A model for non-equilibrium metapopulation dynamics utilizing data on species occupancy, patch ages and landscape history

Authors

  • Alejandro Ruete,

    Corresponding author
    1. Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Uppsala, Sweden
    Current affiliation:
    1. Swedish Species Information Centre, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Uppsala, Sweden
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Örjan Fritz,

    1. Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Uppsala, Sweden
    Current affiliation:
    1. Independent researcher
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Tord Snäll

    1. Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Uppsala, Sweden
    Current affiliation:
    1. Swedish Species Information Centre, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Uppsala, Sweden
    Search for more papers by this author

Summary

  1. The distribution pattern of many species reflects the past rather than the current structure of landscapes. Consequently, species are most often not in equilibrium with the current landscape structure. Yet this is a well-known fact, there is no appropriate approach to estimate the colonization rate of non-equilibrium species based on only data on the species occurrence pattern in the landscape.
  2. We present an approach to estimate the colonization rate of non-equilibrium metapopulations. The approach requires only data on species presence/absence among its patches (occurrence pattern), data on patch ages and data on the historic distribution of the patches in the landscape. By estimating the past occurrence patterns and colonization events leading to the current pattern of occupied and non-occupied patches, we estimate the colonization rate, including the dispersal kernel. We also show how to estimate effects of local patch conditions and how to include an independent estimate of the local extinction rate based on other data. We use nine epiphytic lichen species confined to beech trees to illustrate the method.
  3. Five species had restricted dispersal range, between 200 and 4700 m, and their colonization rate decreased with increasing fragmentation. Species colonization rates were related to niche width. Among the demographic parameters, the force of colonization was more important than the dispersal range in explaining the colonization rates. Local patch conditions did not explain the colonization probability of any species. In metapopulation projections that did not account for restricted dispersal range, higher future metapopulation sizes were projected.
  4. Synthesis. The presented approach uses data on only species occurrence, patch age and landscape history to estimate the species colonization rate and dispersal kernel. It can also utilize independent data on local extinction rate. Rather than identifying factors explaining the occurrence pattern, the model estimates the rate of change in the occurrence pattern. This dynamic modelling allows testing general and applied questions on the dynamics or viability of metapopulations of sessile species. The approach is applicable for species whose distribution pattern reflects the past rather than the current landscape structure, for example, certain epiphytes and ground-floor plants.

Ancillary