Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T01:26:11.130Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

15 - Scaling species richness and distribution: uniting the species–area and species–energy relationships

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2012

By
David Storch ,
Arnošt L. Šizling  and
Kevin J. Gaston
Edited by
David Storch ,
Pablo Marquet  and
James Brown
David Storch
Affiliation:
Charles University, Prague, The Santa Fe Institute
Arnošt L. Šizling
Affiliation:
Charles University, Prague
Kevin J. Gaston
Affiliation:
University of Sheffield
David Storch
Affiliation:
Charles University, Prague
Pablo Marquet
Affiliation:
Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile
James Brown
Affiliation:
University of New Mexico
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Two macroecological patterns of species richness are sufficiently common and occur across such a wide range of taxa and geographic realms that they can be regarded as universal. The first is an increase in the number of species with the area sampled, the species–area relationship (hereafter SAR). The other is the relationship between species richness and the availability of energy that can be turned into biomass – the species–energy relationship (hereafter SER). Both patterns have a long history of exploration (e.g. Arrhenius, 1921; Gleason, 1922; Preston, 1960; Wright, 1983; Williamson, 1988; Currie, 1991; Rosenzweig, 1995; Waide et al., 1999; Gaston, 2000; Hawkins et al., 2003). However, attempts to interpret them within one unifying framework, or at least to relate them to each other, have been surprisingly rare. The most notable exception has been Wright's (1983) attempt to derive both patterns from the assumed relationship between total energy availability (defined as the product of available area and energy input per unit area) and population size. According to this theory, both area and energy positively affect species' population abundances, which decreases probabilities of population extinction, and thus increases the total number of species that can coexist on a site. Then, species richness should increase with increasing area or increasing energy in the same way.

Although this theory can be valid in island situations where the total number of species is determined by the rate of extinctions which are not balanced by immigration events (MacArthur & Wilson, 1967), the situation on the mainland is more complicated.

Type
Chapter
Information
Scaling Biodiversity , pp. 300 - 322
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, A. P., Brown, J. H. & Gillooly, J. F. (2002). Global biodiversity, biochemical kinetics, and the energetic-equivalence rule. Science, 297, 1545–1548.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Allen, A. P. & White, E. P. (2003). Effects of range size on species-area relationships. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 5, 493–499.Google Scholar
Arrhenius, O. (1921). Species and area. Journal of Ecology, 9, 95–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonn, A., Storch, D. & Gaston, K. J. (2004). Structure of the species-energy relationship. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 271, 1685–1691.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, J. H. (1984). On the relationship between abundance and distribution of species. American Naturalist, 124, 255–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chase, J. M. & Leibold, M. A. (2002). Spatial scale dictates the productivity-biodiversity relationship. Nature, 416, 427–429.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chown, S. L., Rensburg, B. J., Gaston, K. J., Rodrigues, A. S. L. & Jaarsveld, A. S. (2003). Species richness, human population size and energy: conservation implications at a national scale. Ecological Application, 13, 1233–1241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, D. B. (1981). On random placement and species-area relations. Mathematical Biosciences, 54, 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colwell, R. K. & Lees, D. C. (2000). The mid-domain effect: geometric constraints on the geography of species richness. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 15, 70–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Connor, E. F. & McCoy, E. D. (1979). The statistics and biology of the species-area relationship. American Naturalist, 113, 791–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Currie, D. (1991). Energy and large-scale patterns of animal- and plant-species richness. American Naturalist, 137, 27–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Currie, D. J., Mittelbach, G. G., Cornell, H. V., et al. (2004). Predictions and tests of climate-based hypotheses of broad-scale variation in taxonomic richness. Ecology Letters, 7, 1121–1134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, K. L., Warren, P. H. & Gaston, K. J. (2005). Species-energy relationships at the macroecological scale: a review of the mechanisms. Biology Review, 80, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gaston, K. J. (2000). Global patterns in biodiversity. Nature, 405, 220–227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gaston, K. J. & Blackburn, T. M. (2000). Pattern and Process in Macroecology. Oxford: Blackwell Science.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaston, K. J., Blackburn, T. M. & Lawton, J. H. (1997). Interspecific abundance-range size relationships: an appraisal of mechanisms. Journal of Animal Ecology, 66, 579–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaston, K. J., Blackburn, T. M., Greenwood, J. J. D., Gregory, R. D., Quinn, R. M. & Lawton, J. H. (2000). Abundance-occupancy relationships. Journal of Applied Ecology, 37 (Suppl. 1), 39–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gleason, H. A. (1922). On the relation between species and area. Ecology, 3, 158–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanski, I. & Gyllenberg, M. (1997). Uniting two general patterns in the distribution of species. Science, 275, 397–400.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harrison, J. A., Allan, D. G., Underhill, L. G., et al. (1997). The Atlas of Southern African Birds. Vols. I & II. Johannesburg: Bird Life South Africa.Google Scholar
Harte, J., Kinzig, A. & Green, J. (1999). Self-similarity in the distribution and abundance of species. Science, 284, 334–336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hawkins, B. A. & Diniz-Filho, J. A. F. (2004). “Latitude” and geographic patterns in species richness. Ecography, 27, 268–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, B. A., Field, R., Cornell, H. V., et al. (2003). Energy, water, and broad-scale geographic patterns of species richness. Ecology, 84, 3105–3117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
He, F. L. & Gaston, K. J. (2000). Estimating species abundance from occurrence. American Naturalist, 156, 553–559.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
He, F. L. & Gaston, K. J. (2003). Occupancy, spatial variance, and the abundance of species. American Naturalist, 162, 366–375.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
He, F. L. & Legendre, P. (2002). Species diversity patterns derived from species-area models. Ecology, 85, 1185–1198.Google Scholar
Hillebrand, H. (2004). On the generality of the latitudinal diversity gradient. American Naturalist, 163, 192–211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hurlbert, A. H. (2004). Species-energy relationships and habitat complexity in bird communities. Ecology Letters, 7, 714–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurlbert, A. H. & Haskell, J. P. (2003). The effect of energy and seasonality on avian species richness and community composition. American Naturalist, 161, 83–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jetz, W. & Rahbek, C. (2001). Geometric constraints explain much of the species richness pattern in African birds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 98, 5661–5666.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaspari, M., Zuan, M. & Alonso, L. (2003). Spatial grain and the causes of regional diversity gradients in ants. American Naturalist, 161, 459–477.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kerr, J. T. & Ostrovsky, M. (2003). From space to species: ecological applications for remote sensing. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 18, 299–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerr, J. T., Southwood, T. R. E. & Cihlar, J. (2001). Remotely sensed habitat diversity predicts butterfly species richness and community similarity in Canada. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 98, 11365–11370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleidon, A. & Mooney, H. A. (2000). A global distribution of biodiversity inferred from climatic constraints: results from a process-based modelling study. Global Change Biology, 6, 507–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koleff, P., Gaston, K. J. & Lennon, J. J. (2003). Measuring beta diversity for presence-absence data. Journal of Animal Ecology, 72, 367–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lennon, J. J., Greenwood, J. J. D. & Turner, J. R. G. (2000). Bird diversity and environmental gradients in Britain: a test of species energy hypothesis. Journal of Animal Ecology, 96, 581–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lennon, J. J., Koleff, P., Greenwood, J. J. D. & Gaston, K. J. (2001). The geographical structure of British bird distributions: diversity, spatial turnover and scale. Journal of Animal Ecology, 70, 966–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lennon, J. J., Kunin, W. E. & Hartley, S. (2002). Fractal species distributions do not produce power-law species area distribution. Oikos, 97, 378–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, S. K. & Willig, M. R. (2002). Species richness, latitude, and scale-sensitivity. Ecology, 83, 47–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacArthur, R. H. & Wilson, E. O. (1967). The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Maurer, B. A. (1999). Untangling Ecological Complexity? The Macroscopic Perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mittelbach, G. G., Steiner, C. F., Scheiner, S. M., et al. (2001). What is the observed relationship between species richness and productivity? Ecology, 82, 2381–2396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ney-Nifle, M. & Mangel, M. (1999). Species-area curves based on geographic range and occupancy. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 196, 327–342.Google Scholar
Pautasso, M. & Gaston, K. J. (2005). Resources and global avian assemblage structure in forests. Ecology Letters, 8, 282–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plotkin, J. B., Potts, M. D., Leslie, N., Manokaran, N., LaFrankie, J. & Ashton, P. S. (2000). Species-area curves, spatial aggregation, and habitat specialization in tropical forests. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 207, 81–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Preston, F. W. (1960). Time and space and the variation of species. Ecology, 29, 254–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahbek, C. (2005). The role of spatial scale and the perception of large-scale species-richness patterns. Ecology Letters, 8, 224–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahbek, C. & Graves, G. R. (2001). Multiscale assessment of patterns of avian species richness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 98, 4534–4539.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rodríguez, P. & Arita, H. T. (2004). Beta diversity and latitude in North American mammals: testing the hypothesis of covariation. Ecography, 27, 547–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenzweig, M. L. (1995). Species Diversity in Space and Time. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Šizling, A. L. & Storch, D. (2004). Power-law species-area relationships and self-similar species distributions within finite areas. Ecology Letters, 7, 60–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, R. D. & Willig, M. R. (2002). Geographical ecology at the community level: Perspectives on the diversity of new world bats. Ecology, 83, 545–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storch, D. & Šizling, A. L. (2002). Patterns in commonness and rarity in central European birds: reliability of the core-satellite hypothesis. Ecography, 25, 405–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storch, D. & Gaston, K. J. (2004). Untangling ecological complexity on different scales of space and time. Basic and Applied Ecology, 5, 389–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storch, D., Gaston, K. J. & Cepák, J. (2002). Pink landscapes: 1/f spectra of spatial environmental variability and bird community composition. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 269, 1791–1796.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Storch, D., Šizling, A. L. & Gaston, K. J. (2003a). Geometry of the species-area relationship in central European birds: testing the mechanism. Journal of Animal Ecology, 72, 509–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storch, D., Konvicka, M., Benes, J., Martinková, J. & Gaston, K. J. (2003b). Distributions patterns in butterflies and birds of the Czech Republic: separating effects of habitat and geographical position. Journal of Biogeography, 30, 1195–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storch, D., Evans, K. L. & Gaston, K. J. (2005). The species-area-energy relationship. Ecology Letters, 8, 487–492.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tjørve, E. (2003). Shapes and functions of species-area curves: a review of possible models. Journal of Biogeography, 30, 827–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, J. R. G., Lennon, J. J. & Lawrenson, J. A. (1988). British bird species distributions and the energy theory. Nature, 335, 539–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rensburg, B. J., Chown, S. L. & Gaston, K. J. (2002). Species richness, environmental correlates, and spatial scale: a test using South African birds. American Naturalist, 159, 566–577.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waide, R. B., Willig, M. R., Steiner, C. F., et al. (1999). The relationship between productivity and species richness. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 30, 257–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittaker, R. J., Willis, K. J. & Field, R. (2001). Scale and species richness: towards a general, hierarchical theory of species diversity. Journal of Biogeography, 28, 453–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, M. R. (1995). An extreme-value function model of the species incidence and species-area relationship. Ecology, 76, 2607–2616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, M. H. (1988). Relationship of species number to area, distance and other variables. In Analytical Biogeography, ed. Myers, A. A. & Giller, P. S., pp. 91–115. London: Chapman & Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, M. H. & Lawton, J. H. (1991). Fractal geometry of ecological habitats. In Habitat Structure: The physical Arrangement of Objects in Space, ed. Bell, S. S., McCoy, E. D. & Mushinsky, H. R., pp. 69–86. London: Chapman & Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodward, F. I., Lomas, M. R. & Lee, S. E. (2001). Predicting the future production and distribution of global terrestrial vegetation. In Terrestrial Global Productivity, ed. Roy, J., Saugier, B. & Mooney, H., pp. 519–539. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wright, D. H. (1983). Species-energy theory: an extension of species-area theory. Oikos, 41, 496–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×