Multiple scales and the relationship between density and spatial aggregation in littoral zone communities

Understanding the constraints on community composition at multiple spatial scales is an immense challenge to community and ecosystem ecologists. As community composition is basically the composite result of species’ spatial patterning, studying this spatial patterning across scales may yield clues as to which scales of environmental heterogeneity influence communities. The now widely documented positive interspecific relationship between ‘regional’ range and mean ‘local’ abundance has become a generalisation describing the spatial patterning of species at coarse scales. We address some of the shortcomings of this generalisation, as well as examine the cross‐scale spatial patterning (aggregation and density levels) of littoral‐benthic invertebrates in very large lakes. Specifically, we (a) determine whether the positive range‐abundance relationship can be reinterpreted in terms of the actual spatial structure of species distributions, (b) examine the relationship between aggregation and density across different spatial scales, and (c) determine whether the spatial patterning of species (e.g. low density/aggregated distribution) is constant across scales, that is, whether our interpretation of a species spatial pattern is dependent on the scale at which we choose to observe the system. Spatial aggregation of littoral invertebrates was generally a negative function of mean density across all spatial scales and seasons (autumn and spring). This relationship may underlie positive range‐abundance relationships. Species that were uncommon and highly aggregated at coarse spatial scales can be abundant and approach random distributions at finer spatial scales. Also, the change in spatial aggregation of closely related taxa across spatial scales was idiosyncratic. The idiosyncratic cross‐scale spatial patterning of species implies that multiple scales of environmental heterogeneity may influence the assembly of littoral communities. Due to the multi‐scale, species‐specific spatial patterning of invertebrates, littoral zone communities form a complex spatial mosaic, and a ‘spatially explicit’ approach will be required by limnologists in order to link littoral‐benthic community patterns with ecosystem processes in large oligotrophic lakes.     

Spatial scales of habitat selection decisions: implications for telemetry‐based movement modelling

Movement influences a myriad of ecological processes operating at multiple spatial and temporal scales. Yet our understanding of animal movement is limited by the resolution of data that can be obtained from individuals. Traditional approaches implicitly assume that movement decisions are made at the spatial and temporal scales of observation, although this scale is typically an artifact of data‐gathering technology rather than biological realism. To address this limitation, we used telemetry‐based movement data for caribou Rangifer tarandus in Newfoundland, Canada, and compared movement decisions estimated at the temporal resolution of GPS relocations (2 h) to a novel model describing directional movement to areas reachable over an extended period. We showed that this newer model is a better predictor of movement decisions by caribou, with decisions made at the scale of ～2 km, including the strong avoidance of dense coniferous forest, an outcome not detectable at the scale of GPS relocations. These results illustrate the complexity of factors affecting animal movement decisions and the analytical challenges associated with their interpretation. Our novel modelling framework will help support increased accuracy in predictive models of animal space‐use, and thereby aid in determining biologically meaningful scales for collecting movement and habitat data.     

Spatio‐temporal variation in European starling reproductive success at multiple small spatial scales

Understanding population dynamics requires spatio‐temporal variation in demography to be measured across appropriate spatial and temporal scales. However, the most appropriate spatial scale(s) may not be obvious, few datasets cover sufficient time periods, and key demographic rates are often incompletely measured. Consequently, it is often assumed that demography will be spatially homogeneous within populations that lack obvious subdivision. Here, we quantify small‐scale spatial and temporal variation in a key demographic rate, reproductive success (RS), within an apparently contiguous population of European starlings. We used hierarchical cluster analysis to define spatial clusters of nest sites at multiple small spatial scales and long‐term data to test the hypothesis that small‐scale spatio‐temporal variation in RS occurred. RS was measured as the number of chicks alive ca. 12 days posthatch either per first brood or per nest site per breeding season (thereby incorporating multiple breeding attempts). First brood RS varied substantially among spatial clusters and years. Furthermore, the pattern of spatial variation was stable across years; some nest clusters consistently produced more chicks than others. Total seasonal RS also varied substantially among spatial clusters and years. However, the magnitude of variation was much larger and the pattern of spatial variation was no longer temporally consistent. Furthermore, the estimated magnitude of spatial variation in RS was greater at smaller spatial scales. We thereby demonstrate substantial spatial, temporal, and spatio‐temporal variation in RS occurring at very small spatial scales. We show that the estimated magnitude of this variation depended on spatial scale and that spatio‐temporal variation would not have been detected if season‐long RS had not been measured. Such small‐scale spatio‐temporal variation should be incorporated into empirical and theoretical treatments of population dynamics.     

Small‐scale spatial dynamics of vegetation in a grazed Uruguayan grassland

We explored the small‐scale plant species mobility in a subhumid native grassland subjected to grazing by cattle in south‐western Uruguay. We established four permanent plots of 40 × 40 cm, divided in 16 × 16 cells. In each cell, the presence of species was seasonally recorded for 2 years and annually recorded for 4 years. By nesting the cells, we studied the mobility at different scales, from 6.25 cm² to 400 cm². At each scale we measured species richness, cumulative richness and the turnover rates of the dominant species. We found that the cumulative species richness was an increasing power function, with higher accumulation rates with smaller spatial scale. Although species richness showed seasonal fluctuations, the mean species richness was constant during the study period. We detected significant spatio‐temporal variability in mobility patterns among species. Certain species showed a high capacity to colonize new sites, whereas other species rotate among sites that they previously occupied. Grazed communities in Uruguayan Campos are structured as a dense matrix of perennials grasses and forbs, where vegetative propagation is the main form of growth of the species. The small‐scale dynamics and the high variability in the mobility characteristics could be linked with the diversity of growth forms and spatial strategies of the species in this community. We believe that a high degree of small‐scale spatial dynamics contribute to explain the species coexistence and the apparent stability of communities at local scales.     

Foraging in nature: Contrasting responses to resource heterogeneity at small‐ and large‐spatial scales

A key problem faced by foragers is how to forage when resources are distributed heterogeneously in space. This heterogeneity and associated trade‐offs may change with spatial scale. Furthermore, foragers may also have to optimize acquiring multiple resources. Such complexity of decision‐making while foraging is poorly understood. We studied the butterfly Ypthima huebneri to examine how foraging decisions of adults are influenced by spatial scale and multiple resources. We predicted that, at a small‐spatial scale, the time spent foraging in a patch should be proportional to resources in the patch, but at large‐spatial scales, due to limitations arising from large travel costs, this relationship should turn negative. We also predicted that both adult and larval resources should jointly affect foraging butterflies. To test these predictions, we laid eleven plots and sub‐divided them into patches. We mapped nectar and larval resources and measured butterfly behavior in these patches and plots. We found that adult foraging behavior showed contrasting relationships with adult resource density at small versus large‐spatial scales. At the smaller‐spatial scale, butterflies spent more time feeding in resource‐rich patches, whereas at the large‐scale, butterflies spent more time feeding in resource‐poor plots. Furthermore, both adult and larval resources appeared to affect foraging decisions, suggesting that individuals may optimize search costs for different resources. Overall, our findings suggest that the variation in foraging behavior seen in foragers might result from animals responding to complex ecological conditions, such as resource heterogeneity at multiple spatial scales and the challenges of tracking multiple resources.     

Habitat selection by a large herbivore at multiple spatial and temporal scales is primarily governed by food resources

Habitat selection can be considered as a hierarchical process in which animals satisfy their habitat requirements at different ecological scales. Theory predicts that spatial and temporal scales should co‐vary in most ecological processes and that the most limiting factors should drive habitat selection at coarse ecological scales, but be less influential at finer scales. Using detailed location data on roe deer Capreolus capreolus inhabiting the Bavarian Forest National Park, Germany, we investigated habitat selection at several spatial and temporal scales. We tested 1) whether time‐varying patterns were governed by factors reported as having the largest effects on fitness, 2) whether the trade‐off between forage and predation risks differed among spatial and temporal scales and 3) if spatial and temporal scales are positively associated. We analysed the variation in habitat selection within the landscape and within home ranges at monthly intervals, with respect to land‐cover type and proxys of food and cover over seasonal and diurnal temporal scales. The fine‐scale temporal variation follows a nycthemeral cycle linked to diurnal variation in human disturbance. The large‐scale variation matches seasonal plant phenology, suggesting food resources being a greater limiting factor than lynx predation risk. The trade‐off between selection for food and cover was similar on seasonal and diurnal scale. Habitat selection at the different scales may be the consequence of the temporal variation and predictability of the limiting factors as much as its association with fitness. The landscape of fear might have less importance at the studied scale of habitat selection than generally accepted because of the predator hunting strategy. Finally, seasonal variation in habitat selection was similar at the large and small spatial scales, which may arise because of the marked philopatry of roe deer. The difference is supposed to be greater for wider ranging herbivores.     

How area restricted search of a pelagic seabird changes while performing a dual foraging strategy

Movements and foraging strategies of marine predators should cope with the hierarchical spatial distribution of resources. Therefore, in order to predict the at‐sea distribution of aerial predators, it is crucial to understand the factors governing trajectory decisions at different scales. Using first passage time (FPT) analysis on precision tracking information (GPS‐loggers data) we were able to examine the foraging strategy of Cory's shearwaters Calonectris diomedea and to detect the adoption of area‐restricted search (ARS), measuring the scale and duration of this behaviour. Data were collected from three different populations foraging in different oceanographic conditions. During long excursions birds only commuted between their colony and prey patches, while on their short movements birds increased the amount of looping movements. On short trips, birds addopted ARS behaviour at an average scale of 18 km and at a second nested scale of around 2 km. When engaging in long trips, first scale of ARS occurred on average at about 67 km of radii and than a second nested scale at a radii of 24 km. Overall, the different populations showed foraging patterns matching the habitats exploited: a) at smaller scales of ARS, sea‐surface temperature, chlorophyll‐a concentration and depth influenced the time of residence (i.e. FPT) of birds (with variations at a population level); b) at larger scales of ARS, FPT increased within regions of higher gradients of sea‐surface temperature, chlorophyl‐a concentration and depth. This study demonstrates that Cory's shearwaters adopt scale‐dependent adjustments of movement in relation to the hierarchical distribution of the environment they exploit, matching the scale and duration of ARS with the hierarchical distribution of the environmental features.     

The biogeography of kin discrimination across microbial neighbourhoods

The spatial distribution of potential interactants is critical to social evolution in all cooperative organisms. Yet the biogeography of microbial kin discrimination at the scales most relevant to social interactions is poorly understood. Here we resolve the microbiogeography of social identity and genetic relatedness in local populations of the model cooperative bacterium Myxococcus xanthus at small spatial scales, across which the potential for dispersal is high. Using two criteria of relatedness—colony‐merger compatibility during cooperative motility and DNA‐sequence similarity at highly polymorphic loci—we find that relatedness decreases greatly with spatial distance even across the smallest scale transition. Both social relatedness and genetic relatedness are maximal within individual fruiting bodies at the micrometre scale but are much lower already across adjacent fruiting bodies at the millimetre scale. Genetic relatedness was found to be yet lower among centimetre‐scale samples, whereas social allotype relatedness decreased further only at the metre scale, at and beyond which the probability of social or genetic identity among randomly sampled isolates is effectively zero. Thus, in M. xanthus, high‐relatedness patches form a rich mosaic of diverse social allotypes across fruiting body neighbourhoods at the millimetre scale and beyond. Individuals that migrate even short distances across adjacent groups will frequently encounter allotypic conspecifics and territorial kin discrimination may profoundly influence the spatial dynamics of local migration. Finally, we also found that the phylogenetic scope of intraspecific biogeographic analysis can affect the detection of spatial structure, as some patterns evident in clade‐specific analysis were masked by simultaneous analysis of all strains.     

Metacommunity Structure of Stream Insects across Three Hierarchical Spatial scales

A major challenge in community ecology is to understand the underlying factors driving metacommunity (i.e., a set of local communities connected through species dispersal) dynamics. However, little is known about the effects of varying spatial scale on the relative importance of environmental and spatial (i.e., dispersal related) factors in shaping metacommunities and on the relevance of different dispersal pathways. Using a hierarchy of insect metacommunities at three spatial scales (a small, within‐stream scale, intermediate, among‐stream scale, and large, among‐sub‐basin scale), we assessed whether the relative importance of environmental and spatial factors shaping metacommunity structure varies predictably across spatial scales, and tested how the importance of different dispersal routes vary across spatial scales. We also studied if different dispersal ability groups differ in the balance between environmental and spatial control. Variation partitioning showed that environmental factors relative to spatial factors were more important for community composition at the within‐stream scale. In contrast, spatial factors (i.e., eigenvectors from Moran's eigenvector maps) relative to environmental factors were more important at the among‐sub‐basin scale. These results indicate that environmental filtering is likely to be more important at the smallest scale with highest connectivity, while dispersal limitation seems to be more important at the largest scale with lowest connectivity. Community variation at the among‐stream and among‐sub‐basin scales were strongly explained by geographical and topographical distances, indicating that overland pathways might be the main dispersal route at the larger scales among more isolated sites. The relative effect of environmental and spatial factors on insect communities varied between low and high dispersal ability groups; this variation was inconsistent among three hierarchical scales. In sum, our study indicates that spatial scale, connectivity, and dispersal ability jointly shape stream metacommunities.     

The importance of water regimes operating at small spatial scales for the diversity and structure of wetland vegetation

1. In most cases, the most important determinant of wetland vegetation is the water regime. Although water regime is usually described and managed at the scale of whole wetlands, the patterning of vegetation is likely to be determined by water regimes that are experienced at much finer spatial scales. In this study, we assess the significance of internal heterogeneity in water regimes and the role that this heterogeneity plays in vegetation patterning. 2. The effects of water regime on wetland plant species richness and vegetation structure were studied at Dowd Morass, a 1500 ha, Ramsar‐listed wetland in south‐eastern Australia that is topographically heterogeneous. Data on plant variables and water depth were collected along 45 (50 m) transects throughout the wetland and related to water regimes assigned individually for each transect. Wetland plants were assigned to plant functional groups (PFG) that describe the response of plants to the presence or absence of water at different life stages. 3. The classification of water depth data indicated four distinct water regimes in the wetland that were differentiated primarily by the duration of the dry period. Representatives of all PFGs co‐existed over small spatial scales where topographical variation was present, and the richness and cover of understorey species declined as transects became more deeply and permanently flooded. Some PFGs (e.g. amphibious fluctuation tolerator‐low growing and amphibious fluctuation responder‐morphologically plastic) were eliminated by extended periods of flooding, which increased the cover but not richness of submerged plants. Species richness and foliage projective cover declined as water regimes shifted from shallow and frequently exposed conditions to regimes typified by deeper and longer inundation. Cover of the structurally dominant woody species was compromised by deeply flooded conditions but vegetative regeneration occurred despite high water levels. 4. Internal topographical variation generates mosaics of water regimes at fine spatial scales that allow plant species with different water regime requirements to co‐exist over small distances. Deep water and an absence of dry periods result in decreased cover of plants and an overall loss of species richness in the understorey. Water regimes are described that promote regeneration and cover of structurally dominant taxa and increased species richness in the understorey. The study demonstrates a strong association between vegetation and the diverse water regimes that exist within a single wetland, a pattern that will be useful for modelling the effects of modified water regimes on wetland vegetation.     

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.     

Scale in macroecology

The past 15 years have seen the development of macroecology as a respectable discipline within the biological sciences. Initial concerns about the utility of a large‐scale approach to ecology have been quietened, if not eliminated, but other arguments about spatial scale in ecology have arisen to take their place. The situation has moved from the absolute advocacy of small‐scale over large‐scale studies to an advocacy of some large scales in preference to others. Here, we argue that there is no general sense in which one scale of study (either in terms of spatial extent or sampling resolution) is better than any other. As long as there are sensible reasons for using the scale chosen, studies at all scales have the potential to inform about the structure and function of the ecological systems that clothe this planet.     

Predator–prey interactions in a ladybeetle–aphid system depend on spatial scale

The outcome of species interactions may manifest differently at different spatial scales; therefore, our interpretation of observed interactions will depend on the scale at which observations are made. For example, in ladybeetle–aphid systems, the results from small‐scale cage experiments usually cannot be extrapolated to landscape‐scale field observations. To understand how ladybeetle–aphid interactions change across spatial scales, we evaluated predator–prey interactions in an experimental system. The experimental habitat consisted of 81 potted plants and was manipulated to facilitate analysis across four spatial scales. We also simulated a spatially explicit metacommunity model parallel to the experiment. In the experiment, we found that the negative effect of ladybeetles on aphids decreased with increasing spatial scales. This pattern can be explained by ladybeetles strongly suppressing aphids at small scales, but not colonizing distant patches fast enough to suppress aphids at larger scales. In the experiment, the positive effects of aphids on ladybeetles were strongest at three‐plant scale. In a model scenario where predators did not have demographic dynamics, we found, consistent with the experiment, that both the effects of ladybeetles on aphids and the effects of aphids on ladybeetles decreased with increasing spatial scales. These patterns suggest that dispersal was the primary cause of ladybeetle population dynamics in our experiment: aphids increased ladybeetle numbers at smaller scales because ladybeetles stayed in a patch longer and performed area‐restricted searches after encountering aphids; these behaviors did not affect ladybeetle numbers at larger spatial scales. The parallel experimental and model results illustrate how predator–prey interactions can change across spatial scales, suggesting that our interpretation of observed predator–prey dynamics would differ if observations were made at different scales. This study demonstrates how studying ecological interactions at a range of scales can help link the results of small‐scale ecological experiments to landscape‐scale ecological problems.     

Connectivity, scale-dependence, and the productivity–diversity relationship

We surveyed freshwater ponds (localities) nested within watersheds (regions) to evaluate the relationship between productivity and animal species richness at different spatial scales. In watersheds where the ponds were relatively distant from one another (likely reducing the level of interpond dispersal of many organisms), we found a scale‐dependent productivity–diversity relationship; at local scales (among ponds), diversity was a hump‐shaped function of productivity, whereas at regional scales (among watersheds), diversity monotonically increased with productivity. Furthermore, this relationship emerged because there was a strong relationship between productivity and pond‐to‐pond species compositional differences. Alternatively, in watersheds where ponds were relatively close together (likely leading to higher rates of dispersal of many organisms), we found no scale‐dependence; diversity was a hump‐shaped function of productivity at both local and regional scales. Here, the relationship between species compositional dissimilarity and productivity was much weaker. We conclude that whether or not scale‐dependence is observed in productivity–diversity relationships will depend, at least in part, on the degree of connectivity among localities within regions.     

Scaling‐up biodiversity‐ecosystem functioning research

A rich body of knowledge links biodiversity to ecosystem functioning (BEF), but it is primarily focused on small scales. We review the current theory and identify six expectations for scale dependence in the BEF relationship: (1) a nonlinear change in the slope of the BEF relationship with spatial scale; (2) a scale‐dependent relationship between ecosystem stability and spatial extent; (3) coexistence within and among sites will result in a positive BEF relationship at larger scales; (4) temporal autocorrelation in environmental variability affects species turnover and thus the change in BEF slope with scale; (5) connectivity in metacommunities generates nonlinear BEF and stability relationships by affecting population  synchrony at local and regional scales; (6) spatial scaling in food web structure and diversity will generate scale dependence in ecosystem functioning. We suggest directions for synthesis that combine approaches in metaecosystem and metacommunity ecology and integrate cross‐scale feedbacks. Tests of this theory may combine remote sensing with a generation of networked experiments that assess effects at multiple scales. We also show how anthropogenic land cover change may alter the scaling of the BEF relationship. New research on the role of scale in BEF will guide policy linking the goals of managing biodiversity and ecosystems.     

A novel framework for disentangling the scale‐dependent influences of abiotic factors on alpine treeline position

Low‐temperature growth limitation largely determines alpine treeline position globally, but treeline elevation also varies locally at a range of scales in response to multiple biotic and abiotic factors. In this study, we conceptualise how variability in treeline elevation is related to abiotic factors that act as thermal modifiers, physiological stressors, or disturbance agents. We then present a novel analytical framework for quantifying how abiotic factors influence treeline elevation at different spatial scales using New Zealand Nothofagus treelines as a case study. We delineated Nothofagus treelines in a GIS, along which we extracted data for treeline elevation and eight abiotic explanatory variables at 54 000 points. Each location was classified at each of five spatial scales based on nested river catchments, ranging from large regional to small hillslope catchments. We used hierarchical linear models to partition the variation in both treeline elevation and the eight abiotic variables by spatial scale, and then quantified the relationships between these at each spatial scale in turn. Nothofagus treeline elevation varied from 800–1740 m a.s.l. across New Zealand. Abiotic factors explained 82% of the variation in treeline elevation at the largest (regional) scale and 44–52% of variation at the four finer scales. Broad‐scale variation in Nothofagus treeline elevation was strongly associated with thermal modifiers, consistent with the idea that treelines coincide with a temperature‐driven, physiological limit. However, much of the finer‐scale variation in treeline elevation was explained by a combination of thermal, physiological stress‐related, and disturbance variables operating at different spatial scales. The conceptual model and analytical methods developed here provide a general framework for understanding treeline variation at different spatial scales.     

Identifying the scales of variability in stream macroinvertebrate abundance, functional composition and assemblage structure

1. Many natural ecosystems are heterogeneous at scales ranging from microhabitats to landscapes. Running waters are no exception in this regard, and their environmental heterogeneity is reflected in the distribution and abundance of stream organisms across multiple spatial scales. 2. We studied patchiness in benthic macroinvertebrate abundance and functional feeding group (FFG) composition at three spatial scales in a boreal river system. Our sampling design incorporated a set of fully nested scales, with three tributaries, two stream sections (orders) within each tributary, three riffles within each section and ten benthic samples in each riffle. 3. According to nested anova s, most of the variation in total macroinvertebrate abundance, abundances of FFGs, and number of taxa was accounted for by the among‐riffle and among‐sample scales. Such small‐scale variability reflected similar patterns of variation in in‐stream variables (moss cover, particle size, current velocity and depth). Scraper abundance, however, varied most at the scale of stream sections, probably mirroring variation in canopy cover. 4. Tributaries and stream sections within tributaries differed significantly in the structure and FFG composition of the macroinvertebrate assemblages. Furthermore, riffles in headwater (second order) sections were more variable than those in higher order (third order) sections. 5. Stream biomonitoring programs should consider this kind of scale‐dependent variability in assemblage characteristics because: (i) small‐scale variability in abundance suggests that a few replicate samples are not enough to capture macroinvertebrate assemblage variability present at a site, and (ii) riffles from the same stream may support widely differing benthic assemblages.     

Patterns of species density and productivity at different spatial scales in herbaceous plant communities

A major challenge in evaluating patterns of species richness and productivity involves acquiring data to examine these relationships empirically across a range of ecologically significant spatial scales. In this paper, we use data from herb‐dominated plant communities at six Long‐Term Ecological Research (LTER) sites to examine how the relationship between plant species density and above‐ground net primary productivity (ANPP) differs when the spatial scale of analysis is changed. We quantified this relationship at different spatial scales in which we varied the focus and extent of analysis: (1) among fields within communities, (2) among fields within biomes or biogeographic regions, and (3) among communities within biomes or biogeographic regions. We used species density (D=number of species per m²) as our measure of diversity to have a comparable index across all sites and scales. Although we expected unimodal relationships at all spatial scales, we found that spatial scale influenced the form of the relationship. At the scale of fields within different grassland communities, we detected a significant relationship at only one site (Minnesota old‐fields), and it was negative linear. When we expanded the extent of analyses to biogeographic regions (grasslands or North America), we found significant unimodal relationships in both cases. However, when we combined data to examine patterns among community types within different biogeographic regions (grassland, alpine tundra, arctic tundra, or North America), we did not detect significant relationships between species density and ANPP for any region. The results of our analyses demonstrate that the spatial scale of analysis – how data are aggregated and patterns examined – can influence the form of the relationship between species density and productivity. It also demonstrates the need for data sets from a broad spectrum of sites sampled over a range of scales for examining challenging and controversial ecological hypotheses.     

Of scales and stationarity in animal movements

With recent technological advances in tracking devices, movements of numerous animal species can be recorded with a high resolution over large spatial and temporal ranges. This opens promising perspectives for understanding how an animal perceives and reacts to the multi‐scale structure of its environment. Yet, conceptual issues such as confusion between movement scales and searching modes prevent us from properly inferring the movement processes at different scales. Here, I propose to build on stationarity (i.e. stability of statistical parameters) to develop a consistent theoretical framework in which animal movements are modelled as a generic composite multi‐scale multi‐mode random walk model. This framework makes it possible to highlight scales that are relevant to the studied animal, the nature of the behavioural processes that operate at each of these different scales, and the way in which the processes involved at any given scale can interact with those operating at smaller or larger scales. This explicitly scale‐focused approach should help properly analyse actual movements by relating, for each scale and each mode, the values of the main model parameters (speed, short‐ and long‐term persistences, degree of stochasticity) to the animal's needs and skills and its response to its environment at multiple scales.     

Should I stay or should I go? Patch departure decisions by herbivores at multiple scales

The question of how much time a foraging herbivore should spend in a patch of food poses a central challenge in classical foraging theory. However, there remains uncertainty about the relevance of the patch paradigm to foraging decisions by large herbivores. This paper examines evidence for successfully predicting and quantifying patch departure decisions for large mammalian herbivores foraging across several spatial and temporal scales. Departure decisions at fine scales are influenced by tradeoffs between maximizing intake rate and food quality. Classical models for departure decisions at larger spatial scales, particularly the marginal value theorem, appear inadequate. We advocate exploring alternative models for predictions of residence time at the patch scale.