Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Spatial asymmetries in connectivity influence colonization−extinction dynamics

  • Population ecology - Original research
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Movement has broad implications for many areas of biology, including evolution, community and population ecology. Movement is crucial in metapopulation ecology because it facilitates colonization and reduces the likelihood of local extinction via rescue effects. Most metapopulation modeling approaches describe connectivity using pair-wise Euclidean distances resulting in the simplifying assumption of a symmetric connectivity pattern. Yet, assuming symmetric connectivity when populations show net asymmetric movement patterns may result in biased estimates of colonization and extinction, and may alter interpretations of the dynamics and conclusions regarding the viability of metapopulations. Here, we use a 10-year time series on a wind-dispersed orchid Lepanthes rupestris that anchors its roots in patches of moss growing on trees or boulders along streams, to test for the role of connectivity asymmetries in explaining the colonization−extinction dynamics of this orchid in a network of 975 patches. We expected that wind direction could highly alter dispersal direction in this orchid. To account for this potential asymmetry, we modified the connectivity measure traditionally used in metapopulation models to allow for asymmetric effective distances between patches and subsequently estimated colonization and extinction probabilities using a dynamic occupancy modeling approach. Asymmetric movement was prevalent in the L. rupestris metapopulation and incorporating potential dispersal asymmetries resulted in higher colonization estimates in larger patches and more accurate models. Accounting for dispersal asymmetries may reveal connectivity effects where they were previously assumed to be negligible and may provide more reliable conclusions regarding the role of connectivity in patch dynamics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackerman JD (1995) An orchid flora of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Mem NY Bot Gard 73:1–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Armsworth PR, Roughgarden JE (2005) The impact of directed versus random movements on population dynamics and biodiversity patterns. Am Nat 165:449–465

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Batty AL, Dixon KW, Sivasithamparam K (2000) Soil seed bank dynamics of terrestrial orchids. Lindleyana 15:227–236

    Google Scholar 

  • Beger M, Linke S, Watts M, Game ET, Treml E, Ball I, Possingham HP (2010) Incorporating asymmetric connectivity into spatial decision making for conservation. Conserv Lett 3:359–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bode M, Burrage K, Possingham HP (2008) Using complex network metrics to predict the persistence of metapopulations with asymmetric connectivity patterns. Ecol Model 214:201–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JH, Kodric-Brown A (1977) Turnover rates in insular biogeography: effect of immigration on extinction. Ecology 58:445–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Chardon JP, Adriaensen F, Matthysen E (2003) Incorporating landscape elements into a connectivity measure: a case study for the speckled wood butterfly (Pararge aegeria L.). Landsc Ecol 18:561–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clobert J, Danchin E, Dhondt A (2001) Dispersal. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferraz G, Nichols JD, Hines JE, Stouffer PC, Bierregaard RO, Lovejoy TE (2007) A large-scale deforestation experiment: effects of patch area and isolation on Amazon birds. Science 315:238–241

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreras P (2001) Landscape structure and asymmetrical inter-patch connectivity in a metapopulation of the endangered Iberian lynx. Biol Conserv 100:125–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiske I, Chandler R (2011) Unmarked: an R package for fitting hierarchical models of wildlife occurrence and abundance. J Stat Softw 43:1–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher RJ Jr (2009) Does attraction to conspecifics explain the patch-size effect? An experimental test. Oikos 118:1139–1147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher RJ, Acevedo MA, Reichert BE, Pias KE, Kitchens WM (2011) Social network models predict movement and connectivity in ecological landscapes. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108:19282–19287

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • García-Cancel JG, Meléndez-Ackerman EJ, Olaya-Arenas P, Merced A, Flores NP, Tremblay RL (2014) Associations between Lepanthes rupestris orchids and bryophyte presence in the Luquillo Experimental Forest, Puerto Rico. Carib Nat 6:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilpin ME, Diamond JM (1976) Calculation of immigration and extinction curves from the species-area-distance relation. Proc Natl Acad Sci 73:4130–4134

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson EJ, Gardner RH (1996) The effect of landscape heterogeneity on the probability of patch colonization. Ecology 77:94–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1994) A practical model of metapopulation dynamics. J Anim Ecol 63:151–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1998) Metapopulation dynamics. Nature 396:41–49

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1999) Metapopulation ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazell P, Kellner O, Rydin H, Gustafsson L (1998) Presence and abundance of four epiphytic bryophytes in relation to density of aspen (Populus tremula) and other stand characteristics. For Ecol Manage 107:147–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hovestadt T, Binzenhöfer B, Nowicki P, Settele J (2011) Do all inter-patch movements represent dispersal? A mixed kernel study of butterfly mobility in fragmented landscapes. J Anim Ecol 80:1070–1077

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson SL, Covich AP, Crowl TA, Estrada-Pinto A, Bithorn J, Wurtsbaugh WA (1998) Do seasonality and disturbance influence reproduction in freshwater atyid shrimp in headwater streams, Puerto Rico? Verhandl Int Verein Theor Angew Limnol 26:2076–2081

    Google Scholar 

  • Kadoya T, Washitani I (2012) Use of multiple habitat types with asymmetric dispersal affects patch occupancy of the damselfly Indolestes peregreinus in a fragmented landscape. Basic Appl Ecol 13:178–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kawecki TJ, Holt RD (2002) Evolutionary consequences of asymmetric dispersal rates. Am Nat 160:333–347

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kindlmann P, Melandez-Ackerman EJ, Tremblay RL (2014) Disobedient epiphytes: colonization and extinction rates in a metapopulation of Lepanthes rupestris (Orchidaceae) contradict theoretical predictions based on patch connectivity. Linn J Bot Soc 175:598–606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleinhans D, Jonsson PR (2011) On the impact of dispersal asymmetry on metapopulation persistence. J Theor Biol 290:37–45

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lomolino MV (1990) The target area hypothesis: the influence of island area on immigration rates of non-volant mammals. Oikos 57:297–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Hines JE, Knutson MG, Franklin AB (2003) Estimating site occupancy, colonization, and local extinction when a species is detected imperfectly. Ecology 84:2200–2207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCormick MK, Jacquemyn H (2013) What constrains the distribution of orchid populations? New Phytol. doi:10.1111/nph.12639

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick MK, Taylor DL, Juhaszova K, Burnett RK, Whigham DF, O’Neill JP (2012) Limitations on orchid recruitment: not a simple picture. Mol Ecol 21:1511–1523

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moilanen A (1999) Patch occupancy models of metapopulation dynamics: efficient parameter estimation using implicit statistical inference. Ecology 80:1031–1043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moilanen A (2002) Implications of empirical data quality to metapopulation model parameter estimation and application. Oikos 96:516–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moilanen A, Hanski I (1998) Metapopulation dynamics: effects of habitat quality and landscape structure. Ecology 79:2503–2515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moilanen A, Nieminen M (2002) Simple connectivity measures in spatial ecology. Ecology 83:1131–1145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olaya-Arenas P, Meléndez-Ackerman E, Pérez ME, Tremblay RL (2011) Demographic response by a small epiphytic orchid. Am J Bot 98:2040–2048

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pavlacky DC, Possingham HP, Lowe AJ, Prentis PJ, Green DJ, Goldizen AW (2012) Anthropogenic landscape change promotes asymmetric dispersal and limits regional patch occupancy in a spatially structured bird population. J Anim Ecol 8:940–952

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellet J, Fleishman E, Dobkin DS, Gander A, Murphy DD (2007) An empirical evaluation of the area and isolation paradigm of metapopulation dynamics. Biol Conserv 136:483–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollock KH (1982) A capture-recapture design robust to unequal probability of capture. J Wildl Manage 46:752–757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prevedello JA, Viera MV (2010) Does the type of matrix mater? A quantitative review of the evidence. Biodivers Conserv 19:1205–1223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramírez A, Melendez-Colom E (2003) Meteorological summary for El Verde Field Station: 1975-2003. Institute for Tropical Ecosystem Studies, University of Puerto Rico

  • Rasmussen HN, Whigham DF (1993) Seed ecology of dust seeds in situ: a new study technique and its application in terrestrial orchids. Am J Bot 80:1374–1378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rota C, Fletcher RJ, Dorazio R, Betts M (2009) Occupancy estimation and the closure assumption. J Appl Ecol 46:1173–1181

    Google Scholar 

  • Royle JA, Dorazio RM (2008) Hierarchical modeling and inference in ecology: the analysis of data from populations, metapopulations and communities. Academic Press, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon Y, Connolly SR, Bode L (2010) Effects of asymmetric dispersal on the coexistence of competing species. Ecol Lett 13:432–441

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer SC, Epps CW, Brashares JS (2011) Placing linkages among fragmented habitats: do least-cost models reflect how animals use landscapes? J Appl Ecol 48:668–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snäll T, Pennanen J, Kivistö L, Hanski I (2005) Modelling epiphyte metapopulation dynamics in a dynamic forest landscape. Oikos 109:209–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D, May RM, Lehman CL, Nowak MA (1994) Habitat destruction and the extinction debt. Nature 371:65–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tremblay RL (1997) Distribution and dispersion patterns of individuals in nine species of Lepanthes (Orchidaceae). Biotropica 29:38–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tremblay RL (2000) Plant longevity in four species of Lepanthes (Pleurothallidinae; Orchidaceae). Lindleyana 15:257–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Tremblay RL, Ackerman JD (2001) Gene flow and effective population size in Lepanthes (Orchidaceae): a case for genetic drift. Biol J Linn Soc 72:47–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tremblay RL, Ackerman JD (2003) The genetic structure of orchid populations and its evolutionary importance. Lankesteriana 7:87–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Tremblay RL, Castro JV (2009) Circular distribution of an epiphytic herb on trees in a subtropical rain forest. Trop Ecol 50:211–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Tremblay RL, Meléndez-Ackerman E, Kapan D (2006) Do epiphytic orchids behave as metapopulations? Evidence from colonization, extinction rates and asynchronous population dynamics. Biol Conserv 129:70–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treml EA, Halpin PN, Urban DL, Pratson LF (2008) Modeling population connectivity by ocean currents, a graph-theoretic approach for marine conservation. Landsc Ecol 23:19–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vuilleumier S, Fontanillas P (2007) Landscape structure affects dispersal in the greater white-toothed shrew: inference between genetic and simulated ecological distances. Ecol Model 201:369–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vuilleumier S, Possingham HP (2006) Does colonization asymmetry matter in metapopulations? Philos Trans R Soc B 273:1637–1642

    Google Scholar 

  • Vuilleumier S, Bolker BM, Lévêque O (2010) Effects of colonization asymmetries on metapopulation persistence. Theor Popul Biol 78:225–238

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Whigham DF, O’Neill JP, Rasmussen HN, Caldwell BA, McCormick MK (2006) Seed longevity in terrestrial orchids-potential for persistent in situ seed banks. Biol Conserv 129:24–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winfree R, Dushoff J, Crone EE, Schultz CB, Budny RV, Williams NM, Kremen C (2005) Testing simple indices of habitat proximity. Am Nat 165:707–717

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work greatly benefited from discussions with B. Bolker and S. Vuilleumier. We thank J. C. Smith, K. Sieving, M. Oli and R. Holt for their suggestions. Funding was provided by the National Science Foundation (NSF) Quantitative Spatial Ecology, Evolution and Environment Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship Program grant 0801544 at the University of Florida and an NSF Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant (DEB-1110441). Funding was also provided by the School of Natural Resources and Environment and the Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation at the University of Florida. R. Tremblay was supported by the Center for Applied Tropical Ecology and Conservation, NSF-HRD 0734826. The experiments comply with the current laws of the country (Puerto Rico) in which the experiments were performed.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Natural Resources and Environment, PO Box 110430, Gainesville, FL, 32611-0430, USA

    Miguel A. Acevedo

  2. Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, PO Box 110430, Gainesville, FL, 32611-0430, USA

    Miguel A. Acevedo & Robert J. Fletcher Jr.

  3. Department of Biology, University of Puerto Rico-Humacao, Call Box 860, Humacao, PR, 00792, USA

    Raymond L. Tremblay

  4. Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Puerto Rico-Río Piedras, PO Box 70377, San Juan, PR, 00936-8377, USA

    Elvia J. Meléndez-Ackerman

  5. Center for Applied Tropical Ecology and Conservation, University of Puerto Rico, PO Box 23360, San Juan, PR, 00931-3360, USA

    Raymond L. Tremblay & Elvia J. Meléndez-Ackerman

Authors
  1. Miguel A. Acevedo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert J. Fletcher Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Raymond L. Tremblay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elvia J. Meléndez-Ackerman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miguel A. Acevedo.

Additional information

Communicated by John Thomas Lill.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 708 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Acevedo, M.A., Fletcher, R.J., Tremblay, R.L. et al. Spatial asymmetries in connectivity influence colonization−extinction dynamics. Oecologia 179, 415–424 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-015-3361-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-015-3361-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation