Metacommunity structuring in stream networks: roles of dispersal mode, distance type, and regional environmental context
Version of Record online: 14 OCT 2013
© 2013 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Ecology and Evolution
Volume 3, Issue 13, pages 4473–4487, November 2013
How to Cite
Ecology and Evolution 2013; 3(13): 4473–4487
- Issue online: 13 NOV 2013
- Version of Record online: 14 OCT 2013
- Manuscript Accepted: 11 SEP 2013
- Manuscript Revised: 10 SEP 2013
- Manuscript Received: 18 JUN 2013
- Academy of Finland
- Maj and Tor Nessling Foundation
- Kone Foundation
Figure S1. Average distances to centroid for each dispersal mode group and the whole community data.
Figure S2. Environmental heterogeneity in the three study areas.
Table S1. Total numbers of taxa and proportion of singletons in each dispersal mode group and in each basin.
Table S2. A list of taxa detected in the field surveys (with frequency of occupancy and mean abundance). The taxa are grouped by study region and dispersal mode group.
Table S3. Number of species and information content within each dataset.
Table S4. Adjusted R2 values and p-values for environmental [a+b] and spatial [b+c] models.
Table S5. Pure environmental and pure spatial fractions for observed data, as well as when information content was taken into account (based on overland distances).
Table S6. Pure environmental and pure spatial fractions for observed data and when information content was taken into account (based on watercourse distances).
Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.