Metacommunity paradigms are increasingly studied to explain how environmental control and spatial patterns determine variation in community composition. However, the relative importance of these patterns on biological assemblages among different habitats is not well known. We investigated the relative roles of local, catchment and spatial variables based on overland and watercourse distances in explaining the variation of community structure of lake and river macrophytes in two large river basins at two spatial extents (within and across river basins). Partial redundancy analysis was used to explore the share of variability in macrophyte communities attributable to local environmental conditions, catchment land cover and space (generated with Principle Coordinates of Neighbour Matrices). We found that local variables had the highest effect on both lake and river macrophyte communities, followed by catchment variables. Space had no or only marginal influence on the community structure regardless of used distance measure. Total phosphorus, conductivity and turbidity of the local variables contributed most for lake macrophytes, whereas pH and color had largest independent contribution for variation in river macrophytes. Size of catchment area and proportion of lakes and agriculture were the most important catchment variables in both habitats. The strong importance of environmental control suggests that both lake and river macrophyte communities are structured by species sorting. This finding gives support to the validity of assessment systems based on the European Water Framework Directive.
Alahuhta, J., K.-M. Vuori and M. Luoto. 2011. Land use, geomor-phology and climate as environmental determinants of emergent aquatic macrophytes in boreal catchments. Boreal Environ.Res. 16: 185–202.
Alahuhta, J. and J. Heino. 2013. Spatial extent, regional specific-ity and metacommunity structuring in lake macrophytes. J. Biogeogr. 40: 1572–1582.
Alahuhta, J., A. Kanninen, S. Hellsten, K.-M. Vuori, M. Kuoppala and H. Hämäläinen. 2013. Environmental and spatial correlates of community composition, richness and status of boreal lake macrophytes. Ecol. Indic. 32: 172–181.
Alahuhta, J. 2015. Geographic patterns of lake macrophyte communities and species richness at regional scale. J. Veg. Sci., in press. DOI: 10.1111/jvs.12261.
Alahuhta, J., A. Kanninen, S. Hellsten, K.-M. Vuori, M. Kuoppala and H. Hämäläinen. 2014a. Variable response of functional mac-rophyte groups to lake characteristics, land use and space: implications for bioassessment. Hydrobiologia 737: 201–214.
Alahuhta, J., L.B. Johnson, J. Olker and J. Heino. 2014b. Species sorting determines variation in the community composition of common and rare macrophytes at various spatial extents. Ecol. Complex. 20: 61–68.
Anonymous 2003. SFS-EN 14184 2003. Water quality. Guideline for studying macrophytes in running waters. Finnish Standards Association SFS, Helsinki.
Beisner, B.E., P.R. Peres-Neto, E.S. Lindström, A. Barnett and M.L. Longhi. 2006. The role of environmental and spatial processes in structuring lake communities from bacteria to fsh. Ecology 87: 2985–2991.
Bennett, J.R., B.F. Cumming, B.K. Ginn and J.P. Smol. 2010. Broad-scale environmental responses and niche conservatism in lacustrine diatom communities. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 19: 724–732.
Birk, S. and N. Willby. 2010. Towards harmonization of ecological quality classification: establishing common grounds in European macrophyte assessment for rivers. Hydrobiologia 652: 149–163.
Blanchet, F.G., P. Legendre and D. Borcard. 2008. Forward selection of explanatory variables. Ecography 89: 2623–2632.
Boedeltje, G., J. Bakker, A. Ten Brinke, J van Groenendael and M. Soesbergen. 2004. Dispersal phenology of hydrochorous plants in relation to discharge, seed release time and buoyancy of seeds: the food pulse concept supported. J. Ecol. 92: 786–796.
Borcard, D., P. Legendre and P. Drapeau. 1992. Partialling out the spatial component of ecological variation. Ecology 73: 1045– 1055.
Borcard, D., F. Gillet and P. Legendre. 2011. Numerical Ecology with R. Springer, New York.
Bornette, G. and C. Amoros. 1991. Aquatic vegetation and hydrology of a braided river floodplain. J. Veg. Sci. 2: 497–512.
Capers, R.S., R. Selsky and G.J. Bugbee. 2010. The relative importance of local conditions and regional processes in structuring aquatic plant communities. Freshw. Biol. 55: 952–966.
Chambers, P.A., P. Lacoul, K.J. Murphy and S.M. Thomaz. 2008. Global diversity of aquatic macrophytes in freshwater. Hydrobiology 595: 9–26.
Cottenie, K. 2005. Integrating environmental and spatial processes in ecological community dynamics. Ecol. Lett. 8: 1175–1182.
Crump, B.C., H.E. Adams, J.E. Hobbie and G.W. Kling. 2007. Biogeography of bacterioplankton in lakes and streams of an arctic tundra catchment. Ecology 88: 1365–1378.
De Bie, T., L. De Meester, L. Brendonck et al. 2012. Body size and dispersal mode as key traits determining metacommunity structure of aquatic organisms. Ecol. Lett. 15: 740–747.
Dray, S., P. Legendre and P.R. Peres-Neto. 2006. Spatial modelling: a comprehensive framework for principal coordinate analysis of neighbour matrices (PCNM). Ecol. Model. 196: 483–493.
Dray, S., R. Pélissier, P. Couteron, M.J. Fortin, P. Legendre, P.R. Peres-Neto, E. Bellier, R. Bivand, F.G. Blanchet, M. De Caceres, A.B. Dufour, E. Heegaard, T. Jombart, F. Munoz, J. Oksanen, J. Thioulouse and H.H. Wagner. 2012. Community ecology in the age of multivariate multiscale spatial analysis. Ecol. Monogr. 82: 257–275.
Eronen, M. 2005. Land Uplift: Virgin Land from the Sea. In: Seppälä, M. (ed.), The Physical Geography of Fennoscandia. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 17–34.
Grönroos, M., J. Heino, T. Siqueira, V.L. Landeiro, J. Kotanen and L.M. Bini 2013. Metacommunity structuring in stream networks: roles of dispersal mode, distance type, and regional environmental context. Ecol. Evol. 3: 4473–4487.
Heino, J. 2011. A macroecological perspective of diversity patterns in the freshwater realm. Freshw. Biol. 56: 1703–1722.
Heino, J., M. Grönroos, J. Soininen, R. Virtanen and T. Muotka. 2012. Context dependency and metacommunity structuring in boreal headwater streams. Oikos 121: 537–544.
Jacobson, N. and P.R. Peres-Neto. 2010. Quantifying and disentangling dispersal in metacommunities: how close have we come? How far is there to go? Landscape Ecol. 25: 495–507.
Johnson, R.K., W. Goedkoop and L. Sandin. 2004. Spatial scale and ecological relationships between the macroinvertebrate communities of stony habitats of streams and lakes. Freshw. Biol. 49: 1179–94.
Kanninen, A., V.-M. Vallinkoski, J. Leka, T. J. Marjomäki, S. Hellsten and H. Hämäläinen. 2013. A comparison of two methods for surveying aquatic macrophyte communities in boreal lakes: implications for bioassessment. Aquatic Bot. 104: 88–100.
Lacoul, P. and B. Freedman. 2006. Environmental infuences on aquatic plants in freshwater ecosystems. Environ. Rev. 14: 89– 136.
Landeiro, V.L., W.E. Magnusson, A.S. Melo, H.M.V. Espirito- Santo and L.M. Bini. 2011. Spatial eigenfunction analyses in stream networks: do watercourse and overland distances produce different results? Freshw. Biol. 56: 1184–1192.
Legendre, P. and E.D. Gallagher. 2001. Ecologically meaningful transformations for ordination of species data. Oecologia 129: 271–280.
Legendre, P., D. Borcard and P.R. Peres-Neto. 2005. Analyzing beta diversity: partitioning the spatial variation of community composition data. Ecol. Monogr. 75: 435–450.
Leibold, M.A., M. Holyoak, N. Mouquet, P. Amarasekare, J.M. Chase, M.F. Hoopes, R.D. Holt, J.B. Shurin, R. Law, D. Tilman, M. Loreau and A. Gonzalez. 2004. The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecol. Lett.7: 601–613.
Logue, J., N. Mouquet, H. Peter, H. Hillebrand and The Metacommunity Working Group. 2011. Empirical approaches to metacommunities: a review and comparison with theory. Trends Ecol. Evol. 26: 482–491.
Madsen, J.D., P.A. Chambers, J.F. James, E.W. Koch and D.F. Westlake. 2001. The interaction between water movement, sediment dynamics and submersed macrophytes. Hydrobiologia 444: 71–84.
Mikulyuk, A., Sharma, S., Van Egeren, S., Erdmann, E., Nault, M.E. and Hauxwell, J. 2011. The relative role of environmental, spatial, and land-use patterns in explaining aquatic macrophyte community composition. Can. J. Fish. Aquatic Sci. 68: 1778– 1789.
O’Hare, M.T., I.D.M. Gunn, D.S. Chapman, B.J. Dudley and B.V. Purse. 2012. Impacts of space, local environment and habitat connectivity on macrophyte communities in conservation lakes. Divers. Distrib. 18: 603–614.
Oksanen, J., F.G. Blanchet, R. Kindt, P. Legendre, P.R. Minchin, R.B. O’Hara, G.L. Simpson, P. Solymos, M.H.H. Stevens and H. Wagner. 2012. vVegan: Community Ecology Package. Rpackage version 2.0-3. Available at: https://doi.org/CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan.
Padial, A.A., F. Ceschin, S.A.J. Declerck, L. De Meester, C.C. Bonecker, F.A. Lansac-Toha, L. Rodrigues, L.C. Rodrigues, S. Train, L.F.M. Velho and L.M. Bini. 2014. Dispersal ability determines the role of environmental, spatial and temporal drivers of metacommunity structure. PLoS ONE 9: e111227.
Peres-Neto, P.R., P. Legendre, S. Dray and D. Borcard. 2006. Variation partitioning of species data matrices: estimation and comparison of fractions. Ecology 87: 2614–2625.
Presley, S.J., C.L. Higgins and M.R. Willig. 2010. A comprehensive framework for the evaluation of metacommunity structure. Oikos 119: 908–917.
Riis, T. 2008. Dispersal and colonisation of plants in lowland streams: success rates and bottlenecks. Hydrobiologia 596: 341–351.
Rintanen, T. 1996. Changes in the fora and vegetation of 113 Finnish lakes during 40 years. Ann. Bot. Fenn. 33: 101–122.
Robinson, C. T. and B. Kawecka. 2005. Benthic diatoms of an Alpine stream/lake network in Switzerland. Aquatic Sci. 67: 492–506.
Santamaria, L. 2002. Why are most aquatic plants widely distributed? Dispersal, clonal growth and small-scale heterogeneity in a stressful environment. Acta Oecol. 23: 137–154.
Soininen, J. and J. Weckström. 2009. Diatom community structure along environmental and spatial gradients in lakes and streams. Fundamental Appl. Limnol. 173: 205–213.
Soons, M.B., C. van der Vlugt, B. van Lith, G.W. Heil and M. Klaassen. 2008. Small seed size increases the potential for dispersal of wetland plants by ducks. J. Ecol. 96: 619–627.
Toivonen H. and P. Huttunen. 1995. Aquatic macrophytes and ecological gradients in 57 small lakes in southern Finland. Aquatic Bot. 51: 197–221.
Van Geest, G.J., F.C.J.M. Roozen, H. Coops, R.M.M. Roijackers, A.D. Buijse, E.T.H.M. Peeters and M. Scheffer. 2003. Vegetation abundance in lowland food plan lakes determined by surface area, age and connectivity. Freshw. Biol. 48: 440–454.
Viana, D.S., L. Santamaria, T.C. Michot and J. Figuerola. 2013. Migratory strategies of waterbirds shape the continental-scale dispersal of aquatic organisms. Ecography 36: 430–438.
Wetzel, R.G. 2001. Limnology, Lake and River Ecosystems. 3rd ed. Academic Press, New York.
About this article
Cite this article
Alahuhta, J., Rääpysjärvi, J., Hellsten, S. et al. Species sorting drives variation of boreal lake and river macrophyte communities. COMMUNITY ECOLOGY 16, 76–85 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1556/168.2015.16.1.9
- Aquatic plants
- Euclidean distances
- Metacommunity dynamics
- Overland distances
- Principle Coordinates of Neighbour Matrices
- Spatial processes
- Stream networks