Opposing community assembly patterns for dominant and non-dominant plant species in herbaceous ecosystems globally

ARENILLAS C.A.; CADOTTE M.; BORER, E.; SEABLOOM E.; ALBERTI J.; BAEZ S.; BAKKER J.; BOUGHTON E.; BUCKLEY Y.; BUGALHO M.; DONOHUE I.; DWYER J.; ESKELINEN A.; FIRN J.; HAGENAH N.; HAUTIER Y.; HELM A.; JENTSCH A.; KNOPS J.; LA PIERRE K.; LAANISTO L.; LAUNGANI R.; MCCULLEY R.; MOORE J.; MORGAN J.; PERI P.L.; POWER S.; PRICE J.; SANKARAN M.; SPEZIALE K.; STANDISH R.; VIRTANEN R.

Ecology and Evolution

Wiley

Año: 2021 vol. 11 p. 17744 - 17761

2045-7758

Biotic and abiotic factors interact with dominant plants?the locally most frequent or with the largest coverage?and nondominant plants differently, partially because dominant plants modify the environment where nondominant plants grow. For instance, if dominant plants compete strongly, they will deplete most resources, forcing nondominant plants into a narrower niche space. Conversely, if dominant plants are constrained by the environment, they might not exhaust available resources but instead may ameliorate environmental stressors that usually limit nondominants. Hence, the nature of interactions among nondominant species could be modified by dominant species. Furthermore, these differences could translate into a disparity in the phylogenetic relatedness among dominants compared to the relatedness among nondominants. By estimating phylogenetic dispersion in 78 grasslands across five continents, we found that dominant species were clustered (e.g., co-dominant grasses), suggesting dominant species are likely organized by environmental filtering, and that nondominant species were either randomly assembled or overdispersed. Traits showed similar trends for those sites (