial patterns are however likely to contribute to existing heterogeneity in soil resources 1 Corresponding author.
416 THIBAUD DECAËNS, JUAN JOSÉ JIMÉNEZ AND JEAN-PIERRE ROSSI
Species responses to the heterogeneity in plant cover and soil properties (Margerie et al. 2001, Phillipson et al. 1976, Poier & Richter 1992), intrinsic population processes such as reproduction rates and limited dispersal (Barot et al.
Classic examples of the latter include limitation of similarity in body size or in multi-trait morphology (Hutchinson 1959, MacArthur & Levins 1967, Weiher & Keddy 1995, Weiher et al. 1998).
Recently, null model analysis has emerged as an efficient tool to identify nonrandom community patterns (Gotelli 2001, Gotelli & Graves 1996).
STUDY SITE
A data set was compiled from two studies carried out at the CIAT-CORPOICA Carimagua Research Station, in the phytogeographic unit of the well-drained isohyperthermic savannas of eastern Colombia (4◦37′N, 71◦19′W, 175 m asl).
Study plots were located in an upland area with a well-drained silty clay Oxisol (Tropeptic Haplustox Isohyperthermic; USDA classification), characterized by its acidity (pH[H2O] = 4.5), a high Al saturation (>80%) and low values of exchangeable cations.
All the study plots were located in the same area of the Research Station, with no more than 100 m between each other.
Nees, Panicum sp., Trachypogon sp. and Imperata brasiliensis Trin. Pasture 1 was a 1 ha and 18-y-old plot of Urochloa decumbens R.D. Webster and Pueraria phaseoloides Benth.
Earthworm sampling
In each plot, samples were taken on a regular grid of evenly spaced points.
As the characteristics of samples varied significantly among plots, the authors used non-parametric regression (using Ecosim software, Acquired Intelligence Inc. & KeseyBear, http://garyentsminger.com/ecosim.htm) to verify that differences in observed patterns were not a byproduct of different sampling procedures.
Two 20 × 20 × 20-cm soil cores were sampled 1 m distance from the monolith; the soil was then washed and sieved to collect small species that were not efficiently collected by hand sorting (Jiménez et al. 2006b).
It was used for each plot to identify the species assemblages that characterized similar patches at different dates, to which the authors refer herein as the ‘patch-level assemblages’.
The maps of the coordinates of the sampling points on the first compromise axis thus described the spatio-temporal distribution of these patchlevel assemblages.
Size distribution analysis
The authors tested if identified assemblages presented patterns that limit biometric similarity between co-existing species for the three morphometric traits that were used in the niche overlap analysis.
For each trait, the authors calculated: (1) the minimum segment length (MSL), which is the smallest size difference found in all available pairs of species; (2) the variance in segment length that measures the overall tendency for the trait values to be evenly spaced.
Observed values were calculated for all assemblages that comprised more than two species, and were compared with those obtained for 10 000 random assemblages.
In a competitively structured community or assemblage, MSL and VarSL should be higher and lower than EBC, respectively (Gotelli & Ellison 2002).
Calculations and tests were done with the ‘Size Overlap’ module of Ecosim.
Data comparisons
For each index (Pianka’s and Czechanowski Oik, MSL, VarSL), the authors calculated the standardised effect size (SES): SE S = (Iobs − Isi m) Ssi m where Isim is the mean index of the simulated assemblages, Ssim is the standard deviation, and Iobs is the observed index (Gotelli & Graves 1996).
For each type of assemblage (patch-level or plot-level) and each index, the authors further calculated the average values of the observed and simulated indices, and the average corresponding SES.
Each test involved 10 000 iterations in which the data were reshuffled among the categories to determine how much variation was expected among the means.
The null hypothesis was that the observed variation among the means of the groups was no greater than EBC.
Calculations were performed using the ‘Anova’ module of Ecosim.
Earthworm assemblage composition
A total of six species, all still undescribed and all native from the study region, was identified in the six sampled plots (Jiménez 1999).
Apart from Andiorrhinus sp., which occurred only in Pasture 1 and Savanna 1, all species were present in all the plots (Tables 1 and 2).
Detailed studies of species assemblage composition in the different study plots have been published previously in Decaëns & Jiménez (2002) and Jiménez et al. (1998b).
The highest densities were recorded for Glossodrilus sp. and, in the pastures, Ocnerodrilidae sp.
420 THIBAUD DECAËNS, JUAN JOSÉ JIMÉNEZ AND JEAN-PIERRE ROSSI
Plot, the highest contributions to biomass were recorded for Glossodrilus sp., Andiodrilus sp. or Martiodrilus sp., the latter being dominant in the three pastures.
The percentages of the total inertia explained by the first axes of the PTA’s interstructure and compromise analyses are presented in Table 1.
Values were always lower than 50%, indicating relatively little inertia in the data.
Interstructure analyses described the patterns of population distribution that were stable across time.
In each sampled plot, earthworm assemblages thus presented non-random and statistically significant spatio-temporal structure consisting in a juxtaposition of patches characterized by dominant ‘patch-level assemblages’.
Niche overlap patterns
Both the Pianka and Czechanowski indices provided very similar results and the authors thus decided to present only those obtained with the former.
Temporal niche overlap was significantly higher than EBC for the majority of patch- and plot-level assemblages (Table 3) and average observed overlaps were unusually high (P = 0.050 and P = 0.002, respectively).
Average SES was significantly higher than 0 at both scales, but was significantly lower in patch- as compared with plot-level assemblages (Table 3).
422 THIBAUD DECAËNS, JUAN JOSÉ JIMÉNEZ AND JEAN-PIERRE ROSSI
At both patch- and plot-levels, vertical niche overlap was almost always significantly higher than EBC, average observed Pianka’s.
Average SES was not significantly different between patch- and plot-level assemblages.
Biometric niche overlap was lower than EBC in a majority of patch assemblages, but the observed and EBC values were not significantly different, and the SES was not significantly lower than 0 (Table 3).
Patterns were mainly random for plot-level assemblages and no significant difference was found when comparing average SES calculated for patch- and plot-level assemblages.
Size distribution patterns
Patch-level assemblages showed a consistent trend toward over and even spacing of body length (Table 4).
Conversely, plot-level assemblages were characterized by random body length ratio patterns and, when compared with patch-level assemblages, lower average value of the SES calculated for MSL.
The VarSL was lower than EBC in the majority of patch and plot assemblages (with two individually significant values for patch-level assemblages), showed an unusually small average (P = 0.011 for both patchand plot-level assemblages), and a SES significantly lower than 0.
Body weight tended to be over spaced in both patchand plot-level assemblages (Table 4): although average observed values were not significantly higher than simulated ones, the corresponding SESs were significantly higher than 0.
In patchlevel assemblages MSL was higher than EBC in six of seven cases (with significant individual tests in one of them), average MSL was significantly higher than EBC (P = 0.050) and SES was significantly higher than 0.
DISCUSSION
The spatial organization of earthworm assemblages in alternating patches characterized by specific species Earthworm assemblages in Colombian grasslands 423 assemblages has been found in both tropical and temperate soils (Margerie et al.
This indicates a high residual variability from the analysis, which may result from different sources including species vagility (Decaëns & Rossi 2001), sampling error (Jiménez et al. 2006b) and/or small-scale variability (below the minimum inter-sample distance) in species distribution (Rossi & Nuutinen 2004).
The reason why patch-level assemblages differed so much in composition among plots of the same habitat type is an interesting question that will require additional information to be elucidated.
The relationship between species biometric features and life history strategies, and in particular resource uses, is also central in most eco-morphological classifications that are classically recognized in earthworm studies (Bouché 1977, Lavelle 1997).
424 THIBAUD DECAËNS, JUAN JOSÉ JIMÉNEZ AND JEAN-PIERRE ROSSI
Competition may however generate different patterns according to the spatial scale considered.
The authors found that body weight was significantly overdispersed and constant among species at both the plot and patch scales, while body length shows a similar pattern at the patch scale only.
Alternatively, species body length was reported to reflect the size of the ingested soil particles, although no general pathway for this relationship has been pointed to date (Blanchart et al. 1997, Lothe authors & Butt 2003).
Dalby et al. (1998) found that competition among species may result from direct cocoon consumption.
LITERATURE CITED
Spatial and temporal niche partitioning in grassland ants.
Patterns of diversity and habitat relationships in terrestrial mollusc communities of the Pukeamaru Ecological District, northeastern New Zealand.
Self-organization in a simple consumer-resource system, the example of earthworms.
BLANCHART, E., LAVELLE, P., BRAUDEAU, E., LE BISSONNAIS, Y.
The feeding ecology of earthworms – a review.
Ecological and community-wide character displacement: the next generation.
HERNÁNDEZ, P., FERNÁNDEZ, R., NOVO, M., TRIGO, D. & DÍAZ-COSÍN,
Relating niche and spatial overlap at the community level.
Doctoral Thesis, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid.
Vertical distribution of earthworms in grassland soils of the Colombian Llanos.
JIMÉNEZ, J. J., BROWN, G. G., DECAËNS, T., FEIJOO, A. & LAVELLE, P.
Differences in the timing of diapause and patterns of aestivation in tropical earthworms.
Two goals for predictive community ecology, also known as Assembly and response rules.
Three mode principal component analysis: “analyse triadique complète”.
Diversity of soil fauna and ecosystem function.
LAVELLE, P., DECAËNS, T., AUBERT, M., BAROT, S., BLOUIN, M.,
Influence of food particle size on inter- and intra-specific interactions of Allolobophora chlorotica and Lumbricus terrestris.
The limiting similarity, convergence, and divergence of coexisting species.
MARCHINKO, K. B., NISHIZAKI, M. T. & BURNS, K. C.
Community-wide character displacement in barnacles: a new perspective for past observations.
Spatial distribution of earthworm species assemblages in a chalky slope of the Seine Valley (Normandy, France).
Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences de Paris.
PHILLIPSON, J., ABEL, A., STEEL, J. & WOODELL, S. R. J. 1976.
Earthworms and the factors governing their distribution in an English beechwood.
Intraguild predation and competition among desert scorpions.
The spatiotemporal pattern of a tropical earthworm species assemblage and its relationship with soil structure.
THIOULOUSE, J., CHESSEL, D., DOLÉDEC, S. & OLIVIER, J. M. 1997.
A multivariate analysis and graphical display software, also known as ADE-4.
Assembly rules, null models, and trait dispersions: new questions from old patterns.
Community assembly rules, morphological dispersion, and the coexistence of plant species.
Linking spatio-temporal dynamics of earthworm populations to nutrient cycling in temperate agricultural and forest ecosystems.
Evidence for competition from field observations, using a patch model, also known as Limitation to species coexistence.
TL;DR: It appears that microorganisms do not respond to large-scale environmental gradients in the same way as metazoans, and soil communities appear weakly structured by competition, although competitive constraints may account for assembly rules within specific taxa.
Abstract: Aim To review published evidence regarding the factors that influence the geographic variation in diversity of soil organisms at different spatial scales.
Location Global.
Methods A search of the relevant literature was conducted using the Web of Science and the author's personal scientific database as the major sources. Special attention was paid to include seminal studies, highly cited papers and/or studies highlighting novel results.
Results Despite their significant contribution to global biodiversity, our taxonomic knowledge of soil biota is still poor compared with that of most above-ground organisms. This is particularly evident for small-bodied taxa. Global patterns of soil biodiversity distribution have been poorly documented and are thought to differ significantly from what is reported above-ground. Based on existing data, it appears that microorganisms do not respond to large-scale environmental gradients in the same way as metazoans. Whereas soil microflora seem to be mainly represented by cosmopolitan species, soil animals respond to altitudinal, latitudinal or area gradients in the same way as described for above-ground organisms. At local scales, there is less evidence that local factors regulate above- and below-ground communities in the same way. Except for a few taxa, the humpbacked response to stress and disturbance gradients doesn't seem to apply underground. Soil communities thus appear weakly structured by competition, although competitive constraints may account for assembly rules within specific taxa. The main factor constraining local soil biodiversity is the compact and heterogeneous nature of soils, which provides unrivalled potential for niche partitioning, thus allowing high levels of local biodiversity. This heterogeneity is increased by the impact of ecosystem engineers that generate resource patchiness at a range of spatio-temporal scales.
TL;DR: The 6th International Soil Zoology Colloquium held in Uppsala in June 1976 as mentioned in this paper focused on the interactions of plant roots, microorganisms, and soil animals.
Abstract: This book is the Proceedings of the 6th International Soil Zoology Colloquium held in Uppsala in June 1976. The major theme is the interactions of plant roots, microorganisms, and soil animals. Four subthemes were chosen for the plenary sessions. These were: (i) Community structure and niche separation; (ii) The role of soil organisms in nutrient cycling; (iii) Plant roots in the soil system; and (iv) Models of soil organisms and their environment. In addition tothe 51 papers (14, 16, 13, and 8) presented in the above sessions, there are summarized versions of 41 papers given in poster session. The individual papers range from excellent to poor, with about one-fourth in the poor category. About half the remainder are autecological in subject matter treatment and lack the perspective promised in the colloquium title. Most of the papers in the first plenary session are on niche exploitation and responses by members of the soil fauna rather than on their roles as ecosystem components. The papers on nutrient cycling are, with few exceptions, excellent contributions. Particularly commendable is the comprehensive discussion offered by D. E. Reichle. The bulk of the papers in the third session concern either the activities or the effects on plants of rhizophagic invertebrates. Good discussions are given by Vancura and associates on quantitative aspects of root exudation and by Sihanonth and Todd on transfer of nutrients by ectomycorrhizal fungi. Readers expecting to find any noteworthy array of simulation models on soil organisms will be disappointed. Most of the papers in this session might have been placed just as appropriately in some other session. The closing session address by J. E. Satchell is thought-provoking as well asentertaining. The reader, while being told that earthworms are the trombones of the grave, gains the impression that as a group, the soil zoologists are alive and well. Mechanistically the book is soft cover and generally excellently edited. There are about 200 illustrations, mostly line graphs and histograms, but also some light microscope and scanning electron micrographs. Unfortunately, some of the hand-drawn diagrams are so overcrowded with small-scale details as to be practically unreadable. This volume belongs primarily in the personal libraries of invertebrate zoologists. Its reading by systems ecologists and soil scientists will be, in part, time well spent.--FRANCIS E. CLARK, Federal Research, Western Region, U.S. Department of Agriculture, P.O. Box E, Fort Collins, CO 80522.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose a conceptual framework for sustainable use of the soil resource and present seven general research questions whose resolution will provide a firmer base for the proposed conceptual framework.
Abstract: Soils are self-organized ecological systems within which organisms interact within a nested suite of discrete scales. Microorganisms form communities and physical structures at the smallest scale (microns), followed by the community of their predators organized in microfoodwebs (tens of microns), the functional domains built by ecosystem engineers (centimeters to meters), ecosystems, and landscapes. Ecosystem engineers, principally plant roots, earthworms, termites, and ants, play key roles in creating habitats for other organisms and controlling their activities through physical and biochemical processes. The biogenic, organic, and organomineral structures that they produce accumulate in the soil space to form three-dimensional mosaics of functional domains, inhabited by specific communities of smaller organisms (microfauna and mesofauna, microorganisms) that drive soil processes through specific pathways. Ecosystem engineers also produce signaling and energy-rich molecules that act as ecological mediators of biological engineering processes. Energy-rich ecological mediators may selectively activate microbial populations and trigger priming effects, resulting in the degradation, synthesis, and sequestration of specific organic substrates. Signaling molecules inform soil organisms of their producers' respective presences and change physiologies by modifying gene expression and through eliciting hormonal responses. Protection of plants against pests and diseases is largely achieved via these processes. At the highest scales, the delivery of ecosystem services emerges through the functioning of self-organized systems nested within each other. The integrity of the different subsystems at each scale and the quality of their interconnections are a precondition for an optimum and sustainable delivery of ecosystem services. Lastly, we present seven general research questions whose resolution will provide a firmer base for the proposed conceptual framework while offering new insights for sustainable use of the soil resource.
129 citations
Cites background from "A null-model analysis of the spatio..."
...The negative correlations that occur between the spatial distributions of soil ecosystem engineers of different species producing separate cast types have been often interpreted as a result of competition (Jimenez et al., 2001; Decaëns et al., 2009; Jimenez et al., 2012)....
TL;DR: The most conspicuous biological inva- sions in terrestrial ecosystems have been by exotic plants, insects and vertebrates. as mentioned in this paper explored the idea that indigenous earthworm fauna and/or characteristics of their characteristics are common in ecosystems inhabited by native earthworms, especially where soils are undisturbed.
Abstract: The most conspicuous biological inva- sions in terrestrial ecosystems have been by exotic plants, insects and vertebrates. Invasions by exo- tic earthworms, although not as well studied, may be increasing with global commerce in agricul- ture, waste management and bioremediation. A number of cases has documented where invasive earthworms have caused significant changes in soil profiles, nutrient and organic matter dynamics, other soil organisms or plant commu- nities. Most of these cases are in areas that have been disturbed (e.g., agricultural systems) or were previously devoid of earthworms (e.g., north of Pleistocene glacial margins). It is not clear that such effects are common in ecosystems inhabited by native earthworms, especially where soils are undisturbed. We explore the idea that indigenous earthworm fauna and/or characteristics of their
TL;DR: The role of earthworms in succession is understood to improve their role in soil restoration and soil management, and limiting environmental factors seem to play a more important role than inherent ecological characteristics like r/K selection.
Abstract: For cultivated soils, the important function of earthworms as ecosystem engineers and their major contribution to the composition and functioning of soil ecosystems with a varying species diversity has been extensively addressed. However, the role of earthworms as colonizers of virgin, uncultivated soil in the process of soil formation has been little researched and long underrated. To better understand this role, the following questions need to be considered: (1) what makes an early colonizer successful, what are its characteristics, and which species are the most successful and under what circumstances are they successful?; (2) what are the limiting factors in these colonization processes with respect to environmental conditions and also to interspecific interactions?; (3) what do earthworms contribute to the further colonization by other soil animals?; and (4) how do they impact the soil itself and what could therefore be the consequences for soil management and restoration?
These questions have recently been addressed from the perspective of new (or ‘alien’) earthworm species invading ecosystems, suggesting a massive influx of species, competitive to the originally present fauna. This idea is, however, contrary to colonization, which suggests a gradual exploration of a previously uninhabited area. Unlike recent research, this review approaches colonization primarily as a spatial dispersal process and part of natural succession processes, and is mainly illustrated with examples of Palearctic species, either in Europe or introduced elsewhere. To begin, the various stages of colonization: dispersal, establishment, population growth and interspecies relations are analysed. Next, the colonization processes, the possible limiting environmental factors and the sequence of the appearance and establishment of species are described. Dispersal rates and sequences of colonization by different earthworm species are given for different soil ecosystems. For colonization, limiting environmental factors such as pH, soil type and heavy metal contents as well as the presence of organic matter seem to play a more important role than inherent ecological characteristics like r/K selection. Finally, the role of earthworms in the early colonization of soils that are earthworm-free because of non-cosmopolitan distribution, drained former sea bottom, permanently water-logged soils or anaerobic, acid peaty soils are reviewed. If we understand the role of earthworms in succession, we will be able to improve their role in soil restoration and soil management.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a model for the analysis of variance in a single-classification and two-way and multiway analysis of Variance with the assumption of correlation.
Abstract: 1. Introduction 2. Data in Biology 3. Computers and Data Analysis 4. Descriptive Statistics 5. Introduction to Probability Distributions 6. The Normal Probability Distribution 7. Hypothesis Testing and Interval Estimation 8. Introduction to Analysis of Variance 9. Single-Classification Analysis of Variance 10. Nested Analysis of Variance 11. Two-Way and Multiway Analysis of Variance 12. Statistical Power and Sample Size in the Analysis of Variance 13. Assumptions of Analysis of Variance 14. Linear Regression 15. Correlation 16. Multiple and Curvilinear Regression 17. Analysis of Frequencies 18. Meta-Analysis and Miscellaneous Methods
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a model for the analysis of variance in a single-classification and two-way and multiway analysis of Variance with the assumption of correlation.
Abstract: 1. Introduction 2. Data in Biology 3. Computers and Data Analysis 4. Descriptive Statistics 5. Introduction to Probability Distributions 6. The Normal Probability Distribution 7. Hypothesis Testing and Interval Estimation 8. Introduction to Analysis of Variance 9. Single-Classification Analysis of Variance 10. Nested Analysis of Variance 11. Two-Way and Multiway Analysis of Variance 12. Statistical Power and Sample Size in the Analysis of Variance 13. Assumptions of Analysis of Variance 14. Linear Regression 15. Correlation 16. Multiple and Curvilinear Regression 17. Analysis of Frequencies 18. Meta-Analysis and Miscellaneous Methods
TL;DR: The role that many organisms play in the creation, modification and maintenance of habitats does not involve direct trophic interactions between species, but they are nevertheless important and common.
Abstract: Interactions between organisms are a major determinant of the distribution and abundance of species. Ecology textbooks (e.g., Ricklefs 1984, Krebs 1985, Begon et al. 1990) summarise these important interactions as intra- and interspecific competition for abiotic and biotic resources, predation, parasitism and mutualism. Conspicuously lacking from the list of key processes in most text books is the role that many organisms play in the creation, modification and maintenance of habitats. These activities do not involve direct trophic interactions between species, but they are nevertheless important and common. The ecological literature is rich in examples of habitat modification by organisms, some of which have been extensively studied (e.g. Thayer 1979, Naiman et al. 1988).
5,407 citations
"A null-model analysis of the spatio..." refers background in this paper
...Additionally, earthworms are ecosystem engineers (sensu Jones et al. 1994) able to physically modify their environment, thus altering resource availability for other species....
TL;DR: The book aims to instill in students an ability to think through biological research problems in such a way as to grasp the essentials of the experimental or analytical setup to know which types of statistical tests to apply in a given case and to carry out the computations required.
Abstract: This text develops the science of biometry from an elementary introduction up to the advanced methods necessary for biological research and for an understanding of the published literature. This text is aimed primarily at the academic biologist including general zoologists botanists microbiologists geneticists and physiologists in universities research institutes and museums. This book while furnishing ample directions for the analysis of experimental works also stresses the descriptive and analytical statistical study of biological phenomena. It is intended both as a text to accompany a lecture course and as a complete course for self-study. The book aims to instill in students an ability to think through biological research problems in such a way as to grasp the essentials of the experimental or analytical setup to know which types of statistical tests to apply in a given case and to carry out the computations required. Chapters cover biological data data handling descriptive statistics probability estimation and hupothesis testing analysis of variance linear regression correlation multiple and curvilinear regression analysis of frequencies and miscellaneous methods.
TL;DR: The total number of species is proportional to the total range of the environment divided by the niche breadth of the species, which is reduced by unequal abundance of resources but increased by adding to the dimensionality of the niche.
Abstract: 1. There is a limit to the similarity (and hence to the number) of competing species which can coexist. The total number of species is proportional to the total range of the environment divided by the niche breadth of the species. The number is reduced by unequal abundance of resources but increased by adding to the dimensionality of the niche. Niche breadth is increased with increased environmental uncertainty and with decreased productivity. 2. There is a different evolutionary limit, L, to the similarity of two coexisting species such that a) If two species are more similar than L, a third intermediate species will converge toward the nearer of the pair. b) If two species are more different than L, a third intermediate species will diverge from either toward a phenotype intermediate between the two.
3,946 citations
"A null-model analysis of the spatio..." refers background in this paper
...…to observe two types of non-random patterns: (1) within-patch niche overlap should be lower than EBC and lower than plot-scale overlap (MacArthur & Levins 1967, Weiher & Keddy 1995); (2) morphometric distance (size ratio) between species co-existing in a given patch should be higher and more…...
[...]
...Classic examples of the latter include limitation of similarity in body size or in multi-trait morphology (Hutchinson 1959, MacArthur & Levins 1967, Weiher & Keddy 1995, Weiher et al. 1998)....