TY - JOUR
T1 - The influence of spatial and temporal scale on the relative importance of biotic vs. abiotic factors for species distributions
AU - King, Travis W.
AU - Vynne, Carly
AU - Miller, David
AU - Fisher, Scott
AU - Fitkin, Scott
AU - Rohrer, John
AU - Ransom, Jason I.
AU - Thornton, Daniel H.
N1 - Funding Information:
Team members of the Washington State University: Mammal Spatial Ecology and Conservation Lab led this work, with support from the United States Forest Service, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Natural Resources, the National Park Service, Osprey Insights and Conservation Northwest. This large collaborative effort focused on the deployment of motion‐activated camera traps to investigate mammalian distribution on the mountainous Washington landscape in order to better understand spatial drivers of occupancy and improve conservation actions within the region.
Funding Information:
We thank the multiple collaborations with the United States Forest Service, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Natural Resources, the National Park Service, Osprey Insights and Conservation Northwest to successfully complete this project. In particular, we thank the support of L. Baum, B. T. Maletzke, D. Youkey, C. Logger, A. E. Scully, K. G. Ebenhoch, R. Christophersen, K. Rine, N. Valdez and L. A. Shipley. Further, we recognize the countless Washington State University undergraduate volunteers and graduate students who aided in photograph identification and other work on the project. Funding for this research was provided by Seattle City Light Wildlife Research Grant, Conservation Northwest, the United States Forest Service, Conservation Research and Education Opportunities International (creoi.org) and Department of the Interior Northwest Climate Adaptation Science Center Research Fellowship, and was supported in part by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, McIntire-Stennis Project 1018967. Graduate funding support to T.W. King was provided by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program and Washington State University.
Funding Information:
We thank the multiple collaborations with the United States Forest Service, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Natural Resources, the National Park Service, Osprey Insights and Conservation Northwest to successfully complete this project. In particular, we thank the support of L. Baum, B. T. Maletzke, D. Youkey, C. Logger, A. E. Scully, K. G. Ebenhoch, R. Christophersen, K. Rine, N. Valdez and L. A. Shipley. Further, we recognize the countless Washington State University undergraduate volunteers and graduate students who aided in photograph identification and other work on the project. Funding for this research was provided by Seattle City Light Wildlife Research Grant, Conservation Northwest, the United States Forest Service, Conservation Research and Education Opportunities International (creoi.org) and Department of the Interior Northwest Climate Adaptation Science Center Research Fellowship, and was supported in part by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, McIntire‐Stennis Project 1018967. Graduate funding support to T.W. King was provided by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program and Washington State University.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The Authors. Diversity and Distributions published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
PY - 2021/2
Y1 - 2021/2
N2 - Aim: The scales of space and time over which biotic interactions influence distribution patterns remain an area of debate. Biotic interactions may be particularly influential in the ecology of mammalian carnivores, which engage in strong predator–prey and competitive interactions. Regional, multi-scale data on distribution patterns of interacting carnivore species are key to informing our understanding of this issue. Location: Washington State, USA. Methods: Using a spatially extensive camera-trapping array, we examined the factors influencing distribution patterns of seven carnivore species at multiple spatial and temporal scales. We used single-species occupancy models to assess the relative influence of abiotic and biotic covariates on distribution of individual carnivore species, and two-species occupancy models to assess how dominant carnivores influence subordinate carnivore occupancy and detection. Results: Carnivore occupancy patterns responded more strongly to abiotic than biotic covariates at both spatial grains and extents of analysis. The influence of biotic variables decreased as the grain of analysis increased, while constraining our study area extent substantially decreased the explanatory power of abiotic variables. Interspecific interactions among carnivores influenced occupancy and detection across spatial scales. However, there was little evidence that interactions were more pronounced at finer temporal scales. Main Conclusions: Results demonstrate that at broad spatial extents, species distributions are largely dictated by abiotic factors, particularly climate. Although biotic factors related to habitat and prey were important factors for some species, they generally declined in importance as grain size of analysis increased, suggesting these interactions play out at finer resolutions. However, competitive and mutualistic interactions exerted an independent influence on distribution over broad extents and coarse grains of analysis, suggesting that failure to account for interactions may limit our ability to accurately model distributions of species and their responses to future large-scale disturbances.
AB - Aim: The scales of space and time over which biotic interactions influence distribution patterns remain an area of debate. Biotic interactions may be particularly influential in the ecology of mammalian carnivores, which engage in strong predator–prey and competitive interactions. Regional, multi-scale data on distribution patterns of interacting carnivore species are key to informing our understanding of this issue. Location: Washington State, USA. Methods: Using a spatially extensive camera-trapping array, we examined the factors influencing distribution patterns of seven carnivore species at multiple spatial and temporal scales. We used single-species occupancy models to assess the relative influence of abiotic and biotic covariates on distribution of individual carnivore species, and two-species occupancy models to assess how dominant carnivores influence subordinate carnivore occupancy and detection. Results: Carnivore occupancy patterns responded more strongly to abiotic than biotic covariates at both spatial grains and extents of analysis. The influence of biotic variables decreased as the grain of analysis increased, while constraining our study area extent substantially decreased the explanatory power of abiotic variables. Interspecific interactions among carnivores influenced occupancy and detection across spatial scales. However, there was little evidence that interactions were more pronounced at finer temporal scales. Main Conclusions: Results demonstrate that at broad spatial extents, species distributions are largely dictated by abiotic factors, particularly climate. Although biotic factors related to habitat and prey were important factors for some species, they generally declined in importance as grain size of analysis increased, suggesting these interactions play out at finer resolutions. However, competitive and mutualistic interactions exerted an independent influence on distribution over broad extents and coarse grains of analysis, suggesting that failure to account for interactions may limit our ability to accurately model distributions of species and their responses to future large-scale disturbances.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85094593047&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85094593047&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/ddi.13182
DO - 10.1111/ddi.13182
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85094593047
SN - 1366-9516
VL - 27
SP - 327
EP - 343
JO - Diversity and Distributions
JF - Diversity and Distributions
IS - 2
ER -