Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30519404›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2018

Size-dependent movement explains why bigger is better in fragmented landscapes.

Jasmijn Hillaert, Thomas Hovestadt, Martijn L Vandegehuchte, Dries Bonte

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The physiology of movement.Movement ecology · 2020
    Review
  11. From individual movement behaviour to landscape-scale invasion dynamics and management: a case study of lionfish metapopulations.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jasmijn HillaertDepartment of Biology Terrestrial Ecology Unit Ghent University Ghent Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-3761-8846
Thomas HovestadtDepartment of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology Biocenter University of Wuerzburg Wuerzburg Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7368-6013
Martijn L VandegehuchteDepartment of Biology Terrestrial Ecology Unit Ghent University Ghent Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-1283-4654
Dries BonteDepartment of Biology Terrestrial Ecology Unit Ghent University Ghent Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-3320-7505

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Body size is a fundamental trait known to allometrically scale with metabolic rate and therefore a key determinant of individual development, life history, and consequently fitness. In spatially structured environments, movement is an equally important driver of fitness. Because movement is tightly coupled with body size, we expect habitat fragmentation to induce a strong selection pressure on size variation across and within species. Changes in body size distributions are then, in turn, expected to alter food web dynamics. However, no consensus has been reached on how spatial isolation and resource growth affect consumer body size distributions. Our aim was to investigate how these two factors shape the body size distribution of consumers under scenarios of size-dependent and size-independent consumer movement by applying a mechanistic, individual-based resource-consumer model. We also assessed the consequences of altered body size distributions for important ecosystem traits such as resource abundance and consumer stability. Finally, we determined those factors that explain most variation in size distributions. We demonstrate that decreasing connectivity and resource growth select for communities (or populations) consisting of larger species (or individuals) due to strong selection for the ability to move over longer distances if the movement is size-dependent. When including size-dependent movement, intermediate levels of connectivity result in increases in local size diversity. Due to this elevated functional diversity, resource uptake is maximized at the metapopulation or metacommunity level. At these intermediate levels of connectivity, size-dependent movement explains most of the observed variation in size distributions. Interestingly, local and spatial stability of consumer biomass is lowest when isolation and resource growth are high. Finally, we highlight that size-dependent movement is of vital importance for the survival of populations or communities within highly fragmented landscapes. Our results demonstrate that considering size-dependent movement is essential to understand how habitat fragmentation and resource growth shape body size distributions-and the resulting metapopulation or metacommunity dynamics-of consumers.

Indexed as

allometric scalingbody size distributionseco‐evolutionary dynamicshabitat fragmentationisolationmetabolic theoryoptimal sizesize‐dependent movement

Identifiers

PMID30519404
PMCPMC6262741

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.