Environmental heterogeneity,species diversity and co‐existence at different spatial scales

The positive relationship between spatial environmental heterogeneity and species diversity is a widely accepted concept, generally associated with niche limitation. However, niche limitation cannot account for negative heterogeneity–diversity relationships (HDR) revealed in several case studies. Here we explore how HDR varies at different spatial scales and provide novel theories for small‐scale species co‐existence that explain both positive and negative HDR. At large spatial scales of heterogeneity (e.g. landscape level), different communities co‐exist, promoting large regional species pool size and resulting in positive HDR. At smaller scales within communities, species co‐existence can be enhanced by increasing the number of different patches, as predicted by the niche limitation theory, or alternatively, restrained by heterogeneity. We conducted meta‐regressions for experimental and observational HDR studies, and found that negative HDRs are significantly more common at smaller spatial scales. We propose three theories to account for niche limitation at small spatial scales. (1) Microfragmentation theory: with increasing spatial heterogeneity, large homogeneous patches lose area and become isolated, which in turn restrains the establishment of new plant individuals and populations, thus reducing species richness. (2) Heterogeneity confounded by mean: when heterogeneity occurs at spatial scales smaller than the size of individual plants, which forage through the patches, species diversity can be either positively or negatively affected by a change in the mean of an environmental factor. (3) Heterogeneity as a separate niche axis: the ability of species to tolerate heterogeneity at spatial scales smaller than plant size varies, affecting HDR. We conclude that processes other than niche limitation can affect the relationship between heterogeneity and diversity.