The stress gradient hypothesis original purposed the frequency of plant interactions along countervailing gradients of abiotic stress and consumer pressure. However, research to date has studied these two stressors in isolation rather than together, thereby potentially neglecting the interaction of these factors on plant composition. During an extreme drought and an above average rainfall year in the arid central valley of California, USA, we artificially manipulated a soil moisture gradient and erected animal exclosures to examine the interactions between dominant shrubs and the subordinate annual community. There was a high frequency of positive interactions between shrubs and the annual community at all levels of soil moisture and consumer pressure. Shrub facilitation and water addition displayed similar effect sizes on plant communities, however, the shrub facilitation effect was significantly stronger in watered plots. Shrubs and positive interactions maintain productivity of annual plant communities at environmental extremes despite reductions in droughts stress or consumer pressure and these positive effects are even more pronounced with water addition. The relationship between consumer pressure and abiotic stress on plant interactions is non-linear, particularly since shrubs can facilitate understorey plants through a series of different mechanisms.
##
## Shapiro-Wilk normality test
##
## data: data$Biomass
## W = 0.70532, p-value < 2.2e-16
##
## Shapiro-Wilk normality test
##
## data: m1$residuals
## W = 0.8549, p-value = 2.963e-14
##
## Shapiro-Wilk normality test
##
## data: m2$residuals
## W = 0.95084, p-value = 0.000249
## Analysis of Deviance Table
##
## Model: Negative Binomial(6.504), link: log
##
## Response: abundance
##
## Terms added sequentially (first to last)
##
##
## Df Deviance Resid. Df Resid. Dev Pr(>Chi)
## NULL 239 269.19
## Microsite 1 5.6497 238 263.54 0.0174587
## Exclosure 1 0.2436 237 263.30 0.6216254
## SWC.initial 1 12.7782 236 250.52 0.0003507
## Microsite:Exclosure 1 0.3931 235 250.12 0.5306886
## Microsite:SWC.initial 1 2.6654 234 247.46 0.1025544
## Exclosure:SWC.initial 1 1.2390 233 246.22 0.2656646
## Microsite:Exclosure:SWC.initial 1 0.0584 232 246.16 0.8090474
##
## NULL
## Microsite *
## Exclosure
## SWC.initial ***
## Microsite:Exclosure
## Microsite:SWC.initial
## Exclosure:SWC.initial
## Microsite:Exclosure:SWC.initial
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## Analysis of Deviance Table
##
## Model: Negative Binomial(16.0757), link: log
##
## Response: abundance
##
## Terms added sequentially (first to last)
##
##
## Df Deviance Resid. Df Resid. Dev Pr(>Chi)
## NULL 119 178.35
## Microsite 1 25.3505 118 153.00 4.78e-07
## Exclosure 1 8.5440 117 144.46 0.003467
## SWC.initial 1 4.1301 116 140.33 0.042128
## Microsite:Exclosure 1 2.3114 115 138.02 0.128425
## Microsite:SWC.initial 1 1.7496 114 136.27 0.185926
## Exclosure:SWC.initial 1 2.5548 113 133.71 0.109960
## Microsite:Exclosure:SWC.initial 1 5.4288 112 128.28 0.019807
##
## NULL
## Microsite ***
## Exclosure **
## SWC.initial *
## Microsite:Exclosure
## Microsite:SWC.initial
## Exclosure:SWC.initial
## Microsite:Exclosure:SWC.initial *
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## Analysis of Deviance Table
##
## Model: Negative Binomial(121833.9), link: log
##
## Response: richness
##
## Terms added sequentially (first to last)
##
##
## Df Deviance Resid. Df Resid. Dev Pr(>Chi)
## NULL 239 86.916
## Microsite 1 4.9236 238 81.993 0.02649
## Exclosure 1 0.4141 237 81.578 0.51989
## SWC.initial 1 0.5055 236 81.073 0.47711
## Microsite:Exclosure 1 0.5339 235 80.539 0.46498
## Microsite:SWC.initial 1 0.0019 234 80.537 0.96485
## Exclosure:SWC.initial 1 0.6888 233 79.848 0.40658
## Microsite:Exclosure:SWC.initial 1 0.1733 232 79.675 0.67716
##
## NULL
## Microsite *
## Exclosure
## SWC.initial
## Microsite:Exclosure
## Microsite:SWC.initial
## Exclosure:SWC.initial
## Microsite:Exclosure:SWC.initial
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## Analysis of Deviance Table
##
## Model: Negative Binomial(141925.3), link: log
##
## Response: richness
##
## Terms added sequentially (first to last)
##
##
## Df Deviance Resid. Df Resid. Dev Pr(>Chi)
## NULL 119 41.965
## Microsite 1 10.1880 118 31.777 0.001414
## Exclosure 1 2.0611 117 29.716 0.151102
## SWC.initial 1 0.0507 116 29.666 0.821876
## Microsite:Exclosure 1 0.2390 115 29.427 0.624939
## Microsite:SWC.initial 1 0.3236 114 29.103 0.569472
## Exclosure:SWC.initial 1 0.2680 113 28.835 0.604696
## Microsite:Exclosure:SWC.initial 1 0.0068 112 28.828 0.934093
##
## NULL
## Microsite **
## Exclosure
## SWC.initial
## Microsite:Exclosure
## Microsite:SWC.initial
## Exclosure:SWC.initial
## Microsite:Exclosure:SWC.initial
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## Analysis of Deviance Table
##
## Model: Negative Binomial(0.8282), link: log
##
## Response: abundance2
##
## Terms added sequentially (first to last)
##
##
## Df Deviance Resid. Df Resid. Dev Pr(>Chi)
## NULL 479 692.46
## species 1 61.399 478 631.06 4.661e-15 ***
## Microsite 1 2.248 477 628.81 0.1338
## species:Microsite 1 44.941 476 583.87 2.030e-11 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## Analysis of Deviance Table
##
## Model: Negative Binomial(1.0411), link: log
##
## Response: abundance2
##
## Terms added sequentially (first to last)
##
##
## Df Deviance Resid. Df Resid. Dev Pr(>Chi)
## NULL 239 441.89
## species 1 31.310 238 410.58 2.199e-08 ***
## Microsite 1 2.489 237 408.09 0.1146
## species:Microsite 1 109.682 236 298.41 < 2.2e-16 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## $lsmeans
## Microsite species lsmean SE df asymp.LCL asymp.UCL
## Open brome 3.837479 0.1012017 NA 3.639127 4.035831
## Shrub brome 4.356816 0.1008417 NA 4.159170 4.554462
## Open nbrome 3.664843 0.1013687 NA 3.466164 3.863522
## Shrub nbrome 2.810406 0.1027799 NA 2.608961 3.011851
##
## Results are given on the log scale.
## Confidence level used: 0.95
##
## $contrasts
## contrast estimate SE df z.ratio p.value
## Open,brome - Shrub,brome -0.5193366 0.1428664 NA -3.635120 0.0016
## Open,brome - Open,nbrome 0.1726362 0.1432389 NA 1.205232 0.6235
## Open,brome - Shrub,nbrome 1.0270728 0.1442411 NA 7.120528 <.0001
## Shrub,brome - Open,nbrome 0.6919728 0.1429848 NA 4.839485 <.0001
## Shrub,brome - Shrub,nbrome 1.5464095 0.1439887 NA 10.739794 <.0001
## Open,nbrome - Shrub,nbrome 0.8544367 0.1443583 NA 5.918859 <.0001
##
## Results are given on the log scale.
## P value adjustment: tukey method for comparing a family of 4 estimates
## $lsmeans
## Microsite species lsmean SE df asymp.LCL asymp.UCL
## Open brome 3.793990 0.1279982 NA 3.543118 4.044862
## Shrub brome 4.919616 0.1270045 NA 4.670692 5.168540
## Open nbrome 4.304741 0.1274108 NA 4.055020 4.554461
## Shrub nbrome 2.647356 0.1311071 NA 2.390391 2.904321
##
## Results are given on the log scale.
## Confidence level used: 0.95
##
## $contrasts
## contrast estimate SE df z.ratio p.value
## Open,brome - Shrub,brome -1.1256260 0.1803155 NA -6.242535 <.0001
## Open,brome - Open,nbrome -0.5107506 0.1806019 NA -2.828046 0.0242
## Open,brome - Shrub,nbrome 1.1466338 0.1832283 NA 6.257950 <.0001
## Shrub,brome - Open,nbrome 0.6148754 0.1798990 NA 3.417891 0.0035
## Shrub,brome - Shrub,nbrome 2.2722598 0.1825356 NA 12.448313 <.0001
## Open,nbrome - Shrub,nbrome 1.6573844 0.1828185 NA 9.065737 <.0001
##
## Results are given on the log scale.
## P value adjustment: tukey method for comparing a family of 4 estimates