» Articles » PMID: 32811317

How to Estimate Community Energy Flux? A Comparison of Approaches Reveals That Size-abundance Trade-offs Alter the Scaling of Community Energy Flux

Overview
Journal Proc Biol Sci
Specialty Biology
Date 2020 Aug 20
PMID 32811317
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Size and metabolism are highly correlated, so that community energy flux might be predicted from size distributions alone. However, the accuracy of predictions based on interspecific energy-size relationships relative to approaches not based on size distributions is unknown. We compare six approaches to predict energy flux in phytoplankton communities across succession: assuming a constant energy use among species (per cell or unit biomass), using energy-size interspecific scaling relationships and species-specific rates (both with or without accounting for density effects). Except for the per cell approach, all others explained some variation in energy flux but their accuracy varied considerably. Surprisingly, the best approach overall was based on mean biomass-specific rates, followed by the most complex (species-specific rates with density). We show that biomass-specific rates alone predict community energy flux because the allometric scaling of energy use with size measured for species in isolation does not reflect the isometric scaling of these species in communities. We also find energy equivalence throughout succession, even when communities are not at carrying capacity. Finally, we discuss that species assembly can alter energy-size relationships, and that metabolic suppression in response to density might drive the allometry of community energy flux as biomass accumulates.

Citing Articles

Biomass competition connects individual and community scaling patterns.

Fant L, Ghedini G Nat Commun. 2024; 15(1):9916.

PMID: 39548097 PMC: 11567973. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-54307-w.


Variation in thermal physiology can drive the temperature-dependence of microbial community richness.

Clegg T, Pawar S Elife. 2024; 13.

PMID: 39348267 PMC: 11588335. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.84662.

References
1.
Ghedini G, Loreau M, Marshall D . Community efficiency during succession: a test of MacArthur's minimization principle in phytoplankton communities. Ecology. 2020; 101(6):e03015. DOI: 10.1002/ecy.3015. View

2.
Brose U, Ehnes R, Rall B, Vucic-Pestic O, Berlow E, Scheu S . Foraging theory predicts predator-prey energy fluxes. J Anim Ecol. 2008; 77(5):1072-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01408.x. View

3.
DeLong J, Okie J, Moses M, Sibly R, Brown J . Shifts in metabolic scaling, production, and efficiency across major evolutionary transitions of life. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010; 107(29):12941-5. PMC: 2919978. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1007783107. View

4.
Huete-Ortega M, Cermeno P, Calvo-Diaz A, Maranon E . Isometric size-scaling of metabolic rate and the size abundance distribution of phytoplankton. Proc Biol Sci. 2011; 279(1734):1815-23. PMC: 3297465. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2011.2257. View

5.
Andersen K, Beyer J . Asymptotic size determines species abundance in the marine size spectrum. Am Nat. 2006; 168(1):54-61. DOI: 10.1086/504849. View