Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T21:45:06.816Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - The storage effect: definition and tests in two plant communities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2013

Peter Chesson
Affiliation:
University of Arizona
Nancy J. Huntly
Affiliation:
Utah State University
Stephen H. Roxburgh
Affiliation:
CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems
Marissa Pantastico-Caldas
Affiliation:
Los Angeles Trade-Tech College
José M. Facelli
Affiliation:
The University of Adelaide
Colleen K. Kelly
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Michael G. Bowler
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Gordon A. Fox
Affiliation:
University of South Florida
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Nature is pervaded by variation: the physical environment is ever changing in time and in space, populations fluctuate, and no two organisms are the same. To explore natural environments is to be confronted by variation, and the science of ecology is challenged by the persistent question: is this variation more than variation itself? Environmental variation can cause population fluctuations (Ripa et al. 1998), but can it do more than this? Does it affect how organisms interact with one another? Does it shape populations and communities? How and in what ways? Biologists firmly accept that variation shapes the organisms. Heritable variation is the engine of evolution, which is fuelled by environmental change. In life-history theory, it is widely accepted that organisms show adaptations to variation in the physical environment, exemplified by evolutionary theories of iteroparity and seed dormancy (Cohen 1966, Bulmer 1985, Ellner 1985a, Real and Ellner 1992). Fundamentally, these adaptations allow species to take advantage of favourable environmental conditions without being too vulnerable to unfavourable environmental conditions.

Community ecologists have had a variety of attitudes to variation, especially variation in the physical environment (Chesson and Case 1986). Successional change after disturbance had a prominent role in the early development of plant and ecosystem ecology (Clements 1916) and now has an important role in diversity maintenance theory relying on competition–colonisation tradeoffs (Hastings 1980). Spatial variation is often assumed to provide for, and should therefore promote, species diversity (Pacala and Tilman 1994, Amarasekare and Nisbet 2001, Snyder and Chesson 2004). Although it is often assumed that regular temporal variation, such as seasonal and diurnal variation, provides for temporal niches (Armstrong and McGehee 1976, Levins 1979, Brown 1989a, b, Chesson et al. 2001), there is also much unpredictable temporal variation, such as deviations of weather and climate from seasonal averages (Davis 1986) and disturbances such as fire (Connell 1978, Bond and Keeley 2005). Should we think of this unpredictable temporal variation as disruptive to ecological processes (May 1974)? Do organisms fail to adapt to unpredictable temporal variation? Are they merely jerked around by it? Life-history theory suggests otherwise (Bulmer 1985, Real and Ellner 1992), yet conclusions are often drawn from models that reflect no such adaptations, for example Lotka–Volterra models with unpredictable environmental variation added arbitrarily (Turelli 1981, Kilpatrick and Ives 2003).

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

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

Adler, P. B., HilleRisLambers, J., Kyriakidis, P. C., Guan, Q. F. and Levine, J. M. (2006). Climate variability has a stabilizing effect on the coexistence of prairie grasses. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 103, 12793–12798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adondakis, S. and Venable, D. L. (2004). Dormancy and germination in a guild of Sonoran Desert annuals. Ecology 85, 2582–2590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amarasekare, P. and Nisbet, R. M. (2001). Spatial heterogeneity, source-sink dynamics, and the local coexistence of competing species. American Naturalist 158, 572–584.Google ScholarPubMed
Angert, A. L., Huxman, T. E., Chesson, P. and Venable, D. L. (2009). Functional tradeoffs determine species coexistence via the storage effect. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 106, 11641–11645.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Armstrong, R. A. and McGehee, R. (1976). Coexistence of species competing for shared resources. Theoretical Population Biology 9, 317–328.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baskin, C. C. and Baskin, J. M. (1998). Seeds: Ecology, Biogeography, and Evolution of Dormancy and Germination. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bond, W. J. and Keeley, J. E. (2005). Fire as a global ‘herbivore’: the ecology and evolution of flammable ecosystems. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20, 387–394.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, J. S. (1989a). Coexistence on a seasonal resource. American Naturalist 133, 168–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. S. (1989b). Desert rodent community structure: a test of four mechanisms of coexistence. Ecological Monographs 59, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bulmer, M. G. (1985). Selection for iteroparity in a variable environment. American Naturalist 126, 63–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapin, F. S., Schulze, E. and Mooney, H. A. (1990). The ecology and economics of storage in plants. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 21, 423–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chesson, P. (1994). Multispecies competition in variable environments. Theoretical Population Biology 45, 227–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chesson, P. (1997). Diversity maintenance by integration of mechanisms over various scales. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Coral Reef Symposium. Balboa, Panama City, Panama: Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, pp. 405–410.Google Scholar
Chesson, P. (2000). General theory of competitive coexistence in spatially-varying environments. Theoretical Population Biology 58, 211–237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chesson, P. (2003). Quantifying and testing coexistence mechanisms arising from recruitment fluctuations. Theoretical Population Biology 64, 345–357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chesson, P. (2008). Quantifying and testing species coexistence mechanisms. In Valladares, F., Camacho, A., Elosegui, A. et al. (eds), Unity in Diversity: Reflections on Ecology after the Legacy of Ramon Margalef. Bilbao, Spain: Fundación BBVA, pp. 119–164.Google Scholar
Chesson, P. and Huntly, N. (1989). Short-term instabilities and long-term community dynamics. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 4, 293–298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chesson, P. and Huntly, N. (1997). The roles of harsh and fluctuating conditions in the dynamics of ecological communities. American Naturalist 150, 519–553.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chesson, P. and Kuang, J. J. (2008). The interaction between predation and competition. Nature 456, 235–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chesson, P. and Kuang, J. J. (2010). The storage effect due to frequency-dependent predation in multispecies plant communities. Theoretical Population Biology 78, 148–164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chesson, P., Donahue, M. J., Melbourne, B. A., and Sears, A. L. W. (2005). Scale transition theory for understanding mechanisms in metacommunities. In Holyoak, M., Leibhold, A. M. and Holt, R. D. (eds), Metacommunities: Spatial Dynamics and Ecological Communities. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 279–306.Google Scholar
Chesson, P., Pacala, S. and Neuhauser, C. (2001). Environmental niches and ecosystem functioning. In Kinzig, A. P., Pacala, S. W. and Tilman, D. (eds), The Functional Consequences of Biodiversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 213–245.Google Scholar
Chesson, P. L. and Case, T. J. (1986). Overview: nonequilibrium community theories: chance, variability, history, and coexistence. In Diamond, J. and Case, T. J. (eds), Community Ecology. New York: Harper and Row, pp. 229–239.Google Scholar
Chesson, P. L. and Huntly, N. (1988). Community consequences of life-history traits in a variable environment. Annales Zoologici Fennici 25, 5–16.Google Scholar
Chesson, P. L. and Warner, R. R. (1981). Environmental variability promotes coexistence in lottery competitive systems. American Naturalist 117, 923–943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choler, P., Michalet, R. and Callaway, R. M. (2001). Facilitation and competition on gradients in alpine plant communities. Ecology 82, 3295–3308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, F. E. (1916). Plant Succession: An Analysis of the Development of Vegetation. Washington DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, D. (1966). Optimizing reproduction in a randomly varying environment. Journal of Theoretical Biology 12, 119–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comins, H. N. and Noble, I. R. (1985). Dispersal, variability, and transient niches: species coexistence in a uniformly variable environment. American Naturalist 126, 706–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connell, J. H. (1978). Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs. Science 199, 1302–1310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, M. B. (1986). Climatic instability, time-lags and community disequilibrium. Diamond, J. and Case, T. J. (eds), Community Ecology. New York: Harper and Row, pp. 269–284.Google Scholar
Ellner, S. (1985a). ESS germination strategies in randomly varying environments. I. Logistic-type models. Theoretical Population Biology 28, 50–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ellner, S. (1985b). ESS germination strategies in randomly varying environments. II Reciprocal yield-law models. Theoretical Population Biology 28, 80–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Facelli, J. M., Chesson, P. and Barnes, N. (2005). Differences in seed biology of annual plants in arid lands: a key ingredient of the storage effect. Ecology 86, 2998–3006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grubb, P. J. (1977). The maintenance of species-richness in plant communities: the importance of the regeneration niche. Biological Review 52, 107–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harper, J. L. (1985). Modules, branches, and the capture of resources. In Jackson, J. B. C., Buss, L. W. and Cook, R. E. (eds), Population Biology and Evolution of Clonal Organisms. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, pp. 1–33.Google Scholar
Hastings, A. (1980). Disturbance, coexistence, history, and competition for space. Theoretical Population Biology 18, 363–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holt, R. D. (1977). Predation, apparent competition, and the structure of prey communities. Theoretical Population Biology 12, 197–229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holt, R. D. (1984). Spatial heterogeneity, indirect interactions, and the coexistence of prey species. American Naturalist 124, 377–406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hutchinson, G. E. (1961). The paradox of the plankton. American Naturalist 95, 137–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inouye, R. S. (1980). Density dependent germination response by seeds of desert annuals. Oecologia 46, 235–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Juhren, M., Went, F. W. and Phillips, E. (1956). Ecology of desert plants. IV. Combined field and laboratory work on germination in the Joshua Tree National Monument, California. Ecology 37, 318–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, C. K. and Bowler, M. G. (2002). Coexistence and relative abundance in forest trees. Nature 417, 437–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, C. K. and Bowler, M. G. (2005). A new application of storage dynamics: differential sensitivity, diffuse competition, and temporal niches. Ecology 86, 1012–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilpatrick, A. M. and Ives, A. R. (2003). Species interactions can explain Taylor’s power law for ecological time series. Nature 422, 65–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuang, J. J. and Chesson, P. (2009). Coexistence of annual plants: generalist seed predation weakens the storage effect. Ecology 90, 170–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuang, J. J. and Chesson, P. (2010). Interacting coexistence mechanisms in annual plant communities: frequency-dependent predation and the storage effect. Theoretical Population Biology 77, 56–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lande, R. (1993). Risks of population extinction from demographic and environmental stochasticity and random catastrophes. American Naturalist 142, 911–927.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levins, R. (1979). Coexistence in a variable environment. American Naturalist 114, 765–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
May, R. M. (1974). Stability and Complexity in Model Ecosystems. 2nd edn. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Pacala, S. W. and Tilman, D. (1994). Limiting similarity in mechanistic and spatial models of plant competition in heterogeneous environments. American Naturalist 143, 222–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Real, L. A. and Ellner, S. (1992). Life-history evolution in stochastic environments: a graphical mean variance approach. Ecology 73, 1227–1236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ripa, J., Lundberg, P. and Kaitala, V. (1998). A general theory of environmental noise in ecological food webs. American Naturalist 151, 256–263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rohde, K. (2005). Nonequilibrium Ecology. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Roxburgh, S. and Chesson, P. (1998). A new method for detecting species associations with spatially autocorrelated data. Ecology 79, 2180–2192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, S. R., Casella, G. and McCulloch, C. E. (1992). Variance Components. New York: John Wiley and Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, A. L. W. and Chesson, P. (2007). New methods for quantifying the spatial storage effect: an illustration with desert annuals. Ecology 88, 2240–2247.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shao, J. and Tu, D. (1995). The Jackknife and Bootstrap. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, R. E. and Chesson, P. (2004). How the spatial scales of dispersal, competition, and environmental heterogeneity interact to affect coexistence. American Naturalist 164, 633–650.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Soong, K., Chen, M.-h., Chen, C.-l. et al. (2003). Spatial and temporal variation of coral recruitment in Taiwan. Coral Reefs 22, 224–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tilman, D. (2004). Niche tradeoffs, neutrality, and community structure: a stochastic theory of resource competition, invasion, and community assembly. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 101, 10854–10861.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turelli, M. (1980). Niche overlap and invasion of competitors in random environments II. The effects of demographic stochasticity. In Jager, W., Rost, H. and Tautu, P. (eds), Biological Growth and Spread: Mathematical Theories and Applications. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 119–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turelli, M. (1981). Niche overlap and invasion of competitors in random environments I: models without demographic stochasticity. Theoretical Population Biology 20, 1–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warner, R. R. and Chesson, P. L. (1985). Coexistence mediated by recruitment fluctuations: a field guide to the storage effect. American Naturalist 125, 769–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, S. J., Muller-Landau, H. C., Calderon, O. and Hernandez, A. (2005). Annual and spatial variation in seedfall and seedling recruitment in a neotropical forest. Ecology 86, 848–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org 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
×