Disturbance Alters the Phylogenetic Composition and Structure of Plant Communities in an Old Field System

Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
PLoS ONE (Impact Factor: 3.53). 09/2009; 4(9):e7071. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007071
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The changes in phylogenetic composition and structure of communities during succession following disturbance can give us insights into the forces that are shaping communities over time. In abandoned agricultural fields, community composition changes rapidly when a field is plowed, and is thought to reflect a relaxation of competition due to the elimination of dominant species which take time to re-establish. Competition can drive phylogenetic overdispersion, due to phylogenetic conservation of 'niche' traits that allow species to partition resources. Therefore, undisturbed old field communities should exhibit higher phylogenetic dispersion than recently disturbed systems, which should be relatively 'clustered' with respect to phylogenetic relationships. Several measures of phylogenetic structure between plant communities were measured in recently plowed areas and nearby 'undisturbed' sites. There was no difference in the absolute values of these measures between disturbed and 'undisturbed' sites. However, there was a difference in the 'expected' phylogenetic structure between habitats, leading to significantly lower than expected phylogenetic diversity in disturbed plots, and no difference from random expectation in 'undisturbed' plots. This suggests that plant species characteristic of each habitat are fairly evenly distributed on the shared species pool phylogeny, but that once the initial sorting of species into the two habitat types has occurred, the processes operating on them affect each habitat differently. These results were consistent with an analysis of correlation between phylogenetic distance and co-occurrence indices of species pairs in the two habitat types. This study supports the notion that disturbed plots are more clustered than expected, rather than 'undisturbed' plots being more overdispersed, suggesting that disturbed plant communities are being more strongly influenced by environmental filtering of conserved niche traits.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: 1. Incorporating the evolutionary history of species into community ecology enhances understanding of community composition, ecosystem functioning and responses to environmental changes.2. Phylogenetic history might partly explain the impact of fragmentation and land-use change on assemblages of interacting organisms, and even determine potential cascading effects across trophic levels. However, it remains unclear whether phylogenetic diversity of basal resources is reflected at higher trophic levels in the food web. In particular, phylogenetic determinants of community structure have never been incorporated into habitat edge studies, even though edges are recognised as key factors affecting communities in fragmented landscapes.3. Here we test whether phylogenetic diversity at different trophic levels (plants, herbivores, parasitoids) and signals of coevolution (i.e. phylogenetic congruence) among interacting trophic levels change across an edge gradient between native and plantation forests. To ascertain whether there is a signal of coevolution across trophic levels, we test whether related consumer species generally feed on related resource species.4. We found differences across trophic levels in how their phylogenetic diversity responded to the habitat edge gradient. Plant and native parasitoid phylogenetic diversity changed markedly across habitats, while phylogenetic variability of herbivores (which were predominantly native) did not change across habitats, though phylogenetic evenness declined in plantation interiors. Related herbivore species did not appear to feed disproportionately on related plant species (i.e. there was no signal of coevolution) even when considering only native species, potentially due to the high trophic generality of herbivores. However, related native parasitoid species tended to feed on related herbivore species, suggesting the presence of a coevolutionary signal at higher trophic levels. Moreover, this signal was stronger in plantation forests, indicating that this habitat may impose stresses on parasitoids that constrain them to attack only host species for which they are best adapted.5. Overall, changes in land use across native to plantation forest edges differentially affected phylogenetic diversity across trophic levels, and may also exert a strong selective pressure for particular coevolved herbivore-parasitoid interactions.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
    Journal of Animal Ecology 10/2014; 84(2). DOI:10.1111/1365-2656.12296 · 4.73 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Czech villages in Romanian Banat: landscape, nature and culture, First edited by Petr Maděra, Pavel Kovář, Dušan Romportl, Antonín Buček, 01/2014: chapter Vernacular architecture of Czech villages: pages 52 - 83; Mendel University in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic., ISBN: 978-80-7375-960-5
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Habitat conversion is the primary driver of biodiversity loss, yet little is known about how it is restructuring the tree of life by favoring some lineages over others. We combined a complete avian phylogeny with 12 years of Costa Rican bird surveys (118,127 detections across 487 species) sampled in three land uses: forest reserves, diversified agricultural systems, and intensive monocultures. Diversified agricultural systems supported 600 million more years of evolutionary history than intensive monocultures but 300 million fewer years than forests. Compared with species with many extant relatives, evolutionarily distinct species were extirpated at higher rates in both diversified and intensive agricultural systems. Forests are therefore essential for maintaining diversity across the tree of life, but diversified agricultural systems may help buffer against extreme loss of phylogenetic diversity.
    Science 09/2014; 345(6202):1343-6. DOI:10.1126/science.1254610 · 31.48 Impact Factor

Preview (2 Sources)

Available from