Skip to main content
Log in

Checkerboard metacommunity structure: an incoherent concept

  • Concepts, Reviews and Syntheses
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Checkerboards have emerged as a metaphor to (1) describe mutually exclusive patterns of co-occurrence for ecologically similar species that are geographically interspersed (i.e., checkerboard distributions), and (2) characterize relationships among species distributions along gradients that involve entire metacommunities (i.e., checkerboard metacommunity structure). Critical differences exist in the conceptual foundations that characterize these patterns. Checkerboard distributions are characterized by mutual exclusion of geographically interspersed species, usually pairs of ecologically similar species for which competition prevents syntopy. In contrast, checkerboard metacommunity structures are more restrictive: groups of species must exhibit mutually exclusive distributions, and each of these groups must be spatially independent of all other groups. Consequently, in a checkerboard metacommunity, competition defines one relationship for each species (i.e., that with its mutually exclusive partner), whereas independence characterizes all other interspecific associations. Consequently, a structure designed to be consistent with this concept will conclude that the metacommunity has random rather than checkerboard structure. Indeed, empirical checkerboard metacommunities are quite rare (7 of 766 reported empirical structures), and likely arise because of poor characterization of species ranges due to detection errors (i.e., a preponderance of rare or hard-to-detect species), rather than from underlying ecological mechanisms. Importantly, no ecological mechanism has been identified that is consistent with the concept of negative coherence. Consequently, the evaluation of checkerboards should be restricted to small sets of ecologically similar species for which interspecific interactions may lead to mutual exclusion, and coherence should be used only to evaluate if species distributions are more coherent than expected by chance (i.e., one-tailed tests).

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Austin MP (1985) Continuum concept, ordination methods and niche theory. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 16:39–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barner AK, Coblentz KE, Hacker SD, Menge BA (2018) Fundamental contradictions among observational and experimental estimates of non-trophic species interactions. Ecology 99:557–566

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blonder B (2016) Do hypervolumes have holes? Am Nat 187:E93–E105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cisneros LM, Fagan ME, Willig MR (2015) Season-specific and guild-specific effects of anthropogenic landscape modification on metacommunity structure of tropical bats. J Anim Ecol 84:373–385

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Clements FE (1916) Plant succession: an analysis of the development of vegetation. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, DC

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Clements FE (1936) Nature and structure of the climax. J Ecol 24:254–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connor EF, Collins MD, Simberloff D (2013) The checkered history of checkerboard distributions. Ecology 94:2403–2414

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Costa-Neto SF, Cardoso TS, Boullosa RG, Maldonado A Jr, Gentile R (2018) Metacommunity structure of the helminths of the black-eared opossum Didelphis aurita in peri-urban, sylvatic and rural environments in south-eastern Brazil. J Helminthol. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022149x18000780

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dallas T, Presley SJ (2014) Relative importance of host environment, transmission potential, and host phylogeny to the structure of parasite metacommunities. Oikos 123:866–874

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond JM (1975) Assembly of species communities. In: Cody ML, Diamond JM (eds) Ecology and evolution of communities. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp 342–444

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauch HG (1982) Multivariate analysis in community ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gauch HG, Whittaker RH (1972) Coenocline simulation. Ecology 53:446–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gleason HA (1926) The individualistic concept of the plant association. Bull Torrey Bot Club 53:7–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gleason HA (1939) The individualistic concept of the plant association. Am Midl Nat 21:92–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gotelli NJ, Hart EM, Ellison AM (2015) EcoSimR: null model analysis for ecological data. R package version 0.1.0

  • Hill MO (1973) Reciprocal averaging: an eigenvector method of ordination. J Ecol 61:237–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korňan M, Svitok M (2018) Pairwise null model analyses of temporal patterns of bird assemblages contradict the assumptions of competition theory. Basic Appl Ecol 31:72–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leibold MA, Mikkelson GM (2002) Coherence, species turnover, and boundary clumping: elements of meta-community structure. Oikos 97:237–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewinsohn TM, Prado PI, Jordano P, Bascompte J, Olesen JM (2006) Structure in plant-animal interaction assemblages. Oikos 113:174–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur RH, Diamond JM, Karr JR (1972) Density compensation in island faunas. Ecology 53:330–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marrec R, Pontbriand-Paré O, Legault S, James PMA (2018) Spatiotemporal variation in drivers of parasitoid metacommunity structure in continuous forest landscapes. Ecosphere 9:e02075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McIntosh RP (1967) The continuum concept of vegetation. Bot Rev 33:130–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mihaljevic JR, Joseph MB, Johnson PTJ (2015) Using multispecies occupancy models to improve the characterization and understanding of metacommunity structure. Ecology 96:1783–1792

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mumladze L, Murvanidze M, Behan-Pelletier V (2013) Compositional patterns in Holarctic peat bog inhabiting oribatid mite (Acari:Oribatida) communities. Pedobiologia 56:41–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nieto-Rabiela F, Suzán G, Wiratsudakul A, Rico-Chávez O (2018) Viral metacommunities associated to bats and rodents at different spatial scales. Commun Ecol 19:168–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patterson BD, Atmar A (1986) Nested subsets and the structure of insular mammalian faunas and archipelagos. Biol J Linn Soc 28:65–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poulin R (1997) Species richness of parasite assemblages: evolution and patterns. Annu Rev Eco Syst 28:341–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Presley SJ, Higgins CL, López-González C, Stevens RD (2009) Elements of metacommunity structure of Paraguayan bats: multiple gradients require analysis of multiple axes of variation. Oecologia 160:781–793

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Presley SJ, Higgins CL, Willig MR (2010) A comprehensive framework for the evaluation of metacommunity structure. Oikos 119:908–917

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Presley SJ, Cisneros LM, Patterson BD, Willig MR (2012) Vertebrate metacommunity structure along an extensive elevational gradient in the tropics: a comparison of bats, rodents and birds. Global Ecol Biogeogr 21:968–976

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schluter D (1984) A variance test for detecting species associations, with some example applications. Ecology 65:998–1005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmera D, Podani J, Botta-Dukát Z, Erős T (2018) On the reliability of the elements of metacommunity structure framework for separating idealized metacommunity patterns. Ecol Indic 85:853–860

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone L, Roberts A (1990) The checkerboard score and species distributions. Oecologia 85:74–79

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D (1982) Resource competition and community structure. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Tonkin JD, Stoll S, Jähnig SC, Haase P (2016) Elements of metacommunity structure of river and riparian assemblages: communities, taxonomic groups and deconstructed trait groups. Ecol Complex 25:35–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich W, Gotelli NJ (2013) Pattern detection in null model analysis. Oikos 122:2–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich W, Almeida-Neto M, Gottelli NJ (2009) A consumer’s guide to nestedness analysis. Oikos 118:3–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker RH (1965) Vegetation of the Santa Catalina Mountain, Arizona: a gradient analysis of the south slope. Ecology 46:429–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker RH (1975) Communities and ecosystems. The Macmillan Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

SJP and MRW were supported by the National Science Foundation (DEB-1239764 and DEB-1546686) and by the Center for Environmental Sciences and Engineering at the University of Connecticut. Support for JHFM to study abroad at the University of Connecticut was provided by Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES/PDSE Grant No. 88881.133815/2016-01) and domestic support was provided by CAPES Grant No. 1343252.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

All authors contributed substantially to the conceptual development of the manuscript. SJP conducted the literature review. SJP and JHFM created and analyzed examples. SJP wrote the manuscript. JHFM and MRW provided editorial advice.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steven J. Presley.

Additional information

Communicated by Pieter Johnson.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 129 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Presley, S.J., Mello, J.H.F. & Willig, M.R. Checkerboard metacommunity structure: an incoherent concept. Oecologia 190, 323–331 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-019-04420-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-019-04420-1

Keywords

Navigation