Scaling issues of neutral theory reveal violations of ecological equivalence for dominant Amazonian tree species

Neutral models are often used as null models, testing the relative importance of niche versus neutral processes in shaping diversity. Most versions, however, focus only on regional scale predictions and neglect local level contributions. Recently, a new formulation of spatial neutral theory was published showing an incompatibility between regional and local scale fits where especially the number of rare species was dramatically under-predicted. Using a forward in time semi-spatially explicit neutral model and a unique large-scale Amazonian tree inventory data set, we show that neutral theory not only underestimates the number of rare species but also fails in predicting the excessive dominance of species on both regional and local levels. We show that although there are clear relationships between species composition, spatial and environmental distances, there is also a clear differentiation between species able to attain dominance with and without restriction to specific habitats. We conclude therefore that the apparent dominance of these species is real, and that their excessive abundance can be attributed to fitness differences in different ways, a clear violation of the ecological equivalence assumption of neutral theory.

Estimating and interpreting migration of Amazonian forests using spatially implicit and semi-explicit neutral models

With many sophisticated methods available for estimating migration, ecologists face the difficult decision of choosing for their specific line of work. Here we test and compare several methods, performing sanity and robustness tests, applying to large‐scale data and discussing the results and interpretation. Five methods were selected to compare for their ability to estimate migration from spatially implicit and semi‐explicit simulations based on three large‐scale field datasets from South America (Guyana, Suriname, French Guiana and Ecuador). Space was incorporated semi‐explicitly by a discrete probability mass function for local recruitment, migration from adjacent plots or from a metacommunity. Most methods were able to accurately estimate migration from spatially implicit simulations. For spatially semi‐explicit simulations, estimation was shown to be the additive effect of migration from adjacent plots and the metacommunity. It was only accurate when migration from the metacommunity outweighed that of adjacent plots, discrimination, however, proved to be impossible. We show that migration should be considered more an approximation of the resemblance between communities and the summed regional species pool. Application of migration estimates to simulate field datasets did show reasonably good fits and indicated consistent differences between sets in comparison with earlier studies. We conclude that estimates of migration using these methods are more an approximation of the homogenization among local communities over time rather than a direct measurement of migration and hence have a direct relationship with beta diversity. As betadiversity is the result of many (non)‐neutral processes, we have to admit that migration as estimated in a spatial explicit world encompasses not only direct migration but is an ecological aggregate of these processes. The parameter m of neutral models then appears more as an emerging property revealed by neutral theory instead of being an effective mechanistic parameter and spatially implicit models should be rejected as an approximation of forest dynamics.