Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Frequency-dependent feedback constrains plant community coexistence

Nature Ecology & Evolution volume 2, pages 1403–1407 (2018)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Ecological theory suggests that coexistence of many species within communities requires negative frequency-dependent feedbacks to prevent exclusion of the least fit species. For plant communities, empirical evidence of negative frequency dependence driving species coexistence and diversity patterns is rapidly accumulating, but connecting these findings to theory has been difficult as corresponding theoretical frameworks only consider small numbers of species. Here, we show how frequency-dependent feedback constrains community coexistence, regardless of the number of species and inherent fitness inequalities between them. Any interaction network can be characterized by a single community interaction coefficient, IC, which determines whether community-level feedback is positive or negative. Negative feedback is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for persistence of the entire community. Even in cases where the coexistence equilibrium state cannot recover from perturbations, IC < 0 can enable species persistence via cyclic succession. The number of coexisting species is predicted to increase with the average strength of negative feedback. This prediction is supported by patterns of tree species diversity in more than 200,000 deciduous forest plots in the eastern United States, which can be reproduced in simulations that span the observed range of community feedback. By providing a quantitative metric for the strength of negative feedback needed for coexistence, we can now integrate theory and empirical data to test whether observed feedback–diversity correlations are strong enough to infer causality.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Conceptual representation of how the frequency-dependent feedback framework can be extended to the community level for any number of plant species (here, n = 5).
Fig. 2: Two hundred runs of plant community assembly show that more species can stably coexist under stronger negative feedback.
Fig. 3: Effects of frequency-dependent feedback on plant community structure.
Fig. 4: Application of the theoretical framework reveals that observed patterns of negative frequency dependence in over 200,000 forest plots in the eastern United States are consistent with predictions from theoretical communities in which community-level feedback determines species richness.

References

  1. MacArthur, R. & Levins, R. The limiting similarity, convergence and divergence of coexisting species. Am. Nat. 101, 377–385 (1967).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Tilman, D. Competition and biodiversity in spatially structured habitats. Ecology 75, 2–16 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Tilman, D. Resource Competition and Community Structure (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1982).

  4. Clark, J. S. Individuals and the variation needed for high species diversity in forest trees. Science 327, 1129–1132 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Allesina, S. & Levine, J. A competitive network theory for species diversity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 5638–5642 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Chesson, P. Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 31, 343–366 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Barabás, G., Michalska-Smith, M. J. & Allesina, S. The effect of intra- and interspecific competition on coexistence in multispecies communities. Am. Nat. 188, E1–E12 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Adler, P., HilleRisLambers, J. & Levine, J. A niche for neutrality. Ecol. Lett. 10, 95–104 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Comita, L. S., Muller-Landau, H. C., Aguilar, S. & Hubbell, S. P. Asymmetric density dependence shapes species abundances in a tropical tree community. Science 329, 330–332 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mangan, S. A. et al. Negative plant–soil feedback predicts tree-species relative abundance in a tropical forest. Nature 466, 752–756 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Johnson, D. J., Beaulieu, W. T., Bever, J. D. & Clay, K. Conspecific negative density dependence and forest diversity. Science 336, 904–907 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. LaManna, J. A. et al. Negative density dependence mediates biodiversity–productivity relationships across scales. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 1107–1115 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. LaManna, J. A. et al. Plant diversity increases with the strength of negative density dependence at the global scale. Science 356, 1389–1392 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Hofbauer, J. & Sigmund, K. Evolutionary Games and Population Dynamics (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1998).

  15. Allesina, S. & Tang, S. Stability criteria for complex systems. Nature 483, 205–208 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Bascompte, J., Jordano, P. & Olesen, J. M. Asymmetric coevolutionary networks facilitate biodiversity maintenance. Science 312, 431–433 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Chisholm, R. A. & Muller-Landau, H. A theoretical model linking interspecific variation in density dependence to species abundances. Theor. Ecol. 4, 241–253 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Bever, J. D., Kristi, M. W. & Antonovics, J. Incorporating the soil community into plant population dynamics: the utility of the feedback approach. J. Ecol. 85, 561–573 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bever, J. D. Soil community feedback and the coexistence of competitors: conceptual frameworks and empirical tests. New Phytol. 157, 465–473 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kulmatiski, A., Heavilin, J. & Beard, K. H. Testing predictions of a three-species plant–soil feedback model. J. Ecol. 99, 542–550 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Van der Putten, W. H., Van Dijk, C. & Peters, B. A. M. Plant-specific soil-borne diseases contribute to succession in foredune vegetation. Nature 362, 53–56 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Revilla, T., Veen, G. F., Eppinga, M. B. & Weissing, F. J. Plant–soil feedbacks and the coexistence of competing plants. Theor. Ecol. 6, 99–113 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mack, K. M. L. & Bever, J. D. Coexistence and relative abundance in plant communities are determined by feedbacks when the scale of feedback and dispersal is local. J. Ecol. 102, 1195–1201 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Levins, R. The qualitative analysis of partially specified systems. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 231, 123–138 (1974).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Wissel, C. A universal law of the characteristic return time near thresholds. Oecologia 65, 101–107 (1984).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Bennincà, E., Ballantine, B., Ellner, S. P. & Huisman, J. Species fluctuations sustained by cyclic succession at the edge of chaos. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 6389–6394 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Klironomos, J. N. Feedback with soil biota contributes to plant rarity and invasiveness in communities. Nature 417, 67–70 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Neutel, A. M. et al. Reconciling complexity with stability in naturally assembling food webs. Nature 449, 599–602 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. De Deyn, G. B. et al. Soil invertebrate fauna enhances grassland succession and diversity. Nature 422, 711–713 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Mazzoleni, S. et al. Inhibitory and toxic effects of extracellular self-DNA in litter: a mechanism for negative plant–soil feedbacks? New Phytol. 205, 1195–1210 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Johnson, D. J., Beaulieu, W. T., Bever, J. D. & Clay, K. Response to comment on “Conspecific negative density dependence and forest diversity”. Science 338, 469 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Dickie, I. A., Hurst, J. M. & Bellingham, P. J. Comment on “Conspecific negative density dependence and forest diversity”. Science 338, 469 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was conducted as part of the ‘Plant–soil feedback theory’ Working Group at the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis, sponsored by the National Science Foundation through NSF Award DBI-1300426, with additional support from The University of Tennessee, Knoxville. The work was further supported by NSF grant DEB-1738041, awarded to J.D.B. We thank K. C. Abbott, J. Bauer, L. S. Comita, K. M. Crawford, S. A. Mangan, J. Umbanhowar and K. N. Suding for discussions of this work during working group meetings, J. Aning for assistance with the FIA data analysis, and T. Markus for assistance with the preparation of the figures. We also thank F. May for comments that improved the manuscript. Finally, we thank all of the FIA employees who collected the data that enabled us to test model predictions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands

    Maarten B. Eppinga & Mara Baudena

  2. Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA

    Daniel J. Johnson

  3. Department of Soil and Water Conservation, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing, China

    Jiang Jiang

  4. Department of Biology, Illinois College, Jacksonville, IL, USA

    Keenan M. L. Mack

  5. Department of Biology, Grice Marine Laboratory, College of Charleston, Charleston, SC, USA

    Allan E. Strand

  6. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and Kansas Biological Survey, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA

    James D. Bever

Authors
  1. Maarten B. Eppinga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mara Baudena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel J. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jiang Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Keenan M. L. Mack
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Allan E. Strand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. James D. Bever
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

M.B.E., D.J.J., K.M.L.M., A.E.S. and J.D.B. designed the study. M.B.E. and M.B. performed the analytical model analyses. M.B.E., M.B., J.J., K.M.L.M. and A.E.S. developed the code, and performed and analysed the model simulations. M.B.E., M.B., D.J.J. and J.D.B. analysed the field observation data. M.B.E. and J.D.B. wrote the first draft, after which all authors contributed to improving the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maarten B. Eppinga.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information sections 1–7 and Supplementary Figures 1–13

Reporting Summary

Supplementary Table 1

A spreadsheet containing the values of average pair-wise feedback summarized in Fig. 4b of the main text

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Eppinga, M.B., Baudena, M., Johnson, D.J. et al. Frequency-dependent feedback constrains plant community coexistence. Nat Ecol Evol 2, 1403–1407 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-018-0622-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-018-0622-3

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing