This is a Preprint and has not been peer reviewed. The published version of this Preprint is available: https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.13051. This is version 1 of this Preprint.
Feedback loops drive ecological succession; towards a unified conceptual framework
Downloads
Authors
Abstract
The core principle shared by most theories and models of succession is that plant-environment (PE) feedback dynamics drive a directional change in the plant community, following a major disturbance. The most commonly studied feedback loops are those in which the regrowth of the plant community causes changes to the biotic (e.g., dispersers) or abiotic (e.g., soil nutrients) environment, which differentially affect species availability or performance. This, in turn, leads to shifts in the species composition of the plant community. However, there are many other PE feedback loops that potentially drive succession, each of which can be considered a model of succession.
While plant-environment feedback loops in principle generate predictable successional trajectories, succession is generally observed to be highly variable. Factors contributing to this variability are the stochastic processes involved in feedback dynamics, such as individual mortality and seed dispersal, and extrinsic causes of succession, that are not affected by changes in the plant community but do affect species performance or availability. Both can lead to variation in the identity of dominant species within communities. This, in turn, leads to further contingencies if these species differ in their effect on their environment (priority effects). Predictability and variability are thus intrinsically linked features of ecological succession.
We present a novel conceptual framework of ecological succession that integrates the propositions discussed above. This framework defines seven general causes: landscape context, disturbance and land-use, biotic factors, abiotic factors, differential species availability and performance, and the plant community. When involved in a feedback loop, these general causes drive succession and when not, they are extrinsic causes that create variability in successional trajectories and dynamics. The proposed framework provides a guide for linking these general causes into causal pathways that represent specific models of succession.
Our framework represents a systematic approach to identifying the main feedback processes and causes of variation at different successional stages. It can be used for systematic comparisons among study sites and along environmental gradients, to conceptualize studies, guide the formulation of research questions and design of field studies. Mapping an extensive field study onto our conceptual framework revealed that the pathways representing the study’s empirical outcomes and conceptual model had important differences, underlining the need to move beyond the conceptual models that currently dominate in our specific fields and to find ways to examine the importance of and interactions among alternative causal pathways of succession. To further this work, we argue for integrating long-term studies across environmental and anthropogenic gradients, combined with controlled experiments and dynamic modeling.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.32942/X2R887
Subjects
Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Life Sciences
Keywords
ecological succession, plant-environment feedback loops, causes of variability, landscape context, biotic and physical environment, disturbance and land use, conceptual framework, plant-environment feedback loops, causes of variability, landscape context, biotic and physical environment, disturbance and land use, conceptual framework
Dates
Published: 2023-08-15 21:04
Last Updated: 2023-08-16 01:04
License
Additional Metadata
Data and Code Availability Statement:
Not applicable
Language:
English
Metrics
Views: 1177
Downloads: 728
Comment #111 Andrew Robert Marshall @ 2023-08-20 23:53
Dear authors,
It is really great to see this article. I am very glad to see more awareness of feedback loops after trying to communicate these (and associated tipping points) in our articles and conference presentations over the past few years.
I am just pointing you towards our article where we made several similar points, specifically in relation to feedback loops in forests. Here is the article:
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ffgc.2020.00035/full
We propose that succession in forests around the world is dependent upon feedbacks from plants that compete with trees – we mention lianas and other vines, as well as grass, bamboo and ferns. We also suggest that the presence of feedbacks is variable, according to environmental drivers, especially climate.
I have also attached an important paper that shows how these abrupt transitions can be measured, but yet both your and my article both seem to agree that these abrupt transitions are probably not “rare” as suggested by this article:
https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/ES11-00216.1
Good luck in getting the work through the review process.
Regards,
Andy Marshall
Forest Research Institute, University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia