SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Table S1 Data set descriptions

Figure S2 Data set locations in North America, Europe, and Australia and New Zealand

Figure S3 Metacommunity axis versus spatial scale. The linear regression was very significant (R2 = 0.11, F(1,50) = 6.09, P = 0.02).

Figure S4 Metacommunity axis versus size. The linear regression was borderline significant (R2 = 0.07, F(1,50) = 4.03, P = 0.05).

Figure S5 Metacommunity axis versus habitat type. Habitat type explained a significant amount of variation in metacommunity scores (ANOVA: F(4,47) = 3.14, P = 0.02). The boxes represent the 25, 50 and 75 quartiles, the whiskers the minimum and maximum values excluding the outliers, values outside 1.5 times the interquartile range.

Figure S6 Metacommunity axis versus dispersal type. Dispersal type explained a significant amount of variation in metacommunity scores (ANOVA: F(4,47) = 3.05, P = 0.03). The boxes represent the 25, 50 and 75 quartiles, the whiskers the minimum and maximum values excluding the outliers, values outside 1.5 times the interquartile range.

FilenameFormatSizeDescription
ELE820ST1SF2to6.pdf224KSupporting info item

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.