Figure legends
Figure 1 Schematic of the experimental design. Microcosms of
either 100%, 10% or 1% resource concentration were disturbed every 1,
2, 4, 8 or 16 days (denoted by an icon of a microcosm) to test for the
effects of both disturbance frequency and resource abundance on invader
success. Disturbances involved 1% transfer of homogenised broth into
fresh media. All microcosms were invaded every four days (immediately
post-disturbance) with either a smooth (SM) or wrinkly spreader (WS)
invader. Six replicates per treatment were used.
Figure 2 Invasion success, log(v +1), of (A) the smooth
(SM) invader and (B) the wrinkly Spreader (WS), in response to different
disturbance frequencies and resource abundances (low resources = red
circles and lines, medium = blue, high = black). v is the
proportional change in invader density compared to the residents; the
dashed line shows the value of equal population growth rate between
residents and invaders, where invaders would have the same proportion in
the community at the beginning and the end of the experiment. Jittered
points represent individual replicates. Lines show the best model fits
and shaded areas show the 95% confidence interval.
Figure 3 Evolved resident P. fluorescens biodiversity
(Simpson’s index) in treatments of different disturbance frequencies
(increasing from left to right within panels) and resource abundances
(low resources = red circles and lines, medium = blue, high = black)
when invaded by (A) a smooth (SM) invader and (B) a wrinkly spreader
(WS). Diversity was significantly lower in the low resource treatment
for both invaders. Resource abundance and invader type affected
diversity through an interaction. Jittered points represent individual
replicates. Lines show the best model fits and shaded areas show the
95% confidence interval.
Figure 4 Final resident density (log10(cfu+1)/mL) after sixteen
days in treatments of different resource abundances (low resources = red
circles and lines, medium = blue, high = black and disturbance
frequencies). Panel A shows treatments invaded with a smooth (SM)
morphotype, panel B by a wrinkly spreader (WS). Jittered points
represent individual replicates. Lines show the best model fits and
shaded areas show the 95% confidence interval.