Natural habitat has been increasingly fragmented due to human activity and other reasons. Metapopulation and metacommunity structure thus have become more and more important as a way for landscape ecology studies. In this paper,we summarize the recent researches on metacommunity dynamics, species abundance and distribution in community and the effects of habitat fragmentation and loss on metacommunities etc.
[1] Arrhenius O. 1921. Species and area[J]. Journal of ecology. 9:95-99
[2] Case T. 1991. Invasion resistance, species build-up and community collapse in metapopulation models with interspecies competion[J]. Biol. J. Limn. Soc. 42:239-266
[3] Caswell H and Cohen J E. 1991. Disturbance,interspecific interaction and diversity in metapopulations[J]. Biol. J. Limn. Soc, 42:193-218
[4] Connell J H. and Slatyer R O. 1977. Mechanisms of successionin natural communities and their role in community stability and organization[J]. Am. Nat.,111:1119-1144
[5] Connell J H. 1971. On the role of natural enemies in preventing competitive exclusion in some marine animals and in rain forest trees[A]. In:DenBoer P J and Gradwell G R(ed.). Dynamics of populations[C]. Wageningen:Pudoc. 298-312
[6] Connor E F. and McCoy E D. 1979. The statistics and biology of the species-area relationship[J]. Am. Nat. 113:791-833
[7] Davies K F, Melbourne B A, Margules C R.2001. Effects of within-and between-patch processes on community dynamics in a fragmen tation experiment[J]. Ecology,82,(7):1830-1846
[8] Gaston K J. 1994. Rarity[M]. Chapman and Hall,London.
[9] Gutierrez D; Leon-Cortes JL and Menendez R etc. 2001. Metapop ulations of four lepidopteran herbivores on a single host plant, Lotus comiculatus[J]. Ecology,82(5):1371-1386
[11] Hanski I. 1982a. Dynamics of regional distribution:the core andsatellite species hypothesis[J]. Oikos. 38:210-221
[12] Hanski I. 1994a. A practical model of metapopulation dynamics[J]. J. Anim. Ecol. 63:151-162
[13] Hanski I. 1994c. Patch-occupancy dynamics in fragemented land scapes[J]. Trends Ecol. Evol. 9:131-135
[14] Hanski I. and Gyllenberg M. 1997. Uniting two general patterns in the distribution of species[J]. Science. 275:397-400
[15] Holt R D. 1995. Demographic constrainta in evolution:towards unifying the evolutionary theories of senesence and the niche conservatism[J]. Evol. Ecology,10:1-11
[16] Holt R D. 1997. From metapopulation danamics to community structure:some consequences of spatial heterogeneity[A]. In:I A Hanski and M E Gilpin(ed.). Metapopulation Ecology[C].San Diego:Academic Press. 149-165
[17] Huston M. 1979. A general hypothesis of species diversity[J]. Am. Nat.,113:81-101
[18] Klausmeier CA.2001. Habitat destruction and extinction in competitive and mutualistic metacommunities[J]. Ecology Letters, 4(1):57-63
[19] Lawton J H. 1993. Range, population abundance and conservation[J]. Trends Ecol. Evol. 8:409-413
[20] Levins R. 1969. Some demographic and genetic consequences of enviromental hetergeneity for bioligical control[J]. Bull Ento mol. Soc. Amer. 15:237-240
[21] MacArthur R H. and Wilson E O. 1967. The theory of island bio geography[M]. Princeton University Press
[22] Moulton M P. and Pimm S L. 1983. The introduced Hawaiian avifauna:biogeographic evidence for competition[J]. Am. Nat.121:669-690
[23] Preston F W. 1960. Time and space and the variation of species[J]. Ecology. 41:611-627
[24] Rosenzweig M L. 1995. Species diversity in space and time[M]. Cambridge University Press
[25] Schoener T W. 1976. The species-area relation within archipela gos:models and evidence from island and land birds[A]. 16th international ornithological congress[C]. 629-641
[26] Williams C B. 1943. Area and number of species[J]. Nature. 152:264-267
[27] Williams M R. 1995. An extreme-value function model of the species incidence and species-area relations[J]. Ecology. 76:2607-2616
[28] Wissel, C. and Maier, B. 1992. A stochastic model for the speciesarea relationship[J]. Journal of Biogeography. 19:355-362
