A Precipitation Gradient Drives Change in Macroinvertebrate Composition and Interactions Within Bromeliads

Overview

Journal PLoS One

Specialties General Medicine
Science

Date 2018 Nov 29

PMID 30485263

Authors

Laura Melissa Guzman

Bram Vanschoenwinkel

Vinicius F Farjalla

Anita Poon

Diane S Srivastava

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Ecological communities change across spatial and environmental gradients due to (i) changes in species composition, (ii) changes in the frequency or strength of interactions or (iii) changes in the presence of the interactions. Here we use the communities of aquatic invertebrates inhabiting clusters of bromeliad phytotelms along the Brazilian coast as a model system for examining variation in multi-trophic communities. We first document the variation in the species pools of sites across a geographical climate gradient. Using the same sites, we also explored the geographic variation in species interaction strength using a Markov network approach. We found that community composition differed along a gradient of water volume within bromeliads due to the spatial turnover of some species. From the Markov network analysis, we found that the interactions of certain predators differed due to differences in bromeliad water volume. Overall, this study illustrates how a multi-trophic community can change across an environmental gradient through changes in both species and their interactions.

References

Harris D . Inferring species interactions from co-occurrence data with Markov networks. Ecology. 2016; 97(12):3308-3314. DOI: 10.1002/ecy.1605. View

Srivastava D . Habitat structure, trophic structure and ecosystem function: interactive effects in a bromeliad-insect community. Oecologia. 2006; 149(3):493-504. DOI: 10.1007/s00442-006-0467-3. View

Edgerly J, Willey M, Livdahl T . Intraguild predation among larval treehole mosquitoes, Aedes albopictus, Ae. aegypti, and Ae. triseriatus (Diptera: Culicidae), in laboratory microcosms. J Med Entomol. 1999; 36(3):394-9. DOI: 10.1093/jmedent/36.3.394. View

Maser G, Guichard F, McCann K . Weak trophic interactions and the balance of enriched metacommunities. J Theor Biol. 2007; 247(2):337-45. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2007.03.003. View

Rall B, Brose U, Hartvig M, Kalinkat G, Schwarzmuller F, Vucic-Pestic O . Universal temperature and body-mass scaling of feeding rates. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2012; 367(1605):2923-34. PMC: 3479751. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2012.0242. View

Poisot T, Canard E, Mouillot D, Mouquet N, Gravel D . The dissimilarity of species interaction networks. Ecol Lett. 2012; 15(12):1353-61. DOI: 10.1111/ele.12002. View

Englund G, Johansson F, Olofsson P, Salonsaari J, Ohman J . Predation leads to assembly rules in fragmented fish communities. Ecol Lett. 2009; 12(7):663-71. DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01322.x. View

Freilich M, Wieters E, Broitman B, Marquet P, Navarrete S . Species co-occurrence networks: Can they reveal trophic and non-trophic interactions in ecological communities?. Ecology. 2018; 99(3):690-699. DOI: 10.1002/ecy.2142. View

Connolly J, Wayne P . Asymmetric competition between plant species. Oecologia. 2017; 108(2):311-320. DOI: 10.1007/BF00334656. View

10.

Farjalla V, Srivastava D, Marino N, Azevedo F, Dib V, Lopes P . Ecological determinism increases with organism size. Ecology. 2012; 93(7):1752-9. DOI: 10.1890/11-1144.1. View

11.

Amundrud S, Srivastava D . Trophic interactions determine the effects of drought on an aquatic ecosystem. Ecology. 2016; 97(6):1475-83. DOI: 10.1890/15-1638.1. View

12.

Pawar S, Dell A, Savage V . Dimensionality of consumer search space drives trophic interaction strengths. Nature. 2012; 486(7404):485-9. DOI: 10.1038/nature11131. View

13.

Stone L, Roberts A . The checkerboard score and species distributions. Oecologia. 2017; 85(1):74-79. DOI: 10.1007/BF00317345. View

14.

Slade E, Mann D, Villanueva J, Lewis O . Experimental evidence for the effects of dung beetle functional group richness and composition on ecosystem function in a tropical forest. J Anim Ecol. 2007; 76(6):1094-104. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2007.01296.x. View

15.

Petermann J, Farjalla V, Jocque M, Kratina P, MacDonald A, Marino N . Dominant predators mediate the impact of habitat size on trophic structure in bromeliad invertebrate communities. Ecology. 2015; 96(2):428-39. DOI: 10.1890/14-0304.1. View

16.

Romero G, Piccoli G, de Omena P, Goncalves-Souza T . Food web structure shaped by habitat size and climate across a latitudinal gradient. Ecology. 2016; 97(10):2705-2715. DOI: 10.1002/ecy.1496. View

17.

Anderson M . Distance-based tests for homogeneity of multivariate dispersions. Biometrics. 2006; 62(1):245-53. DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2005.00440.x. View

18.

Laliberte E, Tylianakis J . Deforestation homogenizes tropical parasitoid-host networks. Ecology. 2010; 91(6):1740-7. DOI: 10.1890/09-1328.1. View

19.

Srivastava D, Trzcinski M, Richardson B, Gilbert B . Why are predators more sensitive to habitat size than their prey? Insights from bromeliad insect food webs. Am Nat. 2008; 172(6):761-71. DOI: 10.1086/592868. View

20.

Wagg C, Bender S, Widmer F, van der Heijden M . Soil biodiversity and soil community composition determine ecosystem multifunctionality. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014; 111(14):5266-70. PMC: 3986181. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1320054111. View