1 - Springer Static Content Server
advertisement
Supplementary Material (Online only) Appendix 1: List of studies Reference Organism Habitat Landscape explicit? Landscape model Metacommunity model Doi et al. 2010 Zooplankton Aquatic No Mosaic1 Mass effect Doi et al. 2010 Zooplankton Aquatic No Mosaic Species sorting Species sorting Carranza et al. 2010 Gastropod Aquatic Yes Gradient2 Carranza et al. 2010 Gastropod Aquatic Yes Gradient Mass effect Species sorting Matthiessen et al. 2010 Microalgae Aquatic No Mosaic3 Okuda et al. 2010 Microalgae Aquatic No Mosaic4 Species sorting Okuda et al. 2010 Invertebrate Aquatic No Mosaic Mass effect Okuda et al. 2010 Mollusk Aquatic No Mosaic Species sorting 5 Westley et al. 2010 Fish Aquatic No Mosaic Species sorting Westley et al. 2010 Fish Aquatic No Mosaic Mass effect Species sorting Brown and Swan 2010 Invertebrate Aquatic No Gradient6 Brown and Swan 2010 Invertebrate Aquatic No Gradient Mass effect Mass effect de Macedo-Soares et al. 2010 Fish Aquatic Yes Mosaic7 de Macedo-Soares et al. 2010 Fish Aquatic Yes Mosaic Species sorting Presley and Willig 2010 Bat Terrestrial No Mosaic8 Patch dynamics No Gradient9 Species sorting Yes Gradient10 Species sorting No Binary11 Patch dynamics No Gradient12 Mass effect Mass effect Heino et al. 2010 Driscoll et al. 2010 Vanschoenwinkel et al 2009 Nabout et al. 2009 Diatom Beetle Invertebrate Phytoplankton Aquatic Terrestrial Aquatic Aquatic Perry et al. 2009 Plant Terrestrial No Mosaic13 Convertino et al. 2009 NA Aquatic Yes Homogeneous Neutral Zealand and Jeffries 2009 Snail Aquatic No Mosaic14 Mass effect Hendricks et al. 2009 Beetles Terrestrial Yes Mosaic Mass effect Yes Mosaic15 Species sorting Species sorting Hendricks et al. 2009 Beetles Terrestrial Pandit et al. 2009 Invertebrate Aquatic No Mosaic16 Pandit et al. 2009 Invertebrate Aquatic No Mosaic Patch dynamics No Mosaic17 Species sorting No Mosaic18 Species sorting Species sorting Werner et al. 2009 Binckley and Restarits 2009 Amphibian Beetles Aquatic Aquatic Lindo and Winchester 2009 Mite Terrestrial No Mosaic19 Soininen and Weckstrom 2009 Diatom Aquatic No Mosaic20 Species sorting Soininen and Weckstrom 2009 Diatom Aquatic No Mosaic Neutral No Gradient21 Species sorting No Gradient22 Species sorting Yes Mosaic23 Species sorting No Mosaic24 Species sorting Yes Binary25 Patch dynamics No Mosaic26 Species sorting Debout et al. 2009 Jones and McMahon 2009 Svenning et al. 2009 Vanromelingen et al. 2008 Loebel et al. 2009 Nig et al. 2009 Ant Bacteria Plant Phytoplankton Bryophyte Zooplankton Terrestrial Aquatic Terrestrial Aquatic Terrestrial Aquatic Reference Organism Habitat Landscape explicit? Landscape model Metacommunity model McCauley et al. 2008 Odonates Aquatic No Mosaic27 Species sorting No Gradient28 Species sorting No Binary29 Patch dynamics Yes Mosaic30 Mass effect Species sorting Heino et al. 2008 Azeria and Kolasa 2008 Guelat et al. 2008 Insect Invertebrate Shrew Aquatic Aquatic Terrestrial Questad et al. 2008 Grassland Terrestrial No Mosaic31 Meynard and Quinn 2008 Bird Terrestrial No Mosaic32 Species sorting Muneepeerakul et al. 2008 Fish Aquatic Yes Gradient33 Neutral Spiesman and Cumming 2008 Ant Terrestrial No Mosaic34 Species sorting No Mosaic35 Species sorting No Mosaic36 Species sorting Species sorting Brooks et al. 2008 Van der Gucht et al. 2007 Beetles Bacteria Terrestrial Aquatic Vanschoenwinkel et al. 2008 Invertebrate Aquatic No Mosaic37 Vanschoenwinkel et al. 2008 Invertebrate Aquatic No Mosaic Mass effect Mass effect Stevens et al. 2007 Langenheder and Ragnassson 2007 Bat Terrestrial Yes Gradient38 Bacteria Aquatic Yes Mosaic39 Species sorting Species sorting Vanschoenwinkel et al. 2007 Zooplankton Aquatic No Mosaic40 Vanschoenwinkel et al. 2007 Zooplankton Aquatic No Mosaic Mass effect Mass effect Van de Meutter et al. 2007 Invertebrate Aquatic No Mosaic41 Huguney et al 2007 Daphnia Aquatic No Mosaic42 Mass effect Crump et al. 2007 Bacterioplankton Aquatic No Gradient43 Mass effect Species sorting Ritcher-Boix et al. 2007 Amphibian Aquatic Yes Mosaic44 Ritcher-Boix et al. 2007 amphibian Aquatic Yes Mosaic Mass effect No Mosaic45 Species sorting Species sorting Bloch et al. 2007 Gastropod Terrestrial Ellis et al. 2006 Mosqueto Terrestrial No Mosaic46 Ellis et al. 2006 Mosqueto Terrestrial No Mosaic Patch dynamics Patch dynamics McCauly 2006 Odonates Terrestrial No Binary47 Parris 2006 Amphibian Aquatic No Mosaic48 Species sorting Parris 2006 Amphibian Aquatic No Mosaic Mass effect Microcosm No Binary49 Patch dynamics Aquatic No Gradient50 Species sorting Aquatic No Gradient Mass effect No 51 Mosaic Mass effect Species sorting Cadotte 2006 Heino 2005 Heino 2005 Urban 2004 Microbe ChiroNomid midges ChiroNomid midges Invertebrate Aquatic Cottenie et al. 2003 Zooplankton Aquatic No Gradient52 Cottenie et al. 2003 Zooplankton Aquatic No Gradient Mass effect Cottenie and De Meester 2003 Zooplankton Aquatic No Gradient53 Species sorting No Gradient54 Species sorting No Binary55 Patch dynamics No Gradient56 Species sorting Species sorting Mass effect Cottenie et al. 2001 Burns and Neufeld 2009 Cottenie and Meester2004 Zooplankton Plant Zooplankton Aquatic Terrestrial Aquatic Grace and Guntenspergen 1999 Plant Aquatic No Gradient57 Grace and Guntenspergen 1999 Plant Aquatic No Gradient Reference Organism Habitat Landscape explicit? Landscape model Metacommunity model Heino et al. 2003 Invertebrate Aquatic No Mosaic58 Species sorting Species sorting Hannay et al. 2001 Hannay et al. 2001 Hannay et al. 2001 Plant Aquatic No Mosaic59 Plant Aquatic No Mosaic Patch dynamics Plant Aquatic No Mosaic Mass effect Species sorting Keller and Conlon 1994 Zooplankton Aquatic No Mosaic60 Parris 2004 Amphibian Aquatic No Mosaic61 Species sorting Townsend et al. 2003 Invertebrate Aquatic No Gradient62 Species sorting Worthern et al. 1998 Marsh-Mathews and Mathews 2000 Flies Terrestrial No Mosaic63 Species sorting Fish Aquatic No Mosaic64 Species sorting Hahs et al. 1999 Plant Terrestrial No Mosaic65 Species sorting O’Brien et al. 2004 Fish Aquatic Yes Mosaic66 Species sorting Krauss et al. 2003 Butterflies Terrestrial 67 No Gradient Patch dynamics Species sorting Plourde et al. 2002 Zooplankton Aquatic No Mosaic68 Plourde et al. 2002 Zooplankton Aquatic No Mosaic Mass effect No Mosaic69 Patch dynamics No Mosaic70 Species sorting Patch dynamics Summerville and Crist 2004 Zimmer et al. 2000 Butterflies Invertebrate Terrestrial Aquatic Ellingsen 2001 Invertebrate Aquatic No Mosaic71 Ellingsen 2002 Invertebrate Aquatic No Mosaic72 Species sorting Ellingsen 2002 Lougheed and Chow-Fraser 1998 Invertebrate Aquatic No Mosaic Mass effect Zooplankton Aquatic No Mosaic73 Species sorting Muylaert et al. 2000 Phytoplankton Aquatic No Gradient74 Species sorting Fleishman et al. 2002 Butterflies Terrestrial No Gradient75 Species sorting Fleishman et al. 2002 Butterflies Terrestrial No Gradient Mass effect Species sorting Harrison et al. 2003 Plant Terrestrial No Mosaic76 Harrison et al. 2003 Plant Terrestrial No Mosaic Mass effect No Mosaic77 Species sorting Yes Mosaic78 Species sorting Species sorting Ebert et al. 2001 Krauss et al. 2004 Zooplankton Plant Aquatic Terrestrial Arrington et al. 2006 Fish Aquatic Yes Mosaic79 Arrington et al. 2006 Invertebrate Aquatic Yes Mosaic Patch dynamics Brunke and Gonser 1999 Invertebrate Aquatic Yes Gradient80 Species sorting Englund 1991 Moss Aquatic No Binary81 Mass effect No Mosaic82 Mass effect Yes Mosaic83 Species sorting No Homogeneous84 Mass effect Aquatic No Mosaic85 Species sorting Aquatic Yes Gradient86 Mass effect No Gradient87 Species sorting No Homogeneous88 Mass effect Yes Gradient89 Species sorting Gjerlov et al. 2003 Kobayashi and Kagaya 2004 Matthaei et al. 2000 Palmar et al. 1991 Silver et al. 2004 Suren and Duncan 1999 Tronstad et al. 2007 Whittaker 1952 Invertebrate Invertebrate Invertebrate Invertebrate ChiroNomid midges Bryophyte Invertebrate Insect Aquatic Aquatic Aquatic Aquatic Aquatic Terrestrial Reference Organism Habitat Landscape explicit? Landscape model Metacommunity model Whittaker 1956 Plant Terrestrial Yes Gradient90 Species sorting Yes Gradient91 Species sorting Yes Gradient92 Species sorting No Binary93 Patch dynamics Patch dynamics Whittaker 1960 Whittaker 1965 Patterson 1987 Plant Plant Bird Terrestrial Terrestrial Terrestrial Patterson and Atmar 1986 Mammals Terrestrial No Mosaic94 Brady et al. 1991 Spider Terrestrial No Mosaic95 Species sorting Gilpin and Diamond 1982 Fauna Terrestrial No Binary96 Patch dynamics Gilbert and Lechowicz 2004 Plant Terrestrial No Gradient97 Species sorting Note: 1 “Of the 18 ponds, 9 were downstream of another pond, to which they were connected by small artificial channels. The other 9 ponds were upstream of the 9 connected ponds. The 9 connected ponds were not connected to each other.” 2 “The Uruguayan shelf is dominated by a homogeneous soft sediment body, with an increase in mean grain size towards the continental shelf and slope, and presents little rocky substrata…..The study area is also characterized by a singular oceanographic system composed by water masses with contrasting thermohaline characteristics, i.e. tropical waters (TW), subtropical waters (STW), subantarctic waters (SAW) and coastal waters (CW).., thus defining large-scale gradients in sea water temperature and salinity” 3 “By varying the strength of print on the foils, six levels of shading were created resulting in different light intensities (5, 10, 15, 20, 30, and 40 µmol,m-2s-2) among the patches of metacommunities..” 4 “Intertidal benthic communities are affected by vertical envi- ronmental gradients (e.g., due to desiccation stress), and the abundance of each species varies greatly with tide levels ranging from several tens of centimeters to several meters (Bertness et al., 2006). Therefore, we divided each plot vertically into four quad- rats measuring 50 cm wide by 25 cm high and surveyed the community in each quadrat.:.” levels: shore, plot, quadrats 5 “The two lakes, Black Lake and Chignik Lake, are dramatically different in abiotic and biotic characteristics” 6 “The basis of the MBSS design is lattice or multi-stratification sampling that ensures all 1st through 3rd order (now 1st through 4th order), non-tidal streams in the sampling frame have a non-zero and known probability of being sampled” www.dnr.state.md.us/streams/mbss “ 7 “In Rio de Janeiro State, a 14 860-ha mosaic consisting of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems was established in 1998 as the sole Conservation Unit in Brazil protecting a ‘restinga’ ecosystem” 8 “They differ greatly in physical characteristics and span a gamut from small (<1 km2), low (<5 m above sea level) cays, with little more than sand and sparse scrub vegetation, to large (114,524.0 sq km2), high (3175.0 m) islands that are physiographically diverse, with many different habitat types..” 9 “sampling of first to sixth order stream..” 10 “The patches range in size from a few hectares up to several square kilometres. The rainforest varies in plant species composition, and forest patches can occur in a range of post-fire successional stages “. 11 “The study site consists of a cluster of 36 temporary rock pools” 12 “The Araguaia River system (Amazon River Basin) rises in the highlands of Central Brazil, discharges into the Tocantins River, and has numerous floodplain lakes along its course. Twenty-one of these lakes were investigated in this study (Fig. 1). Most of the study area is covered by savanna” 13 “Sites were located in (1) a tall shrubland on deep acid sands of a low dune (Crest), (2) a low shrubland on shallow acid sands overlying clays of an inter-dune (Swale), and (3) a low shrubland on shallow sands overlying lateritic gravels (Laterite), to provide three high-diversity data sets spanning a range of substrates” 14 “Ponds were chosen to include both obvious clusters and more isolated sites and also ponds with different origins and current management, in particular four types: nature reserve ponds, subsidence ponds, old field ponds and coastal dune ponds” 15 “We therefore included landscapes that differed profoundly in habitat composition of semi-natural patches (see Billeter et al., 2008, for maps of some representative landscapes used in this study). The absence of a significant correlation between landscape coverage of the two main habitat types, i.e. woody and herbaceous habitats, across the 24 landscapes reduced possible confounding effects of the relationship between habitat composition and species diversity” 16 “For the study, we selected 49 rock pools (see Plate 1) with a volume of no less than 500 mL, situated on fossil reef, within a 25-m radius of mixed land and sea environment. The pools in this small area had varying environmental characteristics” 17 “After metamorphosis, juveniles move into lowland marshes, wetlands, and moist upland forests (Delzell 1958, Alexander 1965). Experimental studies both in the laboratory and field have outlined the mechanistic basis for the differences in Pseudacris distributions on the hydroperiod gradient” 18 “We established 24 experimental ponds organised into six rectangular spatial blocks of four ponds each at the Naval Security Group Activity Northwest (NSGANW) base in Chesapeake, Virginia” 19 “ Estuaries were chosen according to the presence of large Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong) Carr.) trees within the alluvial flood plain. Within each estuary, three plots were chosen depending on the location of Sitka spruce…all plots were pooled within each watershed” 20 “The PCA showed that the main gradients in water chemistry of lakes and streams were relatively similar in the study area in northern Finland although the main PCA gradient was more related to water pH in lakes, whereas in streams the main PCA gradient was mainly related to alkalinity and conductivity. According to NMDS, however, the lake and stream diatom communities differed sharply” 21 “Experiments and surveys were carried out in 25 patches along an 85 km transect” 22 “Crystal Bog is a small, humic lake located in Vilas County, Wisconsin, USA. This polymictic, shallow lake is stained and acidic as a result of the surrounding Sphagnum bog mat” 23 “The RBSF lower montane rain forest is characterized by a species-rich, 20–35 m tall and 2–3-layered tree stratum” 24 “The pond system in the nature reserve ‘De Maten’, Genk, Belgium, consists at present of 34 eutrophic shallow ponds which are directly interconnected through rivulets and overflows. This results in a similar nutrient loading for all ponds, while they still maintain large differences in food web structure” 25 “..many old deciduous forests were cut and replaced by forests dominated by Picea abies... Today, 135 forest stands with host trees (0.1– 15 ha in size) are left; these form distinct habitat patches for the studied epiphytes” 26 “This rock bluff metacommunity consists of three rock bluffs (A, B, and C), each containing rock pools that have formed from precipitation and/or salt spray. The pools are known to contain Anostraca, Cladocera, and Copepod. The pools differ in several local environmental variables..” 27 “The water bodies surveyed encompassed the majority of lentic habitat types in the region, from small, shaded, ephemeral ponds in which invertebrates were the dominant predators to large, open-canopy, permanent lakes with large-bodied predatory fish” 28 “The bedrock of the study area is highly variable, with extensive occurrence of calcareous rocks. Accompanied by considerable relative altitudinal differences, this geological variability is mirrored in highly variable vegetation, ranging from old-growth coniferous forests to mixed-deciduous riparian woodlots, and from nutrient-poor bogs to fertile fens” 29 “This study was based on extensive data of aquatic meio- and micro-invertebrates inhabiting a system of 49 rock pool microcosms located within a radius of 30 m and monitored every winter from 1989/90 to 2002, at the Discovery Bay Marine Laboratory, on the north coast of Jamaica (Therriault and Kolasa 2000, Kolasa and Romanuk 2005). The rock pools are small (20_60 cm along longer axis), situated 1_235 cm (mean_76 cm) above the high tide level, with the tide rarely exceeding 30 cm range.” 30 “Sampling sites consisted of 20 x 20 m areas within private gardens. These were always adjacent to human habitations, and usually comprised some lawn, a vegetable garden, a compost pile, wooden piles, stone walls, and hedges” 31 “The disturbance treatments were four manipulated levels of spatio-temporal patch heterogeneity applied at the scale of the 1-m2 patches” 32 “Farther south, bird species diversity in evergreen temperate forests has been related to vegetation structural elements such as forest seral stage, understory cover, availability of deadwood, and fragment area.. reserves tend to be dominated by second-growth forests, whereas parks are dominated by old-growth forests.” 33 “Its vast extent spans diverse habitat types operating under varying environmental conditions (such as climate, hydrological regime, primary productivity and human disturbance); these diverse habitats are connected to each other by one river network” 34 “Sandhill habitat, a rolling savanna-like ecosystem, is characterized by an open canopy of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) and scattered oak species. The understory is a sparse yet diverse mix of wiregrass (Aristida stricta) and other perennial herbs with few shrubs” 35 “..here reappraise data from the FSE covering spring crops of beet, maize and oilseed rape and winter oilseed rape. Sites were fields, each representing a single block in a randomized block design, within which conventional and GMHT treatments were applied randomly to half-fields” 36 “Lakes were not selected randomly, but according to four potentially important key factors: submerged vegetation cover (more than or less than 20% of the lake area surface covered), total phosphorus (more than or less than 100_g_l_1), lake surface area (more than or less than 5 ha), and the degree of connectedness (‘‘isolated’’: distance to nearest lake longer than 200 m; first order lake if part of river system; ‘‘connected’’: distance to nearest lake _200 m; second or higher order lake and distance to upstream lake smaller than 1 km if part of river system” 37 “The study site consists of a cluster of rock pools including 36 basins (area: 0.6_50 m2) and a larger number of small depressions and cracks. Pools are located on a flat sandstone rock ledg” 38 “Seven different phytogeographical zones are recognized..” 39 “The rock pools are grouped into five locations” 40 “The study site consists of 36 rock pools…It comprises various geological formations. The youngest (Clarence) formation tends to form calcareous concretions from trapped organic matter.. All microhabitats were traversed in order to obtain a representative composite sample for each pool” 41 “The reserve comprises 33 shallow ponds, connected by a complex network of rivulets and overflows (Appendix A). Despite the high degree of connectivity, the shallow ponds display striking differences in environmental conditions” 42 “..small bedrock depressions containing fresh or brackish water, in coastal areas around Scandinavia and on the numerous islets and islands in the Baltic Sea. The daphnids have Palearctic or Holarctic distributions and can also live in lakes and ponds; however, on Fennoscandian islands, rock pools are the only suitable habitat..” 43 “The Toolik Lake catchment (6690 ha) is a research site for the Arctic Long-Term Ecological Research program, and is an archetype of regional tundra terrain. The main inlet stream to Toolik Lake drains 75% of the catchment and is formed by the merger of two streams, each draining large catchments similar in area but with different lake– stream configurations. One contains a chain of nine lakes while the other contains only one lake near its base fed by a large network of headwater streams” 44 “..Collserola is formed by a mosaic of landscapes, ranging from forests of Aleppo, nut pines and evergreen oaklands, to maquis and scrublands and cultivated area” 45 “Using aerial photographs and US Forest Service records, locations on the LFDP can be allocated into four categories (hereafter, cover classes..)” 46 Each tree hole was a patch that differs in terms of volume of water content [which is the determinants of habitat quality for mosquito] 47 “Artificial ponds (cattle tanks) were established in May 2002 and monitored through October 2003 for dragonflies dispersing to and colonizing ponds” 48 “Sites were selected remotely using maps and aerial photographs, and stratified on pond size (two classes; < 200 m2 and 200 m2 ), the presence or absence of a vertical pond wall, and landscape context (urban or rural)” 49 “Local patches were 125-mL Nalgene narrow-mouth square bottles (Nalg Nunc, Rochester, New York, USA) with two or four 4.76-mm holes drilled into opposing sides and tapped.. a preliminary experiment found no significant differences in protozoan abundances attributable to the number of connectors” 50 “Accompanied by considerable altitudinal differences, this is mirrored in highly variable vegetation, ranging from old-growth coniferous forests and deciduous riparian zones to nutrient-poor bogs and luxurious fens. The 34 sites surveyed for the present study represent typical headwater streams and small rivers in the area” 51 “I estimated total pond habitat diversity as the number of habitats classified by k-means clustering with cluster number determined objectively” 52 “The ponds are connected with each other through a system of overflows and rivulets. The main sources of water are two rivulets, one of which mainly feeds a subset of ponds located in the northwest corner of the area” 53 same as 325 54 same as 324 55 “All data were collected on islands located in Barkley Sound, British Columbia, Canada (48880?N, 125820?W). Barkley Sound contains hundreds of small islands that were separated from the west coast of Vancouver Island by rising sea levels since the last glacial maximum…Between the water’s edge and inland conifer forest on Vancouver Island there lies a distinctive band of rocky habitat that is periodically inundated by the sea.. We restricted our attention to islands that contained only this distinctive habitat type.” 56 Same as 324 57 “The area studied was a coastal marsh landscape subject to periodic storm events. To evaluate the impact of historical effects, it was assumed that the landscape position of a plot relative to the rivers mouth (distance from sea?) and to the edge of a stream channel (distance from shore?) would correlate with the impact of prior storm events, an assumption supported by previous studies. To evaluate the importance of spatial location on species density, data were collected from five sites located at increasing distances from the rivers mouth along the Middle Pearl River in Louisiana. At each site, plots were established systematically along transects perpendicular to the shoreline”. 58 “We limited our consideration to near-pristine streams with base flow < 0·6 m3 s−1 and catchment area < 60 km2, to delineate our analysis to a single habitat type, i.e. headwater streams. Therefore, we excluded spring-fed streams, lake outlets and streams disturbed by recent human activities” 59 “The study area (6 km2) is situated in the Flemish Ardennes, 50 km to the west of Brussels, Belgium and consists of forest-covered headwaters of six different watersheds. Forests here are a mixture of mainly Quercus robur, Fraxinus excelsior, Populus 3 canadensis, and Fagus sylvatica. Soils are moderately drained and loamy and are part of a .20 m thick homogeneous aeolian loam deposit. Due to heterogeneities in the Tertiary deposits under the loam, minerotrophic water emerges as small springs and seepages that result in complex dendritic networks of forest streams” 60 “Overburden throughout this area is typically thin, discontinuous and sandy, and … As a group, the study lakes can be considered as relatively small (median area 14.4 ha), shdlow (median maximum depth 6.2 m), dilute (median conductivity 28.5 p ~ ~ c m - ' ) , and nutrient poor (median total phosphorus (TP) 7 y g - ~ - '” 61 “I recognised five broad forest types on the basis of the overstorey composition: dry sclerophyll forest; dry sclerophyll to wet sclerophyll forest; wet sclerophyll forest; wet sclerophyll forest to rainforest; and rainforest.” 62 “The river flows for 318 km from the headwaters in the Lammerlaw and Lammermoor ranges at 1150 m above sea level before reaching the Pacific Ocean 30 km south of the city of Dunedin. Sampling sites consisted of 30 m sections of stream, each containing at least one riffle. Eight subcatchments were selected, and reaches were sampled at up to three locations on each of up to three tributaries and on the mainstem of the subcatchment… Our descriptive analysis used linear ordination methods, where the general principle is to compute scores for sites as linear combinations of environmental variables or species. Our aim was to investigate the relationships between four tables of landscape” 63 “Two of these Moun- tain Bridge sites were dry ridgetops dominated by pines (Pinus virginiana Mill. and P. echinata Mill.), oaks (Quercus alba L. and Q. marilandica Muenchh.), and hickories (Carya spp.). The other two Mountain Bridge sites were hemlock ravines dominated by hemlock (Tsuga canadensis L.), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipif- era L.) sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua L.), and red maple (Acer rubrum L.). Two additional dry ridgetop sites, also dominated by pines and oaks, were selected in Paris Mountain State Park, on a monadnock 3 km north of Greenville, SC”. Site description from Worthern et al. 1995 Ecography 64 “Sites included in the analyses ranged from small, shallow, open-canopy streams less than 2 m wide to rivers as wide as 30 m” 65 “Seven major vegetation types are identified within the Little Desert National Park “ 66 “There have been four major glacial intervals in the area (Hamilton 1982, 1986) with the two most recent, termed Itkillik I (40,000 yr BP) and Itkillik II (25,000–11,000 yr BP), resulting in a landscape mosaic of differently aged areas.” 67 “A total of thirty-two calcareous grasslands in the vicinity of the city of Go¨ ttingen in Lower Saxony (Germany) were studied (Fig. 1). The study sites were chosen to cover the full gradient of habitat area and isolation in the study region. Calcareous grasslands cover only 0.26% of the area in the study region and are sharply delimited from the surrounding landscape matrix. The natural fragmentation of the seminatural calcareous grasslands increased greatly because of intensification of agricultural development during the last decades in Germany (WallisDeVries et al., 2002). In Lower Saxony the total area of calcareous grasslands is much lower and probably more fragmented than in southern Germany (WallisDeVries et al., 2002). Compared with northern Europe, our study region might be less fragmented” 68 “The hierarchical agglomerative clustering model of Lance & Williams (1967; flexible grouping with beta = 0.5) was used to group months or stations into homogeneous clusters. Clusters were then superimposed on a projection in the reduced plane of the first 2 axes of a principal coordinate analysis to separate groups with similar copepod composition.” 69 “..we restricted site selection to those forest tracts that contained trees _/60 yr old to minimize the effects of forest age on moth community structure (Summerville and Crist 2002). Finally, to control the effects of topographic heterogeneity on moth communities, we focused our study on upland forests within each of the two ecoregions. Forest patches in the historically glaciated NCT primarily occur in a matrix dominated by row crops (corn, soybeans), while forest patches in the unglaciated WAP tend to be interspersed in a matrix of old field and pasture habitat.” 70 “Ten restored wetlands were selected for study based on criteria including presence or absence of fathead minnows, upland cover type, similarities in hydroperiod, specific conductance, and other physical characteristics. Five restored wetlands had fathead minnow populations and five were fishless, based on the results of sampling during spring 1996. We also selected 10 natural wetlands (nondrained) based on similar criteria, five with and five without fathead minnow populations.” 71 “The Norwegian Pollution Control Authority (SFT) has divided the Norwegian continental shelf into ‘regions’, of which this data set is from the southernmost region” 72 same as Ellingsen 2001 73 “Sites 1 and 12, the open-water sites, were most similar to site 13, which is located at the outskirts ofWestdale Cut. Sites 9 and 10, located near vegetated sites in Mac Landing, were also similar, while the two vegetated sites, Nos. 8 and 16, were grouped together. West Pond (site 5), a former sewage lagoon, was the most unique among the in-marsh sites being the most eutrophic and turbid (Table 1). Among those sites flowing into the marsh, sites exposed to the flowing water entering the marsh via Spencer Creek, such as the delta (site 3), the Desjardins Canal (site 4), and in the creek itself (site 7), were most similar. Site 6, located on the outskirts of the marsh at the STP outfall was unique compared with all other sites. Based on these clusters of water quality parameters, we selected five sites representative of the range of variation within the marsh (Nos. 1, 3, 5, 8, and 9) on which to concentrate our zooplankton surveys and analyzed” 74 “this estuary is characterized by the presence of extensive freshwater tidal reaches (Meire et al., 1994), which encompass mainly stations 14 or 15 (depending on river discharge)..Based on measurements on bathymetric maps, the volume of different compartments of the freshwater tidal estuary were calculated.” 75 “The Great Basin of western North America includes more than 200 mountain ranges. These ranges were isolated from each other and from the surrounding lower-elevation valleys as the regional climate became warmer and drier following the Pleistocene… ‘topography’ as habitat quality” 76 “Native and exotic species richness were sampled at 38 serpentine and 42 nonserpentine grassland sites in 1998 and 1999 (Harrison 1999 a ). Approximately half the sites on each soil had been grazed year-round for many decades, with roughly one cow and calf per 10 ha. The other half had been similarly grazed until cattle were removed from various areas during the construction of a mine in 1985. These sites were well interspersed around the 3100-ha study area, such that soil type and grazing status were independent of latitude and longitude (Harrison 1999 a ). Serpentine grasslands were dominated by native species (mean _ 81% native species in 1 m 2 plots), whereas the flora of nonserpentine grasslands was largely exotic (mean _ 43% native species). Serpentine grasslands were significantly higher in soil magnesium and lower in biomass, cover, soil depth, nitrogen, phosphorus, and calcium than nonserpentine grasslands. Within serpentine grasslands, the proportion of native species increased with a decreasing ratio of calcium to magnesium, whereas within nonserpentine grasslands the proportion of native species was higher on cooler ( north- to northeast-facing ) slopes than on warmer slopes.” 77 “Rock pools belonging to our study area fall into two categories (Fig. 1): rock pools in the core area, which includes 13 islands; and rock pools in the outer area, which includes data from 19 further islands.” 78 “The landscape is structurally rich with a mosaic of diverse habitat types. Calcareous grasslands can be sharply delimited from the surrounding landscape with little or no ambiguity and cover 0.26% of the study region” 79 “During the low-water period (typically January to March), aquatic habitats are reduced to a spatial mosaic consisting of the main channel (average width ¼ 150 m, depth ¼ 2–3 m), side channels, and lagoons (i.e., floodplain lakes with a permanent surface-water connection to the main channel)” 80 “The stream at the study site (460 m asl) flows through a forested valley in the foothills north of the Alps, has a gradient of 0.5%, a mean width of 20 m, a depth of -20-40 cm at low discharge conditions, and an annual mean discharge of 7 m3/s (1921-1994” 81 “Descriptions of the moss distribution were made in two woodland streams. Fallforsan, a 4th-order stream, is 10- 15 m wide at the study site. The dominating substrate type is stones reaching 10-20 cm in diameter. Tavelan, a 3rdorder tributary to Fallforsan, is 7-10 m wide at the study site and has substrate composition similar to Fallforsan.” 82 “Sites were close in proximity (<7 km apart), but they differed in substratum particle size and acidity (Table 1); sites were grouped into three categories – low , medium and high refugium availability,” 83 “Our main objec tives in this study were to examine 1) if different litter patch types can be characterized by their microtopographic location within stream pools and, if so, 2) whether different litter patch types have dissimilar macroinvertebrate assemblages.. Pools varied in size, shape, hydraulics, and litter patch formation. Patches were classi- fied into 1 of 3 types based on their locations within the pool” 84 “The site was a fairly uniform riffle with little depth variation (depth at mean flow in the upstream half was 19 ? 5 [SD] cm and in the downstream half was 21 ? 5 cm; n = 400 and 100, respectively), and its sediment consisted mainly of gravels and cobbles without large boulders or bedrock outcrops” 85 “The remaining 130 km of the river (below Maden dam) falls within Harrison and Elsworth's (1958) zone II foothill stony run zone, and consists of sedimented pools interspersed with turbulent flow over stony runs. The middle and lower reaches of the river (Sites 2 and 3) (Fig. 1) both fall within this zone, but are distinguished by differences in the river channel structure: Site 2 is narrower than Site 3, and the pools between riffles are longer and deeper at Site 3 than at Site 2.” 86 “Goose Creek is a forested, low-gradient stream with straight runs (300-600 m long x 10- 20 m wide) interspersed with short riffles” 87 “Bryophyte taxonomic richness was assessed in 48 gauged streams that flowed through small, relatively unmodified catchments (<20 km2) in New Zealand's South Island. A 40-m long transect was established along the thalweg of each stream, and samples of all fully submerged, or continually splashed bryophytes along this transect were collected.” 88 “The Sipsey's mean annual dis- charge is only 24 m3/s near our study site, but discharge may increase to >200 m3/s (Fig. 1) and inundate much of its floodplain (1-3-km width). This floodplain has a bottomland hardwood forest with a dense canopy; water level in the forest varies from day to day and year to year ….Our study showed that many aquatic invertebrates colonize inundated floodplain habitats through the air, even though some invertebrates are incapable of flight” 89 Moisture/elevational gradients 90 Moisture gradient 91 Moisture and elevational gradient 92 Comprise transects of moisture gradient… 93 “Landbridge islands were directly connected to species-rich main- land areas during glacial episodes of the Pleistocene, and they presumably shared their diverse biotas. Since their disjunction from mainland areas, landbridge islands are thought to have suffered a net loss of species via local extinction (faunal relaxation).. Nine islands are oceanic in a zoogeographic sense by virtue of their remote location and situation in deep water, whereas 22 are landbridge islands that lie on the conti- nental shelf. Distributions of 60 native land and fresh- water bird species on these islands were taken directly from Diamond (1984b) and are listed in Table 1” 94 “Fig. 1: three types of forests- xeric forest, mesic forest and alpine meadow” 95 Different forest types: Old field, oak forest, beach maple forest 96 “the pattern of species pair-wise co-occurrence on islands of an archipelago..” 97 “This rugged hill complex is considered one habitat type at a landscape scale; We used a digital elevation model of the reserve in concert with geographic information system (GIS) software to identify potential sample sites in broadly defined environmental classes based on terrain attributes (aspect, slope steepness, and slope position)” References Doi H, Chang KH, Nakano S (2010) Dispersal, connectivity, and local conditions determine zooplankton community composition in artificially connected ponds. Aquatic Biology 10:47-55 Carranza A, Arim M, Scarabino F et al. (2010) Coexistence patterns of benthic gastropods on the Uruguayan shelf. Oikos 119:1312-1318 Matthiessen B, Mielke E, Sommer U (2010) Dispersal decreases diversity in heterogeneous metacommunities by enhancing regional competition. Ecology 91:2022-2033 Okuda T, Noda T, Yamamoto T et al. (2010) Contribution of environmental and spatial processes to rocky intertidal metacommunity structure. Acta Oecologica 36:413-422 Westley PAH, Schindler DE, Quinn TP et al. (2010) Natural habitat change, commercial fishing, climate, and dispersal interact to restructure an Alaskan fish metacommunity. Oecologia 163:471-484 Brown BL, Swan CM (2010) Dendritic network structure constrains metacommunity properties in riverine ecosystems. Journal of Animal Ecology 79:571-580 de Macedo-Soares PHM, Petry AC, Farjalla VF et al. (2010) Hydrological connectivity in coastal inland systems: lessons from a Neotropical fish metacommunity. Ecology of Freshwater Fish 19:7-18 Presley SJ, Willig MR (2010) Bat metacommunity structure on Caribbean islands and the role of endemics. Global Ecology and Biogeography 19:185-199 Heino J, Bini LM, Karjalainen SM et al. (2010) Geographical patterns of micro-organismal community structure: are diatoms ubiquitously distributed across boreal streams? Oikos 119:129-137 Driscoll DA, Kirkpatrick JB, McQuillan PB et al (2010) Classic metapopulations are rare among common beetle species from a naturally fragmented landscape. Journal of Animal Ecology 79:294-303 Nabout JC, Siqueira T, Bini LM et al. (2009) No evidence for environmental and spatial processes in structuring phytoplankton communities. Acta Oecologica 35:720-726 Perry GLW, Enright NJ, Miller BP et al. (2009) Dispersal, edaphic fidelity and speciation in species-rich Western Australian shrublands: evaluating a neutral model of biodiversity. Oikos 118:1349-1362 Convertino M, Muneepeerakul R, Azaele S et al. (2009) On neutral metacommunity patterns of river basins at different scales of aggregation. Water Resources Research 45. Article Number: W08424 Zealand AM, Jeffries MJ (2009) The distribution of pond snail communities across a landscape: separating out the influence of spatial position from local habitat quality for ponds in south-east Northumberland, UK. Hydrobiologia 632:177-187 Hendrickx F, Maelfait JP, Desender K et al. (2009) Pervasive effects of dispersal limitation on within- and amongcommunity species richness in agricultural landscapes. Global Ecology and Biogeography 18:607-616 Pandit SN, Kolasa J, Cottenie K (2009) Contrasts between habitat generalists and specialists: an empirical extension to the basic metacommunity framework. Ecology 90: 2253-2262 Werner EE, Relyea RA, Yurewicz KL et al. (2009) Comparative landscape dynamics of two anuran species: climate-driven interaction of local and regional processes. Ecological Monographs 79:503-521 Binckley CA, Resetarits WJ (2009) Spatial and temporal dynamics of habitat selection across canopy gradients generates patterns of species richness and composition in aquatic beetles. Ecological Entomology 34:457-465 Lindo Z, Winchester NN (2009) Spatial and environmental factors contributing to patterns in arboreal and terrestrial oribatid mite diversity across spatial scales. Oecologia 160:817-825 Soininen J, Weckstrom J (2009) Diatom community structure along environmental and spatial gradients in lakes and streams. Fundamental and Applied Limnology 174:205-213 Debout GDG, Dalecky A, Ngomi A et al. (2009) Dynamics of species coexistence: maintenance of a plant-ant competitive metacommunity. Oikos 118:873-884 Jones SE, McMahon KD (2009) Species-sorting may explain an apparent minimal effect of immigration on freshwater bacterial community dynamics. Environmental Microbiology 11:905-913 Svenning JC, Harlev D, Sorensen M et al. (2009) Topographic and spatial controls of palm species distributions in a montane rain forest, southern Ecuador. Biodiversity and Conservation 18:219-228 Vanormelingen P, Cottenie K, Michels E et al. (2008) The relative importance of dispersal and local processes in structuring phytoplankton communities in a set of highly interconnected ponds. Freshwater Biology 53:21702183 Lobel S, Snall T, Rydin H (2009) Mating system, reproduction mode and diaspore size affect metacommunity diversity. Journal of Ecology 97:176-185 Ng ISY, Carr CM, Cottenie K (2009) Hierarchical zooplankton metacommunities: distinguishing between high and limiting dispersal mechanisms. Hydrobiologia 619:133-143 McCauley SJ, Davis CJ, Relyea RA et al. (2008) Metacommunity patterns in larval odonates. Oecologia 158:329342 Heino J, Mykra H (2008) Control of stream insect assemblages: roles of spatial configuration and local environmental factors. Ecological Entomology 33:614-622 Azeria ET, Kolasa J (2008) Nestedness, niche metrics and temporal dynamics of a metacommunity in a dynamic natural model system. Oikos 117:1006-1019 Guelat J, Jaquiery J, Berset-Brandli L et al. (2008) Mass effects mediate coexistence in competing shrews. Ecology 89:2033-2042 Vanschoenwinkel B, De Vries C, Seaman M et al. (2007) The role of metacommunity processes in shaping invertebrate rock pool communities along a dispersal gradient. Oikos 116:1255-1266 Van De Meutter F, De Meester L, Stoks R (2007) Metacommunity structure of pond macro invertebrates: Effects of dispersal mode and generation time. Ecology 88:1687-1695 Hugueny B, Cornell HV, Harrison S (2007) Metacommunity models predict the local-regional species richness relationship in a natural system. Ecology 88:1696-1706 Crump BC, Adams HE, Hobbie JE et al. (2007) Biogeography of bacterioplankton in lakes and streams of an arctic tundra catchment. Ecology 88:1365-1378 Richter-Boix A, Llorente GA, Montori A (2007) Structure and dynamics of an amphibian metacommunity in two regions. Journal of Animal Ecology 76:607-618 Bloch CP, Higgins CL, Willig MR (2007) Effects of large-scale disturbance on metacommunity structure of terrestrial gastropods: temporal trends in nestedness. Oikos 116:395-406 Ellis AM, Lounibos LP, Holyoak M (2006) Evaluating the long-term metacommunity dynamics of tree hole mosquitoes. Ecology 87:2582-2590 McCauley SJ (2006) The effects of dispersal and recruitment limitation on community structure of odonates in artificial ponds. Ecography 29:585-595 Parris KM (2006) Urban amphibian assemblages as metacommunities. Journal of Animal Ecology 75:757-764 Cadotte MW (2006) Metacommunity influences on community richness at multiple spatial scales: A microcosm experiment. Ecology 87:1008-1016 Heino J (2005) Metacommunity patterns of highly diverse stream midges: gradients, chequerboards, and nestedness, or is there only randomness? Ecological Entomology 30: 590-599 Urban MC (2004) Disturbance heterogeneity determines freshwater metacommunity structure. Ecology 85:29712978 Cottenie K, Michels E, Nuytten N et al. (2003) Zooplankton metacommunity structure: Regional vs. local processes in highly interconnected ponds. Ecology 84:991-1000 Cottenie K, De Meester L (2003) Connectivity and cladoceran species richness in a metacommunity of shallow lakes. Freshwater Biology 48:823-832 Cottenie K, Nuytten N, Michels E et al (2001) Zooplankton community structure and environmental conditions in a set of interconnected ponds. Hydrobiologia 442:339-350 Burns KC, Neufeld CJ (2009) Plant extinction dynamics in an insular metacommunity. Oikos 118:191-198 Cottenie K, De Meester L (2004) Metacommunity structure: synergy of biotic interactions as selective agents and dispersal as fuel. Ecology 85:114-119 Grace JB, Guntenspergen GR (1999) The effects of landscape position on plant species density: Evidence of past environmental effects in a coastal landscape. EcoScience 6:381-391 Heino J, Muotka T, Paavola R (2003) Determinants of macroinvertebrate diversity in headwater streams: regional and local influences Journal of Animal Ecology 72:425-434 Honnay O, Verhaeghe W, Hermy M (2001) Plant community assembly along dendritic networks of small forest streams. Ecology 82:1691-1702 Keller W, Conlon M (1994) Crustacean zooplankton communities and lake morphometry in Precambrian Shield lakes. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 51:2424-2434. Parris KM (2004) Environmental and spatial variables influence the composition of frog assemblages in sub-tropical eastern Australia. Oikos 27:392-400 Townsend CR, Dole Dec S, Norris R et al. (2003) The influence of scale and geography on relationships between stream community composition and landscape variables: description and prediction. Freshwater Biology 48:768–785 Worthen WB, Jones MT, Jetton RM (1998) Community structure and environmental stress: desiccation promotes nestedness in mycophagous fly communities. Oikos 81:45-54. Marsh-Matthews E, Matthews WJ (2000) Geographic, terrestrial and aquatic factors: which most influence the structure of stream fish assemblages in the midwestern United States? Ecology of Freshwater Fish 9: 9–21 Hahs A, Enright NJ, Thomas I (1999) Plant communities, species richness and their environmental correlates in the sandy heaths of Little Desert National Park, Victoria. Australian Journal of Ecology 24:249–257. O’Brien W J, Barfield M, Bettez ND et al (2004) Physical, chemical, and biotic effects on arctic zooplankton communities and diversity. Limnol Oceanogr 49:1250–1261 Krauss J, Dewenter IS, Tscharntke T (2003) How does landscape context contribute to effects of habitat fragmentation on diversity and population density of butterflies? Journal of Biogeography 30:889–900 Plourde1 S, Dodson JJ, Runge JA et al (2002) Spatial and temporal variations in copepod community structure in the lower St. Lawrence. Estuary, Canada. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 230:211–224 Summerville KS, Crist TO (2004) Contrasting effects of habitat quantity and quality on moth communities in fragmented landscapes. Ecography 27:3 -12 Zimmer KD, Hanson MA, Butler MG (2000) Factors influencing invertebrate communities in prairie wetlands: a multivariate approach. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 57:76–85 Ellingsen KE (2001) Biodiversity of a continental shelf soft-sediment macrobenthos community. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 218:1–15 Ellingsen KE (2002) Soft-sediment benthic biodiversity on the continental shelf in relation to environmental variability. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 232:15–27 Lougheed VL, Chow-Fraser P (1998) Factors that regulate the zooplankton community structure of a turbid, hypereutrophic Great Lakes wetland. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 55:150–161 Muylaert K, Sabbe K, Vyverman W (2000) Spatial and Temporal Dynamics of Phytoplankton Communities in a Freshwater Tidal Estuary (Schelde, Belgium). Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 50: 673–687 Fleishman E, Betrus CJ, Blair RB et al. (2002) Nestedness analysis and conservation planning: the importance of place, environment, and life history across taxonomic groups. Oecologia 133:78–89 Harrison S, Inouye BD, Safford HD (2003) Ecological Heterogeneity in the Effects of Grazing and Fire on Grassland Diversity. Conservation Biology 17:837–845 Ebert D, Hottinger JW, Pujanen VI (2001) Temporal and spatial dynamics of parasite richness in a Daphnia metapopulation. Ecology 82:2417-2424 Krauss J, Klein AM, Dewenter IS et al. (2004) Effects of habitat area, isolation, and landscape diversity on plant species richness of calcareous grasslands. Biodiversity and Conservation 13: 1427–1439 Arrington DA, Winemiller KO (2006) Cyclical flood pulses, littoral habitats and species associations in a Neotropical floodplain river. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 25:126–141. Brunke M, Gonser T (1999) Hyporheic invertebrates: the clinical nature of interstitial communities structured by hydrological exchange and environmental gradients. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 18:344–362. Englund G (1991) Effects of disturbance on stream moss and invertebrate community structure. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 10:143–153. Gjerløv C, Hildrew AG, Jones JI (2003) Mobility of stream invertebrates in relation to disturbance and refugia: a test of habitat template theory. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 22:207–223. Kobayashi S, Kagaya T (2004) Litter patch types determine macroinvertebrate assemblages in pools of a Japanese headwater headwater stream. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 23:78–89. Matthaei CD, Arbuckle CJ, Townsend CR (2000) Stable surface stones as refugia for invertebrates during disturbance in a New Zealand stream. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 19:82–93 Palmer CG, O’Keefe JH, Palmer AR (1991) Are macroinvertebrate assemblages in the Buffalo River, southern Africa, associated with particular biotopes? Journal of the North American Benthological Society 10:349– 357. Silver P, Mccall CB, Wooster D (2004) Habitat partitioning by chironomid larvae in arrays of leaf patches in streams. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 23:467–479 Suren AM, Duncan MJ (1999) Rolling stones and mosses: effect of substrate stability on bryophyte communities in streams. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 8:457–467 Tronstad LM, Tronstad BP, Benke AC (2007) Aerial colonization and growth: rapid invertebrate responses to temporary aquatic habitats in a river floodplain. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 26:460–471. Whittaker RH (1952) A study of summer foliage insect communities in the Great Smoky Mountains. Ecological Monographs 22:1–44 Whittaker RH (1956) Vegetation of the Great Smoky Mountains. Ecological Monographs 26:1–69 Whittaker RH (1960) Vegetation of the Siskiyou Mountains, Oregon and California. Ecological Monographs 279– 338. Whittaker RH (1965) Vegetation of the Santa Catalina Mountain, Arizona: a gradient analysis of the south slope. Ecology 46:429–452 Patterson BD (1987) The principle of nested subsets and its implications for biological conservation. Conservation Biology 1:323–334 Patterson BD, Atmar W (1986) Nested subsets and the structure of insular mammalian faunas and archipelagos. Biol J Linn Soc 28: 65–82 Brady A, Bosworth W, Sangster W (1991) A comparison of cursorial spider associations in three Western Michigan communities. Mich Acad 24:247–258 Gilpin ME, Diamond JM (1982) Factors contributing to non-randomness in species co-occurrences on islands. Oecologia 52:75–84 Gilbert B, Lechowicz MJ (2004) Neutrality, niches, and dispersal in a temperate forest understory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 101:7651-7656
