Vertebrate metacommunity structure along an extensive elevational gradient in the tropics: a comparison of bats, rodents and birds

Abstract

ABSTRACTAim We evaluated the structure of metacommunities for each of three vertebrate orders (Chiroptera, Rodentia and Passeriformes) along an extensive elevational gradient. Using elevation as a proxy for variation in abiotic characteristics and the known elevational distributions of habitat types, we assessed the extent to which variation in those factors may structure each metacommunity based on taxon‐specific characteristics.Location Manu Biosphere Reserve in the Peruvian Andes.Methods Metacommunity structure is an emergent property of a set of species distributions across geographic or environmental gradients. We analysed elements of metacommunity structure (coherence, range turnover and range boundary clumping) to determine the best‐fit structure for each metacommunity along an elevational gradient comprising 13 250‐m elevational intervals and 58 species of rodent, 92 species of bat or 586 species of passerine.Results For each taxon, the environmental gradient along which the metacommunity was structured was highly correlated with elevation. Clementsian structure (i.e. groups of species replacing other such groups along the gradient) characterized rodents, with a group of species that was characteristic of rain forests and a group of species that was characteristic of higher elevation habitats (i.e. above 1500 m). Distributions of bats were strongly nested, with more montane communities comprising subsets of species at lower elevations. The structure of the passerine metacommunity was complex and most consistent with a quasi‐Clementsian structure.Main conclusions Each metacommunity exhibited a different structure along the same elevational gradient, and each structure can be accounted for by taxon‐specific responses to local environmental factors that vary predictably with elevation. The structures of rodent and bird metacommunities suggest species sorting associated with habitat specializations, whereas structure of the bat metacommunity is probably moulded by a combination of species‐specific tolerances to increasingly cold, low‐productivity environs of higher elevations and the diversity and abundance of food resources associated with particular habitat types.