Abstract
Vegetation is the consequence of the interaction of a series of widely differing processes, each uniquely scaled. Extensive slow processes pertain to high levels of organization, while fast local processes pertain to lower levels. Curvature in ordination gradients is often not artefact, but the result of interference between different levels. As straight gradients are lengthened by the inclusion of more heterogeneity in the data, the nature of relationships change between species and their environment and each other at distant places in environmental space. With change in these relationships, movement down the gradient does not always mean the same thing, and this causes curvature. In plotting a noneuclidean space onto a euclidean reference, the change in metrics causes apparent curvature. The technical causes of curvature (bimodality, double zeros, beta diversity) fit this model. Data transformations scale the analyses so that different levels are reflected in results. Between levels, when the processes of the lower level are not local enough to be trivial, the pattern from new upper level processes cannot assert a new straight gradient with coarser grained criteria. Thus transformation and the emergence of curvature followed eventually by new straight gradients allow the linking of different levels in an orderly fashion.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen T. F. H., Bartell S. M. & Koonce J. F., 1977. Multiple stable configurations in ordination of phytoplankton community change rates. Ecology 58: 1076–1084.
Allen, T. F. H., O'Neill, R. V. & Hoekstra, T. W., 1984a. Interlevel relations in ecological research and management: Some working principles from hierarchy theory. USDA Forest Service Gen. Techn. Rep. RM-110, Fort Collins.
Allen T. F. H., Sadowsky D. A. & Woodhead N., 1984b. Data transformation as a scaling operation in ordination of plankton. Vegetatio 56: 147–160.
Allen T. F. H. & Starr T. B., 1982. Hierarchy: Perspectives for ecological complexity. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Allen T. F. H. & Wileyto E. P., 1983. A hierarchical model for the complexity of plant communities. J. Theor. Biol. 101: 529–540.
Austin M. P., 1980. Searching for a model for use in vegetation analysis. Vegetatio 42: 11–21.
Beals E. W., 1973. Ordination: Mathematical elegance and ecological naiveté. J. Ecol. 61: 23–36.
Bray J. R. & Curtis J. T., 1957. An ordination of the upland forest communities of Southern Wisconsin. Ecol. Monogr. 27: 325–349.
Curtis J. T., 1959. The vegetation of Wisconsin. Univ. of Wisconsin Press, Madison.
Ellenberg H., 1953. Physiologisches und ökologisches Verhalten derselben Pflanzenarten. Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges. 65: 351–362.
Hill M. O. & GauchJr. H. G., 1980. Detrended Correspondence analysis: an improved ordination technique. Vegetatio 42: 47–58.
Holling C. S., 1973. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 4: 1–24.
Levins R., 1974. The qualitative analysis of partially specified systems. Ann. New York Acad. Sci. 231: 123–138.
Levins R. & Lewontin R., 1980. Dialectics and reductionism in ecology. Synthese 43: 47–78.
Lindman H. & Caelli T., 1978. Constant curvative Riemannian scaling. J. Math. Psychol. 17(2): 89–109.
Loucks O. L., 1962. Ordinating forest communities by means of environmental scalars and phytosociological indices. Ecol. Monogr. 32: 137–166.
Maycock P. F., 1957. The phytosociology of boreal coniferhardwood forests of the great lakes region. Ph.D. thesis University of Wisconsin, Madison.
McCune B. & Allen T. F. H., 1984. Will similar forests develop on similar sites? Can. J. Bot. 63: 367–376.
McCune B. & Allen T. F. H., 1984. Forest dynamics in the Bitterroot Canyons, Montana. Can. J. Bot. 63: 377–383.
Mueller-Dombois D. & Ellenberg H., 1974. Aims and methods of vegetation ecology.Wiley, New York.
Simon H. A., 1962. The architecture of complexity: Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. 106: 467–482.
Van derMaarel E., 1979. Transformation of cover-abundance values in phytosociology and its effects on community similarity. Vegetatio 39: 97–114.
Williamson M. H., 1978. The ordination of incidence data. J. Ecol. 66: 911–920.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Nomenclature follows Gleason (1952), The New Britton and Brown Illustrated Flora of the Northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada.
I am grateful to Grant Cottam for permission to publish his ordination of the Wasatch Mountain data. Tom Givnish made many helpful suggestions for revision of this manuscript.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Allen, T.F.H. Hierarchical complexity in ecology: a noneuclidean conception of the data space. Vegetatio 69, 17–25 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00038683
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00038683