Abstract
Dispersal heterogeneity is increasingly being observed in ecological populations and has long been suspected as an explanation for observations of non-Gaussian dispersal. Recent empirical and theoretical studies have begun to confirm this. Using an integro-difference model, we allow an individual’s diffusivity to be drawn from a trait distribution and derive a general relationship between the dispersal kernel’s moments and those of the underlying heterogeneous trait distribution. We show that dispersal heterogeneity causes dispersal kernels to appear leptokurtic, increases the population’s spread rate, and lowers the critical reproductive rate required for persistence in the face of advection. Wavespeed has been shown previously to be determined largely by the form of the dispersal kernel tail. We qualify this by showing that when reproduction is low, the precise shape of the tail is less important than the first few dispersal moments such as variance and kurtosis. If the reproductive rate is large, a dispersal kernel’s asymptotic tail has a greater influence over wavespeed, implying that estimating the prevalence of traits which correlate with long-range dispersal is critical. The presence of multiple dispersal behaviors has previously been characterized in terms of long-range versus short-range dispersal, and it has been found that rare long-range dispersal essentially determines wavespeed. We discuss this finding and place it within a general context of dispersal heterogeneity showing that the dispersal behavior with the highest average dispersal distance does not always determine wavespeed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Balanda KP, Macgillivray HL (1988) Kurtosis: a critical review. Am Stat 42(2):111–119. doi:10.1080/00031305.1988.10475539
Bollinger EK, Gavin TA (2004) Responses of nesting bobolinks (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) to habitat edges. Auk 121(3):767–776. doi:10.1642/0004-8038(2004)121[0767:RONBDO]2.0.CO;2
Boulding E, Van Alstyne K (1993) Mechanisms of differential survival and growth of two species of Littorina on wave-exposed and on protected shores. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 169(2):139–166. doi:10.1016/0022-0981(93)90191-P
Byers JE, Pringle JM (2006) Going against the flow: retention, range limits and invasions in advective environments. Mar Ecol Progr Ser 313:27–41. doi:10.3354/meps313027
Casellas J, Noguera JL, Varona L, Sánchez A, Arqué M, Piedrafita J (2004) Viability of Iberian \(\times \) Meishan F\(_2\) newborn pigs. II. Survival analysis up to weaning. J Anim Sci 82(7):1925–1930. http://jas.fass.org/cgi/content/abstract/82/7/1925
Clark JS, Fastie C, Hurtt G, Jackson ST, Johnson C, King GA, Lewis M, Lynch J, Pacala S, Prentice C, Schupp EW, Thompson Webb I, Wyckoff P (1998) Reid’s paradox of rapid plant migration. BioScience 48(1):13–24. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1313224
Clobert J, Le Galliard JF, Cote J, Meylan S, Massot M (2009) Informed dispersal, heterogeneity in animal dispersal syndromes and the dynamics of spatially structured populations. Ecol Lett 12(3):197–209. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01267.x
Conner MM, White GC (1999) Effects of individual heterogeneity in estimating the persistence of small populations. Nat Resour Model 12:109–127. doi:10.1111/j.1939-7445.1999.tb00005.x
DeCarlo LT (1997) On the meaning and use of kurtosis. Psychol Methods 2(3):292–307. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.2.3.292
Delgado MM, Penteriani V (2008) Behavioral states help translate dispersal movements into spatial distribution patterns of floaters. Am Nat 172(4):475–485. doi:10.1086/590964
Dobzhansky T, Wright S (1943) Genetics of natural populations. x. dispersion rates in drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetics 28(4):304–340. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17247091/
Ducrocq V, Besbes B, Protais M (2000) Genetic improvement of laying hens viability using survival analysis. Genet Sel Evol 32(1):23–40. doi:10.1051/gse:2000104
Ellner SP, Schreiber SJ (2012) Temporally variable dispersal and demography can accelerate the spread of invading species. Theor. Popul Biol. doi:10.1016/j.tpb.2012.03.005
Fisher RA (1937) The wave of advance of advantageous genes. Ann Eugen 7(4):355–369. doi:10.1111/j.1469-1809.1937.tb02153.x
Foss S, Zachary S, Korshunov D (2011) An introduction to heavy-tailed and subexponential distributions. Springer, New York
Fox GA (2005) Extinction risk of heterogeneous populations. Ecology 86(5):1191–1198. doi:10.1890/04-0594
Fox GA, Kendall BE (2002) Demographic stochasticity and the variance reduction effect. Ecology 83(7):1928–1934. doi:10.2307/3071775
Fox GA, Kendall BE, Fitzpatrick JW, Woolfenden GE (2006) Consequences of heterogeneity in survival probability in a population of Florida scrub-jays. J Anim Ecol 75(4):921–927. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2006.01110.x
Franklin AB, Anderson DR, Gutiérrez RJ, Burnham KP (2000) Climate, habitat quality, and fitness in Northern Spotted Owl populations in northwestern California. Ecol Monogr 70(4):539–590. doi:10.1890/0012-9615(2000)070[0539:CHQAFI]2.0.CO;2
Fraser DF, Gilliam JF, Daley MJ, Le AN, Skalski GT (2001) Explaining leptokurtic movement distributions: intrapopulation variation in boldness and exploration. Am Nat 158(2):124–135. doi:10.1086/321307
Gates JE, Gysel LW (1978) Avian nest dispersion and fledging success in field-forest ecotones. Ecology 59:871–883. doi:10.2307/1938540
Gerdes LU, Jeune B, Ranberg KA, Nybo H, Vaupel JW (2000) Estimation of apolipoprotein E genotype-specific relative mortality risks from the distribution of genotypes in centenarians and middle-aged men: apolipoprotein E gene is a “frailty gene”, not a “longevity gene”. Genet Epidemiol 19(3):202–210. doi:10.1002/1098-2272(200010)19:3<202::AID-GEPI2>3.0.CO;2-Q
Isberg SR, Thomson PC, Nicholas FW (2006) Quantitative analysis of production traits in saltwater crocodiles (Crocodylus porosus): III. Juvenile survival. J Anim Breed Genet 123(1):44–47. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0388.2006.00557.x
Johnstone RA (2004) Begging and sibling competition: how should offspring respond to their rivals? Am Nat 163(3):388–406. doi:10.1086/375541
Kendall B, Fox G, Fujiwara M, Nogeire T (2011) Demographic heterogeneity, cohort selection, and population growth. Ecology 92(10):1985–1993. doi:10.1890/11-0079.1
Kendall BE, Fox GA (2002) Variation among individuals and reduced demographic stochasticity. Conserv Biol 16(1):109–116. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00036.x
Kendall BE, Fox GA (2003) Unstructured individual variation and demographic stochasticity. Conserv Biol 17(4):1170–1172. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.02411.x
Kot M, Lewis MA, Pvd Driessche (1996) Dispersal data and the spread of invading organisms. Ecology 77(7):2027–2042. doi:10.2307/2265698
Landis RM, Gurevitch J, Fox GA, Fang W, Taub DR (2005) Variation in recruitment and early demography in Pinis ridida following crown fire in the pine barrens of Long Island, New York. J Ecol 93(3):607–617. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2745.2005.00996.x
Lindström J (1999) Early development and fitness in birds and mammals. Trends Ecol Evol 14(9):343–348. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(99)01639-0
Lloyd-Smith JO, Schreiber SJ, Kopp PE (2005) Superspreading and the effect of individual variation on disease emergence. Nature 438(7066):355–359. doi:10.1038/nature04153
Lowe WH (2010) Explaining long-distance dispersal: effects of dispersal distance on survival and growth in a stream salamander. Ecology 91(10):3008–3015. doi:10.1890/09-1458.1
Lui R (1989) Biological growth and spread modeled by systems of recursions. I. mathematical theory. Math Biosci 93(2):269–295. doi:10.1016/0025-5564(89)90026-6
Lutscher F (2007) A short note on short dispersal events. Bull Math Biol 69:1615–1630. doi:10.1007/s11538-006-9182-9
Lutscher F, Pachepsky E, Lewis MA (2005) The effect of dispersal patterns on stream populations. SIAM J Appl Math 65(4):1305–1327. doi:10.1137/S003613990444040
Lutscher F, Nisbet R, Pachepsky E (2010) Population persistence in the face of advection. Theor Ecol 3(4):271–284. doi:10.1007/s12080-009-0068-y
Manolis JC, Andersen DE, Cuthbert FJ (2002) Edge effect on nesting success of ground nesting birds near regenerating clearcuts in a forest-dominated landscape. Auk 119(4):955–970. doi:10.1642/0004-8038(2002)119[0955:EEONSO]2.0.CO;2
Manser MB, Avey G (2000) The effect of pup vocalisations on food allocation in a cooperative mammal, the meerkat (Suricata suricatta). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 48(6):429–437. doi:10.1007/s002650000248
McCauley SJ (2010) Body size and social dominance influence breeding dispersal in male Pachydiplax longipennis (Odonata). Ecol Entomol 35(3):377–385. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2311.2010.01191.x
Menge BA, Berlow EL, Blanchette CA (1994) The keystone species concept: variation in interaction strength in a rocky intertidal habitat. Ecol Monogr 64(3):249–286. doi:10.2307/2937163
Murray JD (2002) Mathematical biology. Springer, New York
Nathan R (2001) The challenges of studying dispersal. Trends Ecol Evol 16(9):481–483. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(01)02272-8
Neubert MG, Caswell H (2000) Demography and dispersal: calculation and sensitivity analysis of invasion speed for structured populations. Ecology 81(6):1613–1628. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[1613:DADCAS]2.0.CO;2
Okubo A, Levin SA (2001) Diffusion and ecological problems: modern perspectives. Mathematical biology. Springer, New York
Petrovskii S, Morozov A (2009) Dispersal in a statistically structured population: fat tails revisited. Am Nat 173(2):278–289. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20491505
Petrovskii S, Morozov A, Li BL (2008) On a possible origin of the fat-tailed dispersal in population dynamics. Ecol Complex 5(2):146–150. doi:10.1016/j.ecocom.2007.10.002
Phillips BL, Brown GP, Webb JK, Shine R (2006) Invasion and the evolution of speed in toads. Nature 439(7078):803. doi:10.1038/439803a
Potapov A, Lewis M (2004) Climate and competition: the effect of moving range boundaries on habitat invasibility. Bull Math Biol 66(5):975–1008. doi:10.1016/j.bulm.2003.10.010
Robert A, Sarrazin F, Couvet D (2003) Variation among individuals, demographic stochasticity, and extinction: response to kendall and fox. Conserv Biol 17(4):1166–1169. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.02259.x
Shigesada N, Kawasaki K (1997) Biological invasions: theory and practice. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford
Shigesada N, Kawasaki K (2002) Invasion and the range expansion of species: effects of long-distance dispersal. In: Bullock JM, Kenward RE, Hails RS (eds) Dispersal ecology: the 42nd symposium of the British Ecological Society. Blackwell Science Ltd, Oxford
Simmons AD, Thomas CD (2004) Changes in dispersal during species range expansions. Am Nat 164(3):378–395. doi:10.1086/423430
Skalski GT, Gilliam JF (2000) Modeling diffusive spread in a heterogeneous population: a movement study with stream fish. Ecology 81(6):1685–1700. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[1685:MDSIAH]2.0.CO;2
Skalski GT, Gilliam JF (2003) A diffusion-based theory of organism dispersal in heterogeneous populations. Am Nat 161(3):441–458. doi:10.1086/367592
Skellam JG (1951) Gene dispersion in heterogeneous populations. Heredity 5(3):433–435. doi:10.1038/hdy.1951.41
Speirs DC, Gurney WSC (2001) Population persistence in rivers and estuaries. Ecology 82(5):1219–1237. doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[1219:PPIRAE]2.0.CO;2
Stover JP, Kendall BE, Fox GA (2012) Demographic heterogeneity impacts density-dependent population dynamics. Theoret Ecol 5(2):297–309. doi:10.1007/s12080-011-0129-x
Vaupel JW, Yashin AI (1985) Heterogeneity’s ruses: some surprising effects of selection on population dynamics. Am Stat 39(3):176–185. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2683925
Venable DL, Dyreson E, Morales E (1995) Population dynamic consequences and evolution of seed traits of heterosperma pinnatum (asteraceae). Am J Botany 82(3):410–420. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2445587
Vindenes Y, Engen S, Sæther BE (2008) Individual heterogeneity in vital parameters and demographic stochasticity. Am Nat 171(4):455–467. doi:10.1086/528965
von Holst D, Hutzelmeyer H, Kaetzke P, Khaschei M, Rödel HG, Schrutka H (2002) Social rank, fecundity and lifetime reproductive success in wild European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 51(3):245–254. doi:10.1007/s00265-001-0427-1
Weinberger H (1982) Long-time behavior of a class of biological models. SIAM J Math Anal 13(3):353–396. doi:10.1137/0513028
Weinberger HF (1978) Asymptotic behavior of a model in population genetics. In: Chadam J (ed) Nonlinear partial differential equations and applications, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol 648. Springer, Berlin, pp 47–96. doi:10.1007/BFb0066406
Winter M, Johnson DH, Faaborg J (2000) Evidence for edge effects on multiple levels in tallgrass prairie. Condor 102(2):256–266. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1369636
Xiao Z, Zhang Z, Wang Y (2005) Effects of seed size on dispersal distance in five rodent-dispersed fagaceous species. Acta Oecol 28(3):221–229. doi:10.1016/j.actao.2005.04.006
Yamamura K (2002) Dispersal distance of heterogeneous populations. Popul Ecol 44(2):93–101. doi:10.1007/s101440200011
Yashin AI, Iachine IA, Harris JR (1999) Half of the variation in susceptibility to mortality is genetic: findings from Swedish twin survival data. Behav Genet 29(1):11–19. doi:10.1023/A:1021481620934
Yasuda N (1975) The random walk model of human migration. Theor Popul Biol 7(2):156–167. doi:10.1016/0040-5809(75)90011-8
Zera A, Denno R (1997) Physiology and ecology of dispersal polymorphism in insects. Ann Rev Entomol 42(1):207–230. doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.42.1.207
Acknowledgments
This work has been supported by NSF Grant Nos. DEB-0615024 and DEB-1120865 and by the Delta Stewardship Council through Delta Science Program Grant No. U-05-SC-058. We thank the anonymous reviewers for comments and suggestions that improved the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix: Moments and Wavespeed
Appendix: Moments and Wavespeed
In this appendix, we will show that a dispersal kernel with faster tail decay can result in larger wavespeeds than a kernel with a more slowly decaying tail as long as the reproductive rate is sufficiently small.
Let \(M_1(s)\) and \(M_2(s)\) be two moment-generating functions for mean-zero, exponentially bounded, symmetric dispersal kernels \(f_1(x)\) and \(f_2(x)\), respectively. We assume that \(f_2(x)>f_1(x)\) for \(x>y>0\) and that \(f_2(x)<f_1(x)\) for some \(x<y\). Only a finite number of moments of \(f_2\) can be less than those of \(f_1\) (see 7.1 below).
The \(2n\)th moment of a distribution \(f\) is defined as \(m_{i,2n}=\displaystyle \int _{-\infty }^\infty x^{2n} f_i(x)\mathrm{d}x\). We further assume that the first \(k-1\) even moments of the distributions are the same (all odd moments are zero), but that the \(2k\)th moment of \(f_1\) is larger than that for \(f_2\). We drop the first subscript on the first \(k-1\) moments since they are equivalent among the two kernels to get
We know that \(m_{1,2k}>m_{2,2k}\), and the rest of the moments can have any arbitrary relationship as long as some \(K\) exists such that \(m_{1,2j}<m_{2,2j}\) for all \(j>K\).
For \(s\) small enough, \(M_1(s)-M_2(s)>0\) because the dominant term becomes that with the \(2k\)th moment \(m_{i,2k}\), which is larger for \(f_1\). However, \(M_1(s)<M_2(s)\) for \(s\) large enough, since the higher-order moments of \(f_2\) are larger. Thus, \(\hat{s}\) exists such that \(M_1(\hat{s}) = M_2(\hat{s})\), \(M_1(s) > M_2(s)\) for \(0 < s < \hat{s}\) and \(M_1(s) < M_2(s)\) for \(\hat{s} < s < \tilde{s}\) (for some \(\tilde{s}\)—depending on the precise relationship between the moments—it may be possible for the moment-generating functions to cross at multiple points).
For any given reproductive rate, \(R\):
and \(c_1(s;R)>c_2(s;R)\) for \(s<\hat{s}\). The wavespeed is defined as
As \(R\) goes down to one, both \(s_1^*\) and \(s_2^*\) go to zero since \(R=1\) corresponds to a wavespeed of zero with a shape parameter \(s^*=0\). So for \(R\) sufficiently close to one, we can get \(s_1^*\) and \(s_2^*\) as close to zero as we like (see Appendix 7.2) and hence both smaller than \(\hat{s}\). Because both critical shape parameters are in the region where \(c_1(s;R)>c_2(s;R)\), \(c_1^*>c_2^*\). This shows that a dispersal kernel with a “thinner” tail can give a larger wavespeed than a dispersal kernel with a “fatter tail” as long as the former dominates the latter in lower-order moments and that the net reproductive rate is sufficiently close to one.
When the mean dispersal location is negative, the critical reproductive rate is greater than one and the above argument does not apply since \(s^*\) does not approach zero as \(R\) goes down to \(R^*\). However, as long as the mean dispersal location is close enough to zero, \(R^*\) is close to one, and for a fixed \(R\) close enough to \(R^*\), \(f_1\) gives larger wavespeeds than \(f_2\).
1.1 Miscellaneous Moment Calculations
High-order moments tend toward infinity Here, we show that the magnitude of a probability distribution’s moments grows unboundedly as we look at higher and higher-order moments.
To see that the \(2n\)th moment goes to infinity as \(n\rightarrow \infty \) for a symmetric kernel \(f\) which has support for \(x>1\), find \(j>1\) such that \(f(x)>C_j\) on the interval \((j,j+1)\). The \(2n\)th moment is \(m_{2n}=2\int _0^\infty x^{2n}f(x)\mathrm{d}x\). This integral is then bounded from below by \(2 j^{2n} C_j\). As \(n\rightarrow \infty \), \(m_{2n}>2 j^{2n} C_j \rightarrow \infty \) which proves the result.
High-order moments are larger for slower decaying tail In this section, we show that if one dispersal kernel is eventually above another \(f_2(x)>f_1(x)\) for all \(x\) greater than some \(y\), then the higher-order moments of \(f_2\) are all larger than those of \(f_1\) (for sufficiently large order). This is a somewhat looser requirement than \(f_2\) having a slower tail decay rate, which may involve showing that the ratio \(f_1(x)/f_2(x)\) goes to zero as \(x\) goes to infinity.
Assume that symmetric, mean-zero, exponentially bounded kernels satisfy \(f_2(x)>f_1(x)\) for all \(x>y\). Also, assume that the minimum of \(f_2(x)-f_1(x)=-C<0\) for \(0<x<y\). For the interval \(0<x<y\), \(x^{2n}(f_2(x)-f_1(x))>-Cy^{2n}\), and for \(x>y\), \(x^{2n}(f_2(x)-f_1(x))>\tilde{C}z^{2n}\) assuming that \(f_2(x)-f_1(x)>\tilde{C}\) for \(z<x<z+1\) given some \(z>y\).
Because \(z\) is greater than \(y\), \(n\) being large enough ensures that \(\tilde{C}z^{2n}-Cy^{2n{+1}}\) is positive, demonstrating that all higher-order moments of \(f_2(x)\) are larger than those of \(f_1(x)\).
1.2 As \(R\searrow 1\), \(c^*\rightarrow 0\) and \(s^*\rightarrow 0\)
As the net reproductive rate \(R\) goes down to one, we will show that the wavespeed \(c^*\) goes to zero and the corresponding critical shape parameter \(s^*\) also goes to zero.
Let \(R_n\) be a decreasing sequence of reproductive rates which converges to one. The moment-generating function for some mean-zero, symmetric, and exponentially bounded dispersal kernel is
When \(s\) is near zero, the moment-generating function is near one and is thus \(M(s)=1+O(s^2)\). The power series expansion of the natural logarithm is \(\ln (1+x)=x-\frac{1}{2}x^2+\cdots \), thus \(\ln (M(s))=O(s^2)\). Now, we look at the sequence of functions
It is clear that \(c_n(s)>c_{n+1}(s)\) for any \(n\) and for any \(s\) because \(R_n\) is a decreasing sequence and the natural logarithm is a monotone function.
Following a standard analytical technique, for any \(\epsilon >0\), choose an \(s\) close enough to zero such that \(\frac{1}{s}\ln (M(s))=O(s)<\frac{\epsilon }{2}\). Because \(R_n\rightarrow 1\) and for the fixed value of \(s\) we just chose, a natural number \(N\) can be chosen such that \(\frac{1}{s}\ln (R_n)<\frac{\epsilon }{2}\) for any \(n>N\) since \(\ln (R_n)\) can be made as close to zero as we like.
Now, we have established that, for the sequence of functions \(c_n(s)\), we can choose an \(N\) and a fixed \(s\) such that for any \(n>N\),
Because \(c_n(s)<\epsilon \) at some \(s\), its minimum is also less than \(\epsilon \). Thus, we can choose \(R\) close enough to one to make the wavespeed as close to zero as we like.
Using the parametric representation (6) and letting \(R\) go down to one
Since the moment-generating function \(M(s)\) is positive and monotonically increasing in \(s\) (hence \(M'(s)>0\) for any \(s>0\)), as \(R\) goes down to one, \(M'(s^*)\) must go to zero. This happens only if \(s^*\rightarrow 0\).
Now, we have established that for any exponentially bounded, symmetric dispersal kernel with mean-zero, we can choose a \(R\) close enough to one to give \(s^*\) as close to zero as we like.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stover, J.P., Kendall, B.E. & Nisbet, R.M. Consequences of Dispersal Heterogeneity for Population Spread and Persistence. Bull Math Biol 76, 2681–2710 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-014-0014-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-014-0014-z