A framework for linking competitor ecological differences to coexistence

Near-natural streams: Spatial factors are key in shaping multiple facets of zooplankton α and β diversity

In near-natural basins, zooplankton are key hubs for maintaining aquatic food webs and organic matter cycles. However, the spatial patterns and drivers of zooplankton in streams are poorly understood. This study registered 165 species of zooplankton from 147 sampling sites (Protozoa, Rotifers, Cladocera and Copepods), integrating multiple dimensions (i.e., taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic) and components (i.e., total, turnover, and nestedness) of α and β diversity. This study aims to reveal spatial patterns, mechanisms, correlations, and relative contribution of abiotic factors (i.e., local environment, geo-climatic, land use, and spatial factors) through spatial interpolation (ordinary kriging), mantel test, and variance partitioning analysis (VPA). The study found that α diversity is concentrated in the north, while β diversity is more in the west, which may be affected by typical habitat, hydrological dynamics and underlying mechanisms. Taxonomic and phylogenetic β diversity is dominated by turnover, and metacommunity heterogeneity is the result of substitution of species and phylogeny along environmental spatial gradients. Taxonomic and phylogenetic β diversity were strongly correlated (r from 0.91 to 0.95), mainly explained by historical/spatial isolation processes, community composition, generation time, and reproductive characteristics, and this correlation provides surrogate information for freshwater conservation priorities. In addition, spatial factors affect functional and phylogenetic α diversity (26%, 28%), and environmental filtering and spatial processes combine to drive taxonomic α diversity (10%) and phylogenetic β diversity (11%). Studies suggest that spatial factors are key to controlling the community structure of zooplankton assemblages in near-natural streams, and that the relative role of local environments may depend on the dispersal capacity of species. In terms of diversity conservation, sites with high variation in uniqueness should be protected (i) with a focus on the western part of the thousand islands lake catchment and (ii) increasing effective dispersal between communities to facilitate genetic and food chain transmission.

Interactions between fitness components across the life cycle constrain competitor coexistence

Numerous mechanisms can promote competitor coexistence. Yet, these mechanisms are often considered in isolation from one another. Consequently, whether multiple mechanisms shaping coexistence combine to promote or constrain species coexistence remains an open question. Here, we aim to understand how multiple mechanisms interact within and between life stages to determine frequency-dependent population growth, which has a key role stabilizing local competitor coexistence. We conducted field experiments in three lakes manipulating relative frequencies of two Enallagma damselfly species to evaluate demographic contributions of three mechanisms affecting different fitness components across the life cycle: the effect of resource competition on individual growth rate, predation shaping mortality rates, and mating harassment determining fecundity. We then used a demographic model that incorporates carry-over effects between life stages to decompose the relative effect of each fitness component generating frequency-dependent population growth. This decomposition showed that fitness components combined to increase population growth rates for one species when rare, but they combined to decrease population growth rates for the other species when rare, leading to predicted exclusion in most lakes. Because interactions between fitness components within and between life stages vary among populations, these results show that local coexistence is population specific. Moreover, we show that multiple mechanisms do not necessarily increase competitor coexistence, as they can also combine to yield exclusion. Identifying coexistence mechanisms in other systems will require greater focus on determining contributions of different fitness components across the life cycle shaping competitor coexistence in a way that captures the potential for population-level variation.

When Ecology Fails: How Reproductive Interactions Promote Species Coexistence

That species must differ ecologically is often viewed as a fundamental condition for their stable coexistence in biological communities. Yet, recent work has shown that ecologically equivalent species can coexist when reproductive interactions and sexual selection regulate population growth. Here, we review theoretical models and highlight empirical studies supporting a role for reproductive interactions in maintaining species diversity. We place reproductive interactions research within a burgeoning conceptual framework of coexistence theory, identify four key mechanisms in intra- and interspecific interactions within and between sexes, speculate on novel mechanisms, and suggest future research. Given the preponderance of sexual reproduction in nature, our review suggests that this is a neglected path towards explaining species diversity when traditional ecological explanations have failed.

Predators weaken prey intraspecific competition through phenotypic selection

Predators have a key role shaping competitor dynamics in food webs. Perhaps the most obvious way this occurs is when predators reduce competitor densities. However, consumption could also generate phenotypic selection on prey that determines the strength of competition, thus coupling consumptive and trait-based effects of predators. In a mesocosm experiment simulating fish predation on damselflies, we found that selection against high damselfly activity rates - a phenotype mediating predation and competition - weakened the strength of density dependence in damselfly growth rates. A field experiment corroborated this finding and showed that increasing damselfly densities in lakes with high fish densities had limited effects on damselfly growth rates but generated a precipitous growth rate decline where fish densities were lower - a pattern expected because of spatial variation in selection imposed by predation. These results suggest that accounting for both consumption and selection is necessary to determine how predators regulate prey competitive interactions.

Disentangling ecologically equivalent from neutral species: The mechanisms of population regulation matter

The neutral theory of biodiversity explored the structure of a community of ecologically equivalent species. Such species are expected to display community drift dynamics analogous to neutral alleles undergoing genetic drift. While entire communities of species are not ecologically equivalent, recent field experiments have documented the existence of guilds of such neutral species embedded in real food webs. What demographic outcomes of the interactions within and between species in these guilds are expected to produce ecological drift versus coexistence remains unclear. To address this issue, and guide empirical testing, we consider models of a guild of ecologically equivalent competitors feeding on a single resource to explore when community drift should manifest. We show that community drift dynamics only emerge when the density-dependent effects of each species on itself are identical to its density-dependent effects on every other guild member. In contrast, if each guild member directly limits itself more than it limits the abundance of other guild members, all species in the guild are coexisting, even though they all are ecologically equivalent with respect to their interactions with species outside the guild (i.e. resources, predators, mutualists). Hence, considering only interspecific ecological differences generating density dependence, and not fully accounting for the preponderance of mechanisms causing intraspecific density dependence, will provide an incomplete picture for segregating between neutrality and coexistence. We also identify critical experiments necessary to disentangle guilds of ecologically equivalent species from those experiencing ecological drift, as well as provide an overview of ways of incorporating a mechanistic basis into studies of species coexistence and neutrality. Identifying these characteristics, and the mechanistic basis underlying community structure, is not merely an exercise in clarifying the semantics of coexistence and neutral theories, but rather reflects key differences that must exist among community members in order to determine how and why communities are structured.