4.7 Article

Hierarchical analysis of species distributions and abundance across environmental gradients

Journal

ECOLOGY
Volume 88, Issue 12, Pages 3144-3152

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1890/07-0047.1

Keywords

conditional autoregressive models; environmental gradients; Goodyera pubescens; hierarchical Bayesian framework; niche; Orchidaceae; spatial scale; species distributions; Tipularia discolor

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Abiotic and biotic processes operate at multiple spatial and temporal scales to shape many ecological processes, including species distributions and demography. Current debate about the relative roles of niche-based and stochastic processes in shaping species distributions and community composition reflects, in part, the challenge of understanding how these processes interact across scales. Traditional statistical models that ignore autocorrelation and spatial hierarchies can result in misidentification of important ecological covariates. Here, we demonstrate the utility of a hierarchical modeling framework for testing hypotheses about the importance of abiotic factors at different spatial scales and local spatial autocorrelation for shaping species distributions and abundances. For the two orchid species studied, understory light availability and soil moisture helped to explain patterns of presence and abundance at a microsite scale (< 4 m(2)), while soil organic content was important at a population scale (< 400 m(2)). The inclusion of spatial autocorrelation is shown to alter the magnitude and certainty of estimated relationships between abundance and abiotic variables, and we suggest that such analysis be used more often to explore the relationships between species life histories and distributions. The hierarchical modeling framework is shown to have great potential for elucidating ecological relationships involving abiotic and biotic processes simultaneously at multiple scales.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available