Should Regional Species Loss Be Faster or Slower Than Local Loss? It Depends on Density‐Dependent Rate of Death

ABSTRACT Assessment of the rate of species loss, which we also label extinction, is an urgent task. However, the rate depends on spatial grain (average area A) over which it is assessed—local species loss can be, on average, faster or slower than regional or global loss. Ecological mechanisms behind...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Petr Keil, Adam T. Clark, Vojtěch Barták, François Leroy
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2025-03-01
Series:Ecology and Evolution
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.71162
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1839649738764320768
author Petr Keil
Adam T. Clark
Vojtěch Barták
François Leroy
author_facet Petr Keil
Adam T. Clark
Vojtěch Barták
François Leroy
author_sort Petr Keil
collection DOAJ
description ABSTRACT Assessment of the rate of species loss, which we also label extinction, is an urgent task. However, the rate depends on spatial grain (average area A) over which it is assessed—local species loss can be, on average, faster or slower than regional or global loss. Ecological mechanisms behind this discrepancy are unclear. We propose that the relationship between extinction rate and A is driven by a classical ecological phenomenon: density‐dependent mortality. Specifically, we hypothesize that (i) when per‐individual probability of death (Pdeath) decreases with the number of individuals in a region N (i.e., negative density dependence), per‐species extinction rate (Px) should be high at regional grains and low locally. (ii) In contrast, when Pdeath increases with N (i.e., positive density dependence), Px should be low regionally but high locally. (iii) Total counts of extinct species (Ex) should follow a more complex relationship with A, as they also depend on drivers of the species‐area relationship (SAR) prior to extinctions, such as intraspecific aggregation, species pools, and species‐abundance distributions. We tested these hypotheses using simulation experiments, the first based on point patterns and the second on a system of generalized Lotka–Volterra equations. In both experiments, we used a single continuous parameter that moved between the negative, zero, and positive relationship between Pdeath and N. We found support for our hypotheses, but only when regional species‐abundance distributions were uneven enough to provide sufficiently rare or common species for density dependence to act on. In all, we have theoretically demonstrated a mechanism behind different rates of biodiversity change at different spatial grains, which has been observed in empirical data.
format Article
id doaj-art-f6d9b4eb8eb84c97a15a8e12e165e028
institution Matheson Library
issn 2045-7758
language English
publishDate 2025-03-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Ecology and Evolution
spelling doaj-art-f6d9b4eb8eb84c97a15a8e12e165e0282025-06-27T10:07:15ZengWileyEcology and Evolution2045-77582025-03-01154n/an/a10.1002/ece3.71162Should Regional Species Loss Be Faster or Slower Than Local Loss? It Depends on Density‐Dependent Rate of DeathPetr Keil0Adam T. Clark1Vojtěch Barták2François Leroy3Faculty of Environmental Sciences Czech University of Life Sciences Prague Praha ‐ Suchdol Czech RepublicDepartment of Biology University of Graz Graz AustriaFaculty of Environmental Sciences Czech University of Life Sciences Prague Praha ‐ Suchdol Czech RepublicFaculty of Environmental Sciences Czech University of Life Sciences Prague Praha ‐ Suchdol Czech RepublicABSTRACT Assessment of the rate of species loss, which we also label extinction, is an urgent task. However, the rate depends on spatial grain (average area A) over which it is assessed—local species loss can be, on average, faster or slower than regional or global loss. Ecological mechanisms behind this discrepancy are unclear. We propose that the relationship between extinction rate and A is driven by a classical ecological phenomenon: density‐dependent mortality. Specifically, we hypothesize that (i) when per‐individual probability of death (Pdeath) decreases with the number of individuals in a region N (i.e., negative density dependence), per‐species extinction rate (Px) should be high at regional grains and low locally. (ii) In contrast, when Pdeath increases with N (i.e., positive density dependence), Px should be low regionally but high locally. (iii) Total counts of extinct species (Ex) should follow a more complex relationship with A, as they also depend on drivers of the species‐area relationship (SAR) prior to extinctions, such as intraspecific aggregation, species pools, and species‐abundance distributions. We tested these hypotheses using simulation experiments, the first based on point patterns and the second on a system of generalized Lotka–Volterra equations. In both experiments, we used a single continuous parameter that moved between the negative, zero, and positive relationship between Pdeath and N. We found support for our hypotheses, but only when regional species‐abundance distributions were uneven enough to provide sufficiently rare or common species for density dependence to act on. In all, we have theoretically demonstrated a mechanism behind different rates of biodiversity change at different spatial grains, which has been observed in empirical data.https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.71162AlleeextirpationJanzen–Connellscalingsixth mass extinctionspecies richness
spellingShingle Petr Keil
Adam T. Clark
Vojtěch Barták
François Leroy
Should Regional Species Loss Be Faster or Slower Than Local Loss? It Depends on Density‐Dependent Rate of Death
Ecology and Evolution
Allee
extirpation
Janzen–Connell
scaling
sixth mass extinction
species richness
title Should Regional Species Loss Be Faster or Slower Than Local Loss? It Depends on Density‐Dependent Rate of Death
title_full Should Regional Species Loss Be Faster or Slower Than Local Loss? It Depends on Density‐Dependent Rate of Death
title_fullStr Should Regional Species Loss Be Faster or Slower Than Local Loss? It Depends on Density‐Dependent Rate of Death
title_full_unstemmed Should Regional Species Loss Be Faster or Slower Than Local Loss? It Depends on Density‐Dependent Rate of Death
title_short Should Regional Species Loss Be Faster or Slower Than Local Loss? It Depends on Density‐Dependent Rate of Death
title_sort should regional species loss be faster or slower than local loss it depends on density dependent rate of death
topic Allee
extirpation
Janzen–Connell
scaling
sixth mass extinction
species richness
url https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.71162
work_keys_str_mv AT petrkeil shouldregionalspecieslossbefasterorslowerthanlocallossitdependsondensitydependentrateofdeath
AT adamtclark shouldregionalspecieslossbefasterorslowerthanlocallossitdependsondensitydependentrateofdeath
AT vojtechbartak shouldregionalspecieslossbefasterorslowerthanlocallossitdependsondensitydependentrateofdeath
AT francoisleroy shouldregionalspecieslossbefasterorslowerthanlocallossitdependsondensitydependentrateofdeath