UNIVERSIDADE DO ESTADO DO RIO DE JANEIRO

Laboratório de Ecologia Vegetal

Seminário LEV
Ilaíne Silveira Matos

Rio de Janeiro
2017
WHAT IS A RARE
SPECIES?
TAXONOMIC RARITY (Rabinowitz 1981): Geographical range; Habitat specificity;
Local abundance.
COMMONEST SPECIES RAREST SPECIES
• Large range • Small range
• Large habitat • Narrow habitat
• High abundance • Low abundance

FUNCTIONAL RARITY (Violle et al 2017)= The extent to which species traits (used as
proxies to represent functions) are more or less distinct or redundant within local
communities or larger-scale species assemblages.
COMMONEST SPECIES RAREST SPECIES
• Common traits • Uncommon traits
• Shared with other • Not shared with
species other species
THE INTEGRATED
VIEW OF
FUNCTIONAL
RARITY
 12 FORMS OF FUNCTIONAL RARITY Taxonomic x Functional rarity
Two spatial scales (Regional & Local)
= taxonomic rarity
Regional

Regional Local

=
functional
rarity
 12 FORMS OF FUNCTIONAL RARITY Taxonomic x Functional rarity
Two spatial scales (Regional & Local)
= taxonomic rarity
Regional

Regional Local

TAXONOMIC RARITY
=
functional
rarity REGIONAL:
Species Restrictedness (R): the extent of occurrence or
the area of occupancy (restricted x widespread);

LOCAL:
Species scarcity (S): the inverse of relative abundance
(scarce x abundant).
 12 FORMS OF FUNCTIONAL RARITY Taxonomic x Functional rarity
Two spatial scales (Regional & Local)
= taxonomic rarity
Regional

Regional Local

FUNCTIONAL RARITY
=
functional
rarity REGIONAL:
Species Uniqueness (U): the extent to which a species has
no functional equivalent in the regional pool, i.e. the
species possess traits not shared by other species (unique
x shared).

LOCAL:
Species Distinctiveness (D): assesses whether a species is
more or less functionally close to the rest of the
community, i.e. the species have traits dissimilar from
those of other species in the community (distinct x
redundant).
 FUNCTIONAL SPACE Distinct
Unique

Redundant FUNCTIONAL DISTINCTIVENESS

Shared the Euclidean distance of a species to the
hypothetical average species pool (center of the
functional space):

REDUNDANT: species close to the center of the

functional space;
Redundant DISTINCT: species having extreme trait
Unique combinations.

Distinct
Shared

FUNCTIONAL UNIQUENESS
the Euclidean distance of a species to the nearest neighbor
in the functional space (degree of isolation):

SHARED: species that share a similar position with other

species (nearest neighbour);
UNIQUE: species that are isolated in the functional space.
 12 FORMS OF FUNCTIONAL RARITY Taxonomic x Functional rarity
Two spatial scales (Regional & Local)
= taxonomic rarity
Regional

Regional Local

=
functional
rarity

species cannot
be functionally
redundant at
the local scale
while being
unique at the
regional scale
 12 FORMS OF FUNCTIONAL RARITY Taxonomic x Functional rarity
Two spatial scales (Regional & Local)
= taxonomic rarity
Regional THE TWO
Regional Local EXTREMES
RAREST
rare and not shared traits
= exhibited by a few scarce,
functional
rarity range-restricted species

COMMONEST
common and
shared traits
supported by many
widespread
and locally
abundant species.
 THE INTEGRATED VIEW OF FUNCTIONAL RARITY

RAREST RAREST

Species Distinctiveness (Di)

Species Uniqueness (Ui)

COMMONEST COMMONEST
Species Restrictedness (Ri) Species scarcity (Si)
REGIONAL SCALE LOCAL SCALE
 THE INTEGRATED VIEW OF FUNCTIONAL RARITY

• Rarity indeed depends on the scale at

which it is defined (a species is rare or not
when compared to some pool of species);
Species Uniqueness (Ui)
or Distinctiveness (Di)

• However, there is no need to use different

metrics of rarity for predefined spatial
scales (both metrics could be defined at
both scales).

Carmona et al 2017

Species Restrictedness (Ri) REGARDLESS THE SCALE

or Scarcity (Si)
WHY IS IT IMPORTANT TO DETERMINE FUNCTIONAL RARITY?

GLOBAL CHANGES  SPECIES LOSS  FUNCTIONALITY LOSS

 THE CONSEQUENCES OF BIODIVERSITY LOSS ON
ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONING
Species Uniqueness (Ui)
or Distinctiveness (Di)

Species Restrictedness (Ri)

or Scarcity (Si)

D- weakest impact: biomass little altered and remaining species perform the same functions;
B – strongest impact: biomass greatly altered and loss of irreplaceable traits;
C - intermediate impact: rare indistinct species can compesate the loss;
A – intermediate impact: loss of originality and function.
THE CONSEQUENCES OF BIODIVERSITY LOSS ON ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONING
SOME CONSIDERATIONS...

1. MASS-RATIO HYPOTHESIS: Dominant species have

strong effects while rare species have marginal
influence. But, there is contrasting evidence about
the importance of rare species for ecosystem
functioning (keystone species);
2. EXTINCTION RISK: rarity not always implies higher
extinction risk, common, instead of rare species, can
be lost if their traits make them more susceptible to
environmental changes (Carmona et al 2017);
3. RESPONSE X EFFECTS TRAITS: a crucial step is the
choice of the traits to be included in the estimation
of functional rarity.;
4. PHYLOGENETIC RARITY: is there any relationship
between functional and phylogenetic distinctiveness
or uniqueness?
5. INTRASPECIFIC TRAIT VARIATION (ITV): may increase
a species’ ability to adapt to changes, as well as,
increase the degree of overlap in trait values among
species (higher redundancy);
 THE CONSEQUENCES OF BIODIVERSITY LOSS ON ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONING

RESPONSE X EFFECTS TRAITS: a crucial step is the choice of the traits to be included
in the estimation of functional rarity.

RESPONSE
Vulnerable
Non-vulnerable

High stability High stability

High stability Low stability

RESPONSE ASSUMPTION
COMMON ≠ EFFECT: Functional= species with distinctRESPONSE
redundancy combinations = EFFECT:
of functional
To be truly traits are
functionally
arises
more when
likelymultiple species
to support share similar
functions thateffect redundant, by
cannot be delivered taxaspecies
must exhibit
withsimilar responses to
more-common
traits but differ in response traits, since the loss of environmental conditions and having similar
traits (Mouillot et al 2013).
some species might be compensated by their effects on the dominant ecosystem processes (Díaz
redundant counterpart (Walker 1992, Naeem 1998, & Cabido 1997; Fonseca & Ganade 2001;
Oliver et al 2015) Rosenfield et al 2012).
THE CONSEQUENCES OF BIODIVERSITY LOSS ON ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONING
SOME CONSIDERATIONS...

1. MASS-RATIO HYPOTHESIS: Dominant species have

strong effects while rare species have marginal
influence. But, there is contrasting evidence about
the importance of rare species for ecosystem
functioning (keystone species);
2. EXTINCTION RISK: rarity not always implies higher
extinction risk, common, instead of rare species, can
be lost if their traits make them more susceptible to
environmental changes (Carmona et al 2017);
3. RESPONSE X EFFECTS TRAITS: a crucial step is the
choice of the traits to be included in the estimation
of functional rarity.;
4. PHYLOGENETIC RARITY: is there any relationship
between functional and phylogenetic distinctiveness
or uniqueness?
5. INTRASPECIFIC TRAIT VARIATION (ITV): may increase
a species’ ability to adapt to changes, as well as,
increase the degree of overlap in trait values among
species (higher redundancy);
THE CONSEQUENCES OF BIODIVERSITY LOSS ON ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONING

PHYLOGENETIC RARITY: is there any

relationship between functional and
phylogenetic distinctiveness or uniqueness?

• Examining the phylogenetic signal of trait

rarity;
• Positive correlation? Functionally distinct
species are also phylogenetically distinct ;

• Cnsequences for conservation biology:

geographical mismatch between taxonomic,
phylogenetic, and functional rarity
hotspots.
THE CONSEQUENCES OF BIODIVERSITY LOSS ON ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONING
SOME CONSIDERATIONS...

1. MASS-RATIO HYPOTHESIS: Dominant species have

strong effects while rare species have marginal
influence. But, there is contrasting evidence about
the importance of rare species for ecosystem
functioning (keystone species);
2. EXTINCTION RISK: rarity not always implies higher
extinction risk, common, instead of rare species, can
be lost if their traits make them more susceptible to
environmental changes (Carmona et al 2017);
3. RESPONSE X EFFECTS TRAITS: a crucial step is the
choice of the traits to be included in the estimation
of functional rarity.;
4. PHYLOGENETIC RARITY: is there any relationship
between functional and phylogenetic distinctiveness
or uniqueness?
5. INTRASPECIFIC TRAIT VARIATION (ITV): may increase
a species’ ability to adapt to changes, as well as,
increase the degree of overlap in trait values among
species (higher redundancy);
THE CONSEQUENCES OF BIODIVERSITY LOSS ON ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONING

INTRASPECIFIC TRAIT VARIATION (ITV): may increase a species’ ability to adapt to

changes, as well as, increase the degree of overlap in trait values among species
(higher redundancy)

Carmona et al (2017)
proposed to apply the trait
probability density (TPD)
approach to include ITV in
the functional rarity
assessments;

Overlap-based dissimilarity
of the TPD (D) is an
estimator of the functional
distinctiveness of that
species in the community
or region:

D = 0 : high redundancy
D = 1: low redundancy
 REDUNDANT SPECIES, BUT ORIGINAL INDIVIDUALS:
INCLUDING INTRASPECIFIC TRAIT VARIABILITY ON
FUNCTIONAL DISTINCTIVENESS/UNIQUENESS INDICES
Matos, I.S. & Rosado, B.H.P.
 67 SPECIES
High altitude grassland
Itatiaia National Park

6 Leaf traits linked to plant response to drought:

- Leaf area (LA)
- Leaf thickness (LT);
- Specific leaf area (SLA);
- Leaf dry matter content (LDMC);
- Leaf succulence (SUC);
- Leaf water uptake (LWU).
 MATRIX
67 spp x 6 traits
Log transformation
GOWDIS FUNCTION
using only ‘mean trait’
value per species
DISSIMILARITY
MATRIX TROVA FUNCTION
Gaussian mode
(mean + SD)
GOWER OVERLAP
(non ITV) (ITV)

Ordenation
(PCoA)

Uniqueness Originality Mouillot et al 2013

Standardization

Null models K -test Simulations Null models

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4
Are species non-original Is there a phylogenetic How the inclusion of ITV How the inclusion of ITV can
and redundant? signal in originality/ can affect indices? affect the probability of
uniqueness indices? functional homogenization?
 NOW WE HAVE
SPECIES FREQUENCY


And SUMMER SPECIES

High altitude
grasslands
 MC FLD
Dominant Scarce FLD MC Dominant Scarce
distinct distinct unique unique
AF

CM
CM
Dominant Scarce Dominant Scarce
indistinct indistinct shared shared

Distinctiveness = distance from the center (6 traits)

Uniqueness = distance from the neighbour (6 traits)
Scarcity = 1- (freqi/freqmax)
MC

Dominant Scarce
distinct distinct

SUMMER SPECIES

CM

Dominant Scarce
indistinct indistinct
Cortaderia Machaerina
modesta ensifolia
DOMINANT DOMINANT
INDISTINCT DISTINCT

34 : 66 : 0 % 38 : 62 : 0 %
S/CS CS
 Distinctiveness
Uniqueness
Frequency
graph Ecological strategies
LOOKING FORWARD...
QUESTION 1: Given the abiotic constraints in the high altitude environments are all the species showing a low
distinctiveness and uniqueness in their trait array to cope with limiting factors?

- Determine distinctiveness and uniqueness;

- Relationship between distinctiveness vs. uniqueness;

QUESTION 2: Is the functional rarity evenly distributed or highly concentrated toward a more favorable ecological
strategy across the coexisting species in a community?

- Determine functional rarity;

- Relationship functional rarity vs. CSR strategies (?);

QUESTION 3: Is there any relationship between functional and phylogenetic distinctiveness or uniqueness?

- Assess the phylogenetic signal in the traits and in the distinctiveness/uniqueness indices;
- Relationship between functional and phylogenetic distinctiveness/uniqueness;

QUESTION 4: How can the inclusion of intraspecific variability affect the calculation of functional rarity indices and
the probability of functional homogenization?

- Assess the ITV contribution;

- Relationship ITV vs distinctiveness/uniqueness/frequency
- Create semi-simulated scenarios with increase ITV contribution;
- Compare results with vs without ITV;
- Compare (with and without ITV) the effects of distinct scenarios of biodiversity loss (random, trait-based,
frequency-based, rarity-based(?)) on functional redundancy/community stability.