Search

Disentangling the multiple factors controlling species diversity is a major challenge in ecology. Island biogeography and environmental filtering are two influential theories emphasizing respectively island size and isolation, and the abiotic environment, as key drivers of species richness. However, few attempts have been made to quantify their relative importance and investigate their mechanistic basis. Here, we applied structural equation modelling, a powerful method allowing test of complex hypotheses involving multiple and indirect effects, on an island‐like system of 22 French Guianan neotropical inselbergs covered with rock‐savanna. We separated the effects of size (rock‐savanna area), isolation (density of surrounding inselbergs), environmental filtering (rainfall, altitude) and dispersal filtering (forest‐matrix openness) on the species richness of all plants and of various ecological groups (terrestrial versus epiphytic, small‐scale versus large‐scale dispersal species). We showed that the species richness of all plants and terrestrial species was mainly explained by the size of rock‐savanna vegetation patches, with increasing richness associated with higher rock‐savanna area, while inselberg isolation and forest‐matrix openness had no measurable effect. This size effect was mediated by an increase in terrestrial‐habitat diversity, even after accounting for increased sampling effort. The richness of epiphytic species was mainly explained by environmental filtering, with a positive effect of rainfall and altitude, but also by a positive size effect mediated by enhanced woody‐plant species richness. Inselberg size and environmental filtering both explained the richness of small‐scale and large‐scale dispersal species, but these ecological groups responded in opposite directions to altitude and rainfall, that is positively for large‐scale and negatively for small‐scale dispersal species. Our study revealed both habitat diversity associated with island size and environmental filtering as major drivers of neotropical inselberg plant diversity and showed the importance of plant species growth form and dispersal ability to explain the relative importance of each driver. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Islands are geographically defined as land masses completely surrounded by water, and island systems have been used as models for many biogeographic, ecological, and evolutionary theories ever since Darwin's pioneering efforts. However, their biological definition is complex. Over the past few decades these theories have been applied to many study systems that only share some geographic features with island systems. These features include spatial fragmentation, limited area, spatial and temporal isolation from adjacent parts of the system, and low connectivity between different parts within the system, to mention just a few. These systems vary in their form, the matrix that surrounds them, the factors defining their borders, the extent of insularity they impose on the different taxa, and their geological similarity to different types of actual islands. Here, I seek to understand whether such island‐like systems (ILS) function biologically as true islands. In the first part, I describe the wide diversity of ILS suggested in the literature and the variation in the features that define their insularity. In the second part, I review the extent to which the main theories of island biology are applicable to these systems: species–area and species–isolation relationships, community composition, evolutionary radiations, and the extent of endemism and genetic diversity. In the third and final part, I suggest a new conceptual framework within which to classify and study the biology of ILS, as well as practical future research directions. I conclude that the term 'biological island' is a multi‐faceted concept, loosely related to its geographical definition. As ILS are often less isolated than true islands, and their biological patterns are only partly similar to those of true islands (and even this is true only for some ILS) the use of the term 'island' to describe any isolated habitat is therefore inappropriate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]