TY - JOUR

T1 - Body size distribution in flea communities harboured by Siberian small mammals as affected by host species, host sex and scale: scale matters the most

AU - Винарский, Максим Викторович

AU - Krasnov, B.R.

AU - van der Mescht, Luther

AU - Warburton, Elizabeth

AU - Korallo-Vinarskaya, N.P.

AU - Khokhlova, I.S.

AU - Surkova, Elena

PY - 2018/12/1

Y1 - 2018/12/1

N2 - The distribution of body sizes of co-existing species at different scales reflects the scale-dependency of rules governing community assembly. Investigation of among-scale variation in community assembly is impeded by the methodological difficulties of establishing scale boundaries. Studying body size distribution in parasites allows us to avoid the problem of defining scale because parasite communities have clear boundaries and are represented by infracommunities (an assemblage harboured by an individual host), component communities (an assemblage harboured by a host population in a locality), and compound communities (an assemblage harboured by a host community in a locality). We studied body size distribution of fleas parasitic on small mammals in Western Siberia using null models. We asked whether body size ratios (i.e., size differences among coexisting species) in these communities demonstrate non-random segregated or aggregated patterns and whether these patterns differ between (a) host species, (b) host sexes and (c) infra-, component, and compound communities. No effect of host sex on the pattern of body size distribution was found at either scale, whereas an effect of host species was found in infracommunities only. We found a tendency of flea infracommunities toward segregation, whereas body size distributions in component and compound communities were consistently aggregated. We propose that the former could be caused by apparent competition (= negative indirect interactions among fleas due to shared natural enemy, i.e. a host), whereas we the latter could be explained by host- and environment-associated filtering (= factors restricting co-occurring species to a certain subset that share certain traits). We conclude that, counterintuitively, flea communities at the lowest hierarchical scale are mainly governed by evolutionary mechanisms, whereas communities at higher scale are assembled via ecological processes.

AB - The distribution of body sizes of co-existing species at different scales reflects the scale-dependency of rules governing community assembly. Investigation of among-scale variation in community assembly is impeded by the methodological difficulties of establishing scale boundaries. Studying body size distribution in parasites allows us to avoid the problem of defining scale because parasite communities have clear boundaries and are represented by infracommunities (an assemblage harboured by an individual host), component communities (an assemblage harboured by a host population in a locality), and compound communities (an assemblage harboured by a host community in a locality). We studied body size distribution of fleas parasitic on small mammals in Western Siberia using null models. We asked whether body size ratios (i.e., size differences among coexisting species) in these communities demonstrate non-random segregated or aggregated patterns and whether these patterns differ between (a) host species, (b) host sexes and (c) infra-, component, and compound communities. No effect of host sex on the pattern of body size distribution was found at either scale, whereas an effect of host species was found in infracommunities only. We found a tendency of flea infracommunities toward segregation, whereas body size distributions in component and compound communities were consistently aggregated. We propose that the former could be caused by apparent competition (= negative indirect interactions among fleas due to shared natural enemy, i.e. a host), whereas we the latter could be explained by host- and environment-associated filtering (= factors restricting co-occurring species to a certain subset that share certain traits). We conclude that, counterintuitively, flea communities at the lowest hierarchical scale are mainly governed by evolutionary mechanisms, whereas communities at higher scale are assembled via ecological processes.

KW - Body size ratio

KW - Communities

KW - Fleas

KW - Null models

KW - Small mammals

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053540490&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10682-018-9955-2

DO - 10.1007/s10682-018-9955-2

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 643

EP - 662

JO - Evolutionary Ecology

JF - Evolutionary Ecology

SN - 0269-7653

IS - 6

ER -