, Volume 140, Issue 2, pp 352–360 | Cite as

Patterns in the co-occurrence of fish species in streams: the role of site suitability, morphology and phylogeny versus species interactions

  • Pedro R. Peres-NetoEmail author
Community Ecology


A number of studies at large scales have pointed out that abiotic factors and recolonization dynamics appear to be more important than biotic interactions in structuring stream-fish assemblages. In contrast, experimental and field studies at small scales show the importance of competition among stream fishes. However, given the highly variable nature of stream systems over time, competition may not be intense enough to generate large-scale complementary distributions via competitive exclusion. Complementary distribution is a recurrent pattern observed in fish communities across stream gradients, though it is not clear which instances of this pattern are due to competitive interactions and which to individual species’ requirements. In this study, I introduce a series of null models developed to provide a more robust evaluation of species associations by facilitating the distinction between different processes that may shape species distributions and community assembly. These null models were applied to test whether conspicuous patterns in species co-occurrences are more consistent with their differences in habitat use, morphological features and/or phylogenetic constraints, or with species interactions in fish communities in the streams of a watershed in eastern Brazil. I concluded that patterns in species co-occurrences within the studied system are driven by common species-habitat relationships and species interactions may not play a significant role in structuring these communities. I suggest that large-scale studies, where adequate designs and robust analytical tools are applied, can contribute substantially to understanding the importance of different types of processes in structuring stream-fish communities.


Stream fish communities Habitat affinities Species distribution Competition Null models 



I would like to thank Nick Collins, Nick Gotelli, Don Jackson, Daniel Simberloff, Keith Somers, and three anonymous reviewers for valuable comments and discussions; Carlos Bizerril for helping to identify the species and discussing phylogenetic relationships for the studied taxa. I thank Rebeca Mendonça and Adriano Monteiro for helping in the field. Funding was provided by a CNPq Fellowship to P.R.P.-N. and an NSERC research grant to D.A. Jackson.


  1. Angermeier PL, Winston MR (1998) Local vs. regional influences on local diversity in stream fish communities of Virginia. Ecology 79:911–927Google Scholar
  2. Arita HT (1997) Species composition and morphological structure of the bat fauna of Yucatan, Mexico. J Anim Ecol 66:83–97Google Scholar
  3. Bennet WA (1990) Scale of investigation and the detection of competition: an example from the house sparrow and house finch introductions in North America. Am Nat 135:725–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bizerril CRSF (1994) Análise taxonômica e biogeográfica da ictiofauna de água doce do Leste Brasileiro. Acta Biol Leopoldensia 16:51–80Google Scholar
  5. Bohlke JE, Weitzman SHL, Menezes NA (1978) Estado atual da sistemática dos peixes de água doce da América do Sul. Acta Amazon 8:657–677Google Scholar
  6. Borcard D, Legendre P, Drapeau P (1992) Partialling out the spatial components of ecological variation. Ecology 73:1045–1055Google Scholar
  7. Bradley RA, Bradley DW (1985) Do non-random patterns of species in niche space imply competition? Oikos 45:443–446Google Scholar
  8. Brooks DR, McLennan DA (1993) Historical ecology: examining phylogenetic components of community evolution. In: Ricklefs RE, Schluter D (eds) Species diversity in ecological communities: historical and geographical perspectives. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 267–280Google Scholar
  9. Brown JH (1987) Variation in desert rodent guilds: patterns, processes, scale. In: Giller JHR, Giller PS (eds) Organization of communities: past and present. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 185–203Google Scholar
  10. Buckup PA (1998) Relationships of the Characidiinae and phylogeny of Characiforms fishes (Teleostei: Ostariophysi). In: Malabarba LR, Reis RE, Vari RP, Lucena ZMS, Lucena CAS (eds) Phylogeny and classification of neotropical fishes. EDIPUCRS, Porto Alegre, pp 123–144Google Scholar
  11. Caswell H (1976) Community structure: a neutral model analysis. Ecol Monogr 46:327–354Google Scholar
  12. Connor EF, Simberloff D (1979) The assembly of species communities: chance or competition? Ecology 60:1132–1140Google Scholar
  13. Cook R, Quinn JF (1995) The importance of colonization in nested species subsets. Oecologia 102:413–424Google Scholar
  14. Gilliam JF, Fraser DF, Alkins-Koo M (1993) Structure of a tropical stream fish community: a role for biotic interactions. Ecology 74:1856–1870Google Scholar
  15. Gotelli NJ (2000) Null model analysis of species co-occurrence patterns. Ecology 81:2606–2621Google Scholar
  16. Gotelli NJ, Ellison AM (2002) Assembly rule for New England ant assemblages. Oikos 99:591–599Google Scholar
  17. Gotelli NJ, Graves GR (1996) Null models in ecology. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. Gotelli NJ, McCabe DL (2002) Species co-occurrence: a meta-analysis of J.M. Diamon’s assembly rules. Ecology 83:2091–2096Google Scholar
  19. Gotelli NJ, Taylor CM (1999) Testing macroecology models with stream-fish assemblages. Evol Ecol Res 1:847–858Google Scholar
  20. Gotelli NJ, Buckley NJ, Wiens JA (1997) Co-occurrence of Australian birds: Diamond’s assembly rules revisited. Oikos 80:311–324Google Scholar
  21. Grossman GD, Moyle PB, Whitaker JO (1982) Stochasticity in structural and functional-characteristics of an Indiana stream fish assemblage—a test of community theory. Am Nat 120:423–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grossman GD, Ratajczak RE, Crawford M, Freeman FC (1998) Assemblage organization in stream fishes: effects of environmental variation and interspecific interactions. Ecol Monogr 68:395–420Google Scholar
  23. Harrel HL (1978) Response of the Devil’s River (Texas) fish community to flooding. Copeia 1978:60–68Google Scholar
  24. Jackson DA, Somers KM, Harvey HH (1992) Null models and fish communities: evidence of nonrandom patterns. Am Nat 139:930–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jackson DA, Peres-Neto PR, Olden JD (2001) What controls who is where in freshwater fish communities—the roles of biotic, abiotic and spatial factors? Can J Fish Aquat Sci 58:157–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Juliano SA, Lawton JH (1990) The relationship between competition and morphology. I. Morphological patterns on co-occurring dysticid beetles. J Anim Ecol 59:403–419Google Scholar
  27. Kelt DA, Brown JH (2001) Community structure and assembly rules: confronting conceptual and statistical issues with data on desert rodents. In: Weiher E, Keddy P (eds) Ecological assembly rules: perspectives, advances, retreats. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 75–107Google Scholar
  28. Legendre P, Legendre L (1998) Numerical ecology. 2nd English edn. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  29. Lockwood JL, Moulton MP, Balent KL (1999) Introduced avifaunas as natural experiments in community assembly. In: Weiher E, Keddy P (eds) Ecological assembly rules: perspectives, advances, retreats. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 108–129Google Scholar
  30. Maurer BA (1999) Untangling ecological complexity: the macroscopic perspective. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  31. Mazzoni R, Lobón-Cerviá J (2000) Longitudinal structure, density and production rates of a neotropical stream fish assemblage: the river Ubatiba in the Serra do Mar, southeast Brazil. Ecography 23:588–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Menezes NA (1972) Distribuição e origem da fauna de peixes de água doce das grandes bacias fluviais do Brasil. Commissão Internacional da Bacia Paraná/Uruguai. Faculdade de Saúde Pública USP e Instituto de Pesca, São Paulo, pp 79–108Google Scholar
  33. Monteiro LR, Reis SF (1999) Princípios de morfometria geométrica. Holos, São PauloGoogle Scholar
  34. Montoya-Burgos J-I, Muller S, Weber C, Pawlowski J (1998) Phylogenetic relationships of the Loricariidae (Siluroformes) based on mitochondrial rRNA gene sequences. In: Malabarba LR, Reis RE, Vari RP, Lucena ZMS, Lucena CAS (eds) Phylogeny and classification of neotropical fishes. EDIPUCRS, Porto Alegre, pp 363–374Google Scholar
  35. Moyle PB, Senanayake FR (1984) Resource partitioning among the fishes of rainforest streams in Sri Lanka. J Zool (Lond) 202:195–223Google Scholar
  36. Peres-Neto PR (1995) Estrutura de comunidades de peixes ao longo de um gradiente lótico de um rio costeiro do Leste Brasileiro (Rio Macacu, RJ). Master dissertation. Universidade Federal do Rio de JaneiroGoogle Scholar
  37. Peres-Neto PR (1999) How many statistical test are too many? The problem of conducting multiple inferences revisited. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 176:303–306Google Scholar
  38. Peres-Neto PR (2002) The distribution of fishes across stream and landscapes analytical approaches and ecological patterns. Doctoral thesis, Department of Zoology, University of TorontoGoogle Scholar
  39. Peres-Neto PR, Jackson DA (2001a) How well do multivariate data sets match? The robustness and flexibility of a Procrustean superimposition approach over the Mantel test. Oecologia 129:169–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Peres-Neto PR, Jackson DA (2001b) The importance of scaling of multivariate analysis in ecological studies. Écoscience 8:522–526Google Scholar
  41. Peres-Neto PR, Olden JD, Jackson DA (2001) Environmentally constrained null models: site suitability as occupancy criterion. Oikos 93:110–120Google Scholar
  42. Pinna MCC de (1998) Phylogenetic relationships of neotropical Siluriformes: historical overview and synthesis of hypotheses. In: Malabarba LR, Reis RE, Vari RP, Lucena ZMS, Lucena CAS (eds) Phylogeny and classification of neotropical fishes. EDIPUCRS, Porto Alegre, pp 279–330Google Scholar
  43. Poff NL, Allen JD (1995) Functional organization of stream fish assemblages in relation to hydrologic variability. Ecology 76:606–627Google Scholar
  44. Resetarits WJ (1997) Interspecific competition and qualitative competitive asymmetry between two benthic stream fish. Oikos 78:429–439Google Scholar
  45. Ricklefs RE, Miles DB (1994) Ecological and evolutionary inferences from morphology: an ecological perspective. In: Wainwright PC, Reilly SM (eds) Ecological morphology: integrative organismal biology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 13–41Google Scholar
  46. Rodriguez MA (1995) Habitat-specific estimates of competition in stream salmonids—a field-test of the isodar model of habitat selection. Evol Ecol 9:169–184Google Scholar
  47. Rohlf FJ, Slice DE (1990) Extensions of the Procrustes method for the optimal superimposition of landmarks. Syst Zool 39:40–59Google Scholar
  48. Schaefer SA (1998) Conflict and resolution: impact of new taxa on phylogenetic studies of the neotropical Cascudinhos (Siluroidei: Loricariidae). In: Malabarba LR, Reis RE, Vari RP, Lucena ZMS, Lucena CAS (eds) Phylogeny and classification of neotropical fishes. EDIPUCRS, Porto Alegre, pp 375–400Google Scholar
  49. Scheibe JS (1987) Climate, competition, and the structure of temperate zone lizard communities. Ecology 68:1424–1436Google Scholar
  50. Schlosser IJ (1982) Fish community structure and function along two habitat gradients in a headwater stream. Ecol Monogr 52:395–414Google Scholar
  51. Schlosser IJ (1987) A conceptual framework for fish communities in small warmwater streams. In: Matthews WJ, Heins DC (eds) Community and evolutionary ecology of North American stream fishes. Oklahoma University Press, Oklahoma, pp 17–24Google Scholar
  52. Schluter DA (1984) A variance test for detecting species associations, with some example applications. Ecology 65:998–1005Google Scholar
  53. Shepherd UL, Kelt DA (1999) Mammalian species richness and morphological complexity along an elevational gradient in the arid south-west. J Biogeogr 26:843–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Siegel AF, Benson RH (1982) A robust comparison of biological shapes. Biometrics 38:341–350PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Silvertown J, Dodd M, Gowing D (2001) Phylogeny and the niche structure of meadow plant communities. J Ecol 89:428–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Slice DE (1994) GRF-ND: generalized rotational fitting on n-dimensional landmark data. Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York, Stony BrookGoogle Scholar
  57. Stone L, Roberts (1992) Competitive exclusion, or species aggregation? An aid in deciding. Oecologia 91:419–424Google Scholar
  58. Taylor CM (1996) Abundance and distribution within a guild of benthic stream fishes: local processes and regional patterns. Freshw Biol 36:385–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Taylor CM (1997) Fish species richness and incidence patterns in isolated and connected stream pools: effects of pool volume and spatial position. Oecologia 110:560–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Taylor CM, Warren ML (2001) Dynamics in species composition of stream fish assemblages: Environmental variability and nested subsets. Ecology 82:2320–2330Google Scholar
  61. Taylor CM, Winston MR, Matthews WJ (1993) Fish species-environment and abundance relationships in a Great Plains river system. Ecography 16:16–23Google Scholar
  62. Townsend CR (1989) The patch dynamics concept of stream community ecology. J N Am Benth Soc 8:36–50Google Scholar
  63. Underwood AJ, Petraitis PS (1993) Structure of intertidal assemblages in different locations: how can local processes be compared? In: Ricklefs RE, Schluter D (eds) Species diversity in ecological communities: historical and geographical perspectives. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 39–51Google Scholar
  64. Walker JA (1996) Principal components of body shape variation within an endemic radiation of Threespine stickleback. In: Marcus LF, Corti M, Loy A, Naylor G, Slice DE (eds) Advances in morphometrics. NATO ASI series A: life sciences, vol 284. Plenum, New York, pp 321–334Google Scholar
  65. Webb CO (2000) Exploring the phylogenetic structure of ecological communities: an example for rainforest trees. Am Nat 156:145–155CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Weiher E, Keddy P (1999) Introduction: the scope and goals of research on assembly rules. In: Weiher E, Keddy P (eds) Ecological assembly rules: perspectives, advances, retreats. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–20Google Scholar
  67. Weiher E, Clarke GD, Keddy PA (1998) Community assembly rules, morphological dispersion, and the coexistence of plant species. Oikos 81:309–322Google Scholar
  68. Wikramanayke ED (1990) Ecomorphology and biogeography of a tropical stream fish assemblage: evolution of assemblage structure. Ecology 71:1756–1764Google Scholar
  69. Wiley EO, Mayden RL (1985) Species and speciation in phylogenetic systematics, with examples from North American fish fauna. Annu Mo Bot Gardens 72:596–635Google Scholar
  70. Winston MR (1995) Co-occurrence of morphologically similar species of stream fishes. Am Nat 145:527–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wood BM, Bain MB (1995) Morphology and microhabitat use in stream fish. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 52:1487–1498Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Département des Sciences BiologiquesUniversité de MontréalMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations