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.