Predicting the assembly of novel communities in urban ecosystems

Abstract

Context

Ecological communities in urban ecosystems are assembled through ecological processes, such as species interactions, dispersal, and environmental filtering, but also through human factors that create and modify the landscape. These complex interactions make it difficult to untangle the relationships between social–ecological dynamics and urban biodiversity.

Objectives

As a result, there has been a call for research to address how human activities influence the processes by which ecological communities are structured in urban ecosystems. We address this research challenge using core concepts from landscape ecology to develop a framework that links social-ecological dynamics to ecological communities using the metacommunity perspective.

Methods

The metacommunity perspective is a useful framework to explore the assembly of novel communities because it distinguishes between the effects of local environmental heterogeneity and regional spatial processes in structuring ecological communities. Both are shaped by social–ecological dynamics in urban ecosystems.

Results

In this paper, we define social, environmental, and spatial processes that structure metacommunities, and ultimately biodiversity, in cities. We then address how our framework could be applied in urban ecosystem research to understand multi-scalar biodiversity patterns.

Conclusions

Our framework provides a theoretical and empirical foundation for transdisciplinary research to examine how social-ecological dynamics mediate the assembly of novel communities in urban ecosystems.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Modified from Leibold and Chase (2017c)

References

  1. Alberti M, Marzluff JM, Shulenberger E et al (2003) Integrating humans into ecology: opportunities and challenges for studying urban ecosystems. Bioscience 53(12):1169–1179

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alberti M, Palkovacs EP, Roches SD et al (2020) The complexity of urban eco-evolutionary dynamics. Bioscience. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biaa079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Allen DC, Bateman HL, Warren PS et al (2019) Long-term effects of land-use change on bird communities depend on spatial scale and land-use type. Ecosphere 10(11):e02952

    Google Scholar 

  4. Andrade R, Bateman HL, Franklin J, Allen D (2018) Waterbird community composition, abundance, and diversity along an urban gradient. Landsc Urban Plan 170:103–111

    Google Scholar 

  5. Aronson MF, Nilon CH, Lepczyk CA et al (2016) Hierarchical filters determine community assembly of urban species pools. Ecology 97(11):2952–2963

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Avolio M, Pataki DE, Gillespie T et al (2015) Tree diversity in southern California’s urban forest: the interacting roles of social and environmental variables. Front Ecol Evol 3:73

    Google Scholar 

  7. Avolio ML, Pataki DE, Trammell TL, Endter-Wada J (2018) Biodiverse cities: the nursery industry, homeowners, and neighborhood differences drive urban tree composition. Ecol Monogr 88(2):259–276

    Google Scholar 

  8. Avolio ML, Blanchette A, Sonti NF, Locke DH (2020) Time is not money: income is more important than lifestage for explaining patterns of residential yard plant community structure and diversity in Baltimore. Front Ecol Evol 8(85):1–14

    Google Scholar 

  9. Belaire JA, Whelan CJ, Minor ES (2014) Having our yards and sharing them too: the collective effects of yards on native bird species in an urban landscape. Ecol Appl 24(8):2132–2143

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Beninde J, Veith M, Hochkirch A (2015) Biodiversity in cities needs space: a meta-analysis of factors determining intra-urban biodiversity variation. Ecol Lett 18(6):581–592

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Boivin NL, Zeder MA, Fuller DQ et al (2016) Ecological consequences of human niche construction: examining long-term anthropogenic shaping of global species distributions. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113(23):6388–6396

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Borcard D, Legendre P, Drapeau P (1992) Partialling out the spatial component of ecological variation. Ecology 73(3):1045–1055

    Google Scholar 

  13. Bradley CA, Altizer S (2007) Urbanization and the ecology of wildlife diseases. Trends Ecol Evol 22(2):95–102

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Chase JM, Leibold MA (2003) Ecological niches: linking classical and contemporary approaches. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  15. Chase JM, Amarasekare P, Cottenie K et al (2005) Competing theories for competitive metacommunities. In: Leibold M, Holt R, Holyoak M (eds) Metacommunities: spatial dynamics and ecological communities. Springer, New York, pp 335–354

    Google Scholar 

  16. Chase JM, McGill BJ, Thompson PL et al (2019) Species richness change across spatial scales. Oikos. https://doi.org/10.1111/oik.05968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chase JM, Jeliazkov A, Ladouceur E, Viana DS (2020) Biodiversity conservation through the lens of metacommunity ecology. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1469(1):86–104

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Chesson PL (1985) Coexistence of competitors in spatially and temporally varying environments: a look at the combined effects of different sorts of variability. Theor Popul Biol 28(3):263–287

    Google Scholar 

  19. Childers DL, Pickett ST, Grove JM, Ogden L, Whitmer A (2014) Advancing urban sustainability theory and action: challenges and opportunities. Landsc Urban Plan 125:320–328

    Google Scholar 

  20. Connell JH (1978) Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs. Science 199(4335):1302–1310

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cook EM, Hall SJ, Larson KL (2012) Residential landscapes as social-ecological systems: a synthesis of multi-scalar interactions between people and their home environment. Urban Ecosyst 15(1):19–52

    Google Scholar 

  22. Cubino JP, Cavender-Bares J, Hobbie SE et al (2019) Drivers of plant species richness and phylogenetic composition in urban yards at the continental scale. Landsc Ecol 34(1):63–77

    Google Scholar 

  23. Cubino JP, Avolio ML, Wheeler MM et al (2020) Linking yard plant diversity to homeowners’ landscaping priorities across the US. Landsc Urban Plan 196:103730

    Google Scholar 

  24. Cumming G, Cumming DH, Redman C (2006) Scale mismatches in social-ecological systems: causes, consequences, and solutions. Ecol Soc 11(1):14

    Google Scholar 

  25. Davis AY, Belaire JA, Farfan MA et al (2012) Green infrastructure and bird diversity across an urban socioeconomic gradient. Ecosphere 3(11):1–18

    Google Scholar 

  26. Evans BS, Ryder TB, Reitsma R, Hurlbert AH, Marra PP (2015) Characterizing avian survival along a rural-to-urban land use gradient. Ecology 96(6):1631–1640

    Google Scholar 

  27. Faeth SH, Warren PS, Shochat E, Marussich WA (2005) Trophic dynamics in urban communities. AIBS Bull 55(5):399–407

    Google Scholar 

  28. Faeth SH, Bang C, Saari S (2011) Urban biodiversity: patterns and mechanisms. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1223(1):69–81

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Fey K, Hämäläinen S, Selonen V (2015) Roads are no barrier for dispersing red squirrels in an urban environment. Behav Ecol 27(3):741–747

    Google Scholar 

  30. Gallo T, Fidino M, Lehrer EW, Magle SB (2017) Mammal diversity and metacommunity dynamics in urban green spaces: implications for urban wildlife conservation. Ecol Appl 27(8):2330–2341

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Goddard MA, Dougill AJ, Benton TG (2010) Scaling up from gardens: biodiversity conservation in urban environments. Trends Ecol Evol 25(2):90–98

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Goddard MA, Ikin K, Lerman SB (2017) Ecological and social factors determining the diversity of birds in residential yards and gardens. In: Goddard MA, Ikin K, Lerman SB (eds) Ecology and conservation of birds in urban environments. Springer, Cambridge, pp 371–397

    Google Scholar 

  33. Goodness J (2018) Urban landscaping choices and people’s selection of plant traits in Cape Town, South Africa. Environ Sci Policy 85:182–192

    Google Scholar 

  34. Grimm NB, Faeth SH, Golubiewski NE et al (2008) Global change and the ecology of cities. Science 319(5864):756–760

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Grimm NB, Pickett ST, Hale RL, Cadenasso ML (2017) Does the ecological concept of disturbance have utility in urban social–ecological–technological systems? Ecosyst Health Sustain 3(1):e01255

    Google Scholar 

  36. Groffman PM, Cadenasso ML, Cavender-Bares J et al (2017) Moving towards a new urban systems science. Ecosystems 20(1):38–43

    Google Scholar 

  37. Grove M, Burch WR, Pickett STA (2005) Social mosaics and urban forestry in Baltimore, Maryland. In: Lee RG, Field DR (eds) Communities and forests: where people meet the land. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, pp 250–274

    Google Scholar 

  38. Grove JM, Troy AR, O’Neil-Dunne JP et al (2006) Characterization of households and its implications for the vegetation of urban ecosystems. Ecosystems 9(4):578–597

    Google Scholar 

  39. Grove JM, Locke DH, O’Neil-Dunne JP (2014) An ecology of prestige in New York City: examining the relationships among population density, socioeconomic status, group identity, and residential canopy cover. Environ Manag 54(3):402–419

    Google Scholar 

  40. Harris EM, Martin DG, Polsky C et al (2013) Beyond “Lawn People”: the role of emotions in suburban yard management practices. Prof Geogr 65(2):345–361

    Google Scholar 

  41. Head L, Muir P (2006) Suburban life and the boundaries of nature: resilience and rupture in Australian backyard gardens. Trans Inst Br Geogr 31(4):505–524

    Google Scholar 

  42. Holt RD (1985) Population dynamics in two-patch environments: some anomalous consequences of an optimal habitat distribution. Theor Popul Biol 28(2):181–208

    Google Scholar 

  43. Holyoak M, Leibold MA, Holt RD (2005) Metacommunities: spatial dynamics and ecological communities. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  44. Hubbell SP (2001) The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  45. Hunter MCR, Brown DG (2012) Spatial contagion: gardening along the street in residential neighborhoods. Landsc Urban Plan 105(4):407–416

    Google Scholar 

  46. Jacobi WR, Goodrich BA, Cleaver CM (2011) Firewood transport by national and state park campers: a risk for native or exotic tree pest movement. Arboric Urban For 37(3):126

    Google Scholar 

  47. Jacobson B, Peres-Neto PR (2010) Quantifying and disentangling dispersal in metacommunities: how close have we come? How far is there to go? Landsc Ecol 25(4):495–507

    Google Scholar 

  48. Johnson AL, Borowy D, Swan CM (2018) Land use history and seed dispersal drive divergent plant community assembly patterns in urban vacant lots. J Appl Ecol 55(1):451–460

    Google Scholar 

  49. Kattwinkel M, Biedermann R, Kleyer M (2011) Temporary conservation for urban biodiversity. Biol Conserv 144(9):2335–2343

    Google Scholar 

  50. Kuras ER, Warren PS, Zinda JA et al (2020) Urban socioeconomic inequality and biodiversity often converge, but not always: a global meta-analysis. Landsc Urban Plan 198:103799

    Google Scholar 

  51. La Sorte FA, McKinney ML, Pyšek P (2007) Compositional similarity among urban floras within and across continents: biogeographical consequences of human mediated biotic interchange. Glob Change Biol 13:913–921

    Google Scholar 

  52. Larson KL, Brumand J (2014) Paradoxes in landscape management and water conservation: examining neighborhood norms and institutional forces. CATE 7(1):6

    Google Scholar 

  53. Larson KL, Cook E, Strawhacker C, Hall SJ (2010) The influence of diverse values, ecological structure, and geographic context on residents’ multifaceted landscaping decisions. Hum Ecol 38(6):747–761

    Google Scholar 

  54. Larson KL, Hoffman J, Ripplinger J (2017) Legacy effects and landscape choices in a desert city. Landsc Urban Plan 165:22–29

    Google Scholar 

  55. Larson KL, Andrade R, Nelson KC et al (2020) Municipal regulation of residential landscapes across US cities: patterns and implications for landscape sustainability. J Environ Manag 275:111132

    Google Scholar 

  56. Legendre P (2008) Studying beta diversity: ecological variation partitioning by multiple regression and canonical analysis. J Plant Ecol 1(1):3–8

    Google Scholar 

  57. Leibold MA, Chase JM (2017a) The theories of metacommunities. Metacommunity ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 23–48

    Google Scholar 

  58. Leibold MA, Chase JM (2017b) Interactions between time and space in metacommunities. Metacommunity Ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 131–150

    Google Scholar 

  59. Leibold MA, Chase JM (2017c) Metacommunity patterns in space. Metacommunity ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 90–130

    Google Scholar 

  60. Leibold MA, Chase JM (2017d) A transition in metacommunity ecology. Metacommunity ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 369–392

    Google Scholar 

  61. Leibold MA, Holyoak M, Mouquet N et al (2004) The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecol Lett 7(7):601–613

    Google Scholar 

  62. Leong M, Dunn RR, Trautwein MD (2018) Biodiversity and socioeconomics in the city: a review of the luxury effect. Biol Lett 14(5):20180082

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Lepczyk CA, Flather CH, Radeloff VC et al (2008) Human impacts on regional avian diversity and abundance. Conserv Biol 22(2):405–416

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Lerman SB, Warren PS (2011) The conservation value of residential yards: linking birds and people. Ecol Appl 21(4):1327–1339

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Lerman SB, Warren PS, Gan H, Shochat E (2012) Linking foraging decisions to residential yard bird composition. PLoS ONE 7(8):e43497

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Lerman S, Turner V, Bang C (2012) Homeowner associations as a vehicle for promoting native urban biodiversity. Ecol Soc 17(4):45

    Google Scholar 

  67. Lerman SB, Contosta AR, Milam J, Bang C (2018) To mow or to mow less: lawn mowing frequency affects bee abundance and diversity in suburban yards. Biol Conserv 221:160–174

    Google Scholar 

  68. Locke DH, Roy Chowdhury R, Grove MJ et al (2018) Social norms, yard care, and the difference between front and back yard management: examining the landscape mullets concept on urban residential lands. Soc Nat Resour 31(10):1169–1188

    Google Scholar 

  69. Locke DH, Hall B, Grove JM et al (2020) Residential housing segregation and urban tree canopy in 37 US Cities. SocArXiv. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/97zcs

  70. Machlis GE, Force JE, Burch WR Jr (1997) The human ecosystem part I: the human ecosystem as an organizing concept in ecosystem management. Soc Nat Resour 10(4):347–367

    Google Scholar 

  71. Mack RN, Lonsdale WM (2001) Humans as global plant dispersers: getting more than we bargained for: current introductions of species for aesthetic purposes present the largest single challenge for predicting which plant immigrants will become future pests. AIBS Bull 51(2):95–102

    Google Scholar 

  72. McDonnell MJ, Pickett ST (1990) Ecosystem structure and function along urban-rural gradients: an unexploited opportunity for ecology. Ecology 71(4):1232–1237

    Google Scholar 

  73. Menge BA, Sutherland JP (1987) Community regulation: variation in disturbance, competition, and predation in relation to environmental stress and recruitment. Am Nat 130(5):730–757

    Google Scholar 

  74. Minor E, Belaire JA, Davis A, Franco M (2016) Socioeconomics and neighbor mimicry drive yard and neighborhood vegetation patterns. Urban landscape ecology. Routledge, London, pp 74–92

    Google Scholar 

  75. Musacchio LR (2013) Cultivating deep care: integrating landscape ecological research into the cultural dimension of ecosystem services. Landsc Ecol 28(6):1025–1038

    Google Scholar 

  76. Nassauer JI, Wang Z, Dayrell E (2009) What will the neighbors think? Cultural norms and ecological design. Landsc Urban Plan 92(3–4):282–292

    Google Scholar 

  77. Nielsen AB, Van Den Bosch M, Maruthaveeran S, Van Den Bosch CK (2014) Species richness in urban parks and its drivers: a review of empirical evidence. Urban Ecosyst 17(1):305–327

    Google Scholar 

  78. Padial AA, Ceschin F, Declerck SA et al (2014) Dispersal ability determines the role of environmental, spatial and temporal drivers of metacommunity structure. PLoS ONE 9(10):e111227

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Piano E, De Wolf K, Bona F et al (2017) Urbanization drives community shifts towards thermophilic and dispersive species at local and landscape scales. Glob Chang Biol 23(7):2554–2564

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Pickett ST, Cadenasso ML (2008) Linking ecological and built components of urban mosaics: an open cycle of ecological design. J Ecol 96(1):8–12

    Google Scholar 

  81. Pickett ST, Cadenasso ML (2017) How many principles of urban ecology are there? Landsc Ecol 32(4):699–705

    Google Scholar 

  82. Pickett ST, Grove JM (2009) Urban ecosystems: what would Tansley do? Urban Ecosyst 12(1):1–8

    Google Scholar 

  83. Pickett STA, Cadenasso ML, Rosi-Marshall EJ et al (2017) Dynamic heterogeneity: a framework to promote ecological integration and hypothesis generation in urban systems. Urban Ecosyst 20(1):1–14

    Google Scholar 

  84. Pincetl S (2012) Nature, urban development and sustainability—what new elements are needed for a more comprehensive understanding? Cities 29:S32–S37

    Google Scholar 

  85. Pincetl S, Prabhu SS, Gillespie TW et al (2013) The evolution of tree nursery offerings in Los Angeles County over the last 110 years. Landsc Urban Plan 118:10–17

    Google Scholar 

  86. Pulliam HR (1988) Sources, sinks, and population regulation. Am Nat 132(5):652–661

    Google Scholar 

  87. Rapport DJ, Regier HA, Hutchinson TC (1985) Ecosystem behavior under stress. Am Nat 125(5):617–640

    Google Scholar 

  88. Raymond CM, Diduck AP, Buijs A et al (2019) Exploring the co-benefits (and costs) of home gardening for biodiversity conservation. Local Environ 24(3):258–273

    Google Scholar 

  89. Ripplinger J, Franklin J, Collins SL (2016) When the economic engine stalls—a multi-scale comparison of vegetation dynamics in pre-and post-recession Phoenix, Arizona, USA. Landsc Urban Plan 153:140–148

    Google Scholar 

  90. Robbins P (2007) Lawn people: How grasses, weeds and chemicals make us who we are. Temple University Press, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  91. Robbins P, Sharp J (2003a) The lawn-chemical economy and its discontents. Antipode 35(5):955–979

    Google Scholar 

  92. Robbins P, Sharp JT (2003b) Producing and consuming chemicals: the moral economy of the American lawn. Econ Geogr 79(4):425–451

    Google Scholar 

  93. Robbins P, Polderman A, Birkenholtz T (2001) Lawns and toxins: an ecology of the city. Cities 18(6):369–380

    Google Scholar 

  94. Rosindell J, Hubbell SP, Etienne RS (2011) The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography at age ten. Trends Ecol Evol 26(7):340–348

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Roy Chowdhury R, Turner BL (2006) Reconciling agency and structure in empirical analysis: smallholder land use in the southern Yucatán, Mexico. Ann Am Assoc Geogr 96(2):302–322

    Google Scholar 

  96. Roy Chowdhury R, Larson K, Grove M et al (2011) A multi-scalar approach to theorizing socio-ecological dynamics of urban residential landscapes. CATE 4(1):6

    Google Scholar 

  97. Ryder TB, Reitsma R, Evans B, Marra PP (2010) Quantifying avian nest survival along an urbanization gradient using citizen-and scientist-generated data. Ecol Appl 20(2):419–426

    Google Scholar 

  98. Sattler T, Borcard D, Arlettaz R et al (2010) Spider, bee, and bird communities in cities are shaped by environmental control and high stochasticity. Ecology 91(11):3343–3353

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Schell CJ, Dyson K, Fuentes TL et al (2020) The ecological and evolutionary consequences of systemic racism in urban environments. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay4497

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Schwartz MW, Thorne JH, Viers JH (2006) Biotic homogenization of the California flora in urban and urbanizing regions. Biol Conserv 127(3):282–291

    Google Scholar 

  101. Sepp T, McGraw KJ, Kaasik A, Giraudeau M (2018) A review of urban impacts on avian life-history evolution: Does city living lead to slower pace of life? Glob Chang Biol 24(4):1452–1469

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Seto KC, Güneralp B, Hutyra LR (2012) Global forecasts of urban expansion to 2030 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon pools. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109(40):16083–16088

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Shepard DB, Kuhns AR, Dreslik MJ, Phillips CA (2008) Roads as barriers to animal movement in fragmented landscapes. Anim Conserv 11(4):288–296

    Google Scholar 

  104. Shmida AVI, Wilson MV (1985). Biological determinants of species diversity. J. Biogeogr., 1–20.

  105. Shochat E (2004) Credit or debit? Resource input changes population dynamics of city-slicker birds. Oikos 106(3):622–626

    Google Scholar 

  106. Shochat E, Lerman SB, Katti M, Lewis DB (2004) Linking optimal foraging behavior to bird community structure in an urban-desert landscape: Field experiments with artificial food patches. Am Nat 164:232–243

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Shochat E, Lerman SB, Anderies JM et al (2010) Invasion, competition, and biodiversity loss in urban ecosystems. Bioscience 60(3):199–208

    Google Scholar 

  108. Shochat E, Lerman SB, Fernández-Juricic E (2010) Birds in urban ecosystems: population dynamics, community structure, biodiversity, and conservation. Urban Ecosyst Ecol 55:75–86

    Google Scholar 

  109. Sisser JM, Nelson KC, Larson KL et al (2016) Lawn enforcement: How municipal policies and neighborhood norms influence homeowner residential landscape management. Landsc Urban Plan 150:16–25

    Google Scholar 

  110. Slatkin M (1974) Competition and regional coexistence. Ecology 55(1):128–134

    Google Scholar 

  111. Smith TW, Lundholm JT (2010) Variation partitioning as a tool to distinguish between niche and neutral processes. Ecography 33(4):648–655

    Google Scholar 

  112. Starrfelt J, Kokko H (2012) The theory of dispersal under multiple influences. Dispersal ecology and evolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 19–28

    Google Scholar 

  113. Swan CM, Pickett ST, Szlavecz K et al (2011) Biodiversity and community composition in urban ecosystems: coupled human, spatial, and metacommunity processes. Handbook of urban ecology. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 179–186

    Google Scholar 

  114. Swan CM, Pickett ST, Szlavecz K et al (2017) Differential organization of taxonomic and functional diversity in an urban woody plant metacommunity. Appl Veg Sci 20(1):7–17

    Google Scholar 

  115. Teixeira CP, Fernandes CO (2020) Novel ecosystems: a review of the concept in non-urban and urban contexts. Landsc Ecol 35:23–39

    Google Scholar 

  116. Venter ZS, Shackleton CM, Van Staden F et al (2020) Green Apartheid: Urban green infrastructure remains unequally distributed across income and race geographies in South Africa. Landsc Urban Plan 203:103

    Google Scholar 

  117. Warren PS, Harlan SL, Boone C et al (2010) Urban ecology and human social organization. Urban ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 172–201

    Google Scholar 

  118. Warren PS, Lerman SB, Andrade R et al (2019) The more things change: species losses detected in Phoenix despite stability in bird–socioeconomic relationships. Ecosphere 10(3):e02624

    Google Scholar 

  119. Wheeler MM, Neill C, Groffman PM et al (2017) Continental-scale homogenization of residential lawn plant communities. Landsc Urban Plan 165:54–63

    Google Scholar 

  120. Wheeler MM, Larson KL, Andrade R (2020) Attitudinal and structural drivers of preferred versus actual residential landscapes in a desert city. Urban Ecosyst 23:659–673

    Google Scholar 

  121. Whittaker RH (1962) Classification of natural communities. Bot Rev 28(1):1–239

    Google Scholar 

  122. Wu J, Hobbs RJ (eds) (2007) Key topics in landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  123. Wu J (2008) Making the case for landscape ecology an effective approach to urban sustainability. Landsc J 27(1):41–50

    Google Scholar 

  124. Yabiku ST, Casagrande DG, Farley-Metzger E (2008) Preferences for landscape choice in a Southwestern desert city. Environ Behav 40(3):382–400

    Google Scholar 

  125. York AM, Smith ME, Stanley BW et al (2011) Ethnic and class clustering through the ages: a transdisciplinary approach to urban neighbourhood social patterns. Urban Stud 48(11):2399–2415

    Google Scholar 

  126. York AM, Tuccillo J, Boone C et al (2014) Zoning and land use: a tale of incompatibility and environmental injustice in early Phoenix. J Urban Affairs 36(5):833–853

    Google Scholar 

  127. York AM, Kane K, Clark CM et al (2017) What determines public support for graduated development impact fees? State Local Gov Rev 49(1):15–26

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under grant number DEB-1832016, Central Arizona-Phoenix Long-Term Ecological Research Program (CAP LTER).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Riley Andrade.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Andrade, R., Franklin, J., Larson, K.L. et al. Predicting the assembly of novel communities in urban ecosystems. Landscape Ecol 36, 1–15 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-01142-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Community ecology theory
  • Urban ecosystems
  • Metacommunity
  • Human–environment interactions
  • Biodiversity
  • Social–ecological dynamics