{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017241379310344827, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009454949944382647, 'mean_word_length': 6.433884297520661, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Functional similarity, not phylogenetic relatedness, predicts the relative strength of competition

Predicting the outcome and strength of species interactions is a central goal of community ecology. Researchers have proposed that outcomes of species interactions (competitive exclusion and coexistence) are a function of both phylogenetic relatedness and functional similarity. Studies relating phylogenetic distance to competition strength have shown conflicting results. Work investigating the role of phylogenetic relatedness and functional similarity in driving competitive outcomes has been limited in terms of the breadth of taxa and ecological contexts examined, which makes the generality of these studies unclear. Consequently, we gathered 1,748 pairwise competition effect sizes from 269 species and 424 unique species pairs with divergence times ranging from 1.14 to 1,275 million years and used meta-regression and model selection approaches to investigate the importance of phylogenetic relatedness and functional similarity to competition across ecological contexts. We revealed that functional similarity, but not phylogenetic relatedness, predicted the relative strength of interspecific competition (defined as the strength of interspecific competition relative to intraspecific competition). Further, we found that the presence of predators, certain habitats, increasing density of competitors, and decreasing spatial grain of experiments were all associated with more intense interspecific competition relative to intraspecific competition. Our results demonstrate that functional similarity, not phylogenetic relatedness, may explain patterns of competition-associated community assembly, highlighting the value of trait-based approaches in clarifying biotic assembly dynamics.