A rich body of knowledge links biodiversity to ecosystem functioning (BEF), but it is primarily focused on small scales. We review the current theory and identify six expectations for scale ...dependence in the BEF relationship: (1) a nonlinear change in the slope of the BEF relationship with spatial scale; (2) a scale‐dependent relationship between ecosystem stability and spatial extent; (3) coexistence within and among sites will result in a positive BEF relationship at larger scales; (4) temporal autocorrelation in environmental variability affects species turnover and thus the change in BEF slope with scale; (5) connectivity in metacommunities generates nonlinear BEF and stability relationships by affecting population synchrony at local and regional scales; (6) spatial scaling in food web structure and diversity will generate scale dependence in ecosystem functioning. We suggest directions for synthesis that combine approaches in metaecosystem and metacommunity ecology and integrate cross‐scale feedbacks. Tests of this theory may combine remote sensing with a generation of networked experiments that assess effects at multiple scales. We also show how anthropogenic land cover change may alter the scaling of the BEF relationship. New research on the role of scale in BEF will guide policy linking the goals of managing biodiversity and ecosystems.
We address the challenge of scale for biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (BEF) research. We review current theory and identify six expectations for scale dependence in the BEF relationship. We suggest directions for synthesis that combine theoretical and empirical methods and suggest their application to human transformed landscapes.
Biodiversity loss decreases ecosystem functioning at the local scales at which species interact, but it remains unclear how biodiversity loss affects ecosystem functioning at the larger scales of ...space and time that are most relevant to biodiversity conservation and policy. Theory predicts that additional insurance effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning could emerge across time and space if species respond asynchronously to environmental variation and if species become increasingly dominant when and where they are most productive. Even if only a few dominant species maintain ecosystem functioning within a particular time and place, ecosystem functioning may be enhanced by many different species across many times and places (β‐diversity). Here, we develop and apply a new approach to estimate these previously unquantified insurance effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning that arise due to species turnover across times and places. In a long‐term (18‐year) grassland plant diversity experiment, we find that total insurance effects are positive in sign and substantial in magnitude, amounting to 19% of the net biodiversity effect, mostly due to temporal insurance effects. Species loss can therefore reduce ecosystem functioning both locally and by eliminating species that would otherwise enhance ecosystem functioning across temporally fluctuating and spatially heterogeneous environments.
ABSTRACT
Biological insurance theory predicts that, in a variable environment, aggregate ecosystem properties will vary less in more diverse communities because declines in the performance or ...abundance of some species or phenotypes will be offset, at least partly, by smoother declines or increases in others. During the past two decades, ecology has accumulated strong evidence for the stabilising effect of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning. As biological insurance is reaching the stage of a mature theory, it is critical to revisit and clarify its conceptual foundations to guide future developments, applications and measurements. In this review, we first clarify the connections between the insurance and portfolio concepts that have been used in ecology and the economic concepts that inspired them. Doing so points to gaps and mismatches between ecology and economics that could be filled profitably by new theoretical developments and new management applications. Second, we discuss some fundamental issues in biological insurance theory that have remained unnoticed so far and that emerge from some of its recent applications. In particular, we draw a clear distinction between the two effects embedded in biological insurance theory, i.e. the effects of biodiversity on the mean and variability of ecosystem properties. This distinction allows explicit consideration of trade‐offs between the mean and stability of ecosystem processes and services. We also review applications of biological insurance theory in ecosystem management. Finally, we provide a synthetic conceptual framework that unifies the various approaches across disciplines, and we suggest new ways in which biological insurance theory could be extended to address new issues in ecology and ecosystem management. Exciting future challenges include linking the effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning and stability, incorporating multiple functions and feedbacks, developing new approaches to partition biodiversity effects across scales, extending biological insurance theory to complex interaction networks, and developing new applications to biodiversity and ecosystem management.
Animal daily routines represent a compromise between maximizing foraging success and optimizing physiological performance, while minimizing the risk of predation. For ectothermic predators, ambient ...temperature may also influence daily routines through its effects on physiological performance. Temperatures can fluctuate significantly over the diel cycle and ectotherms may synchronize behaviour to match thermal regimes in order to optimize fitness. We used bio-logging to quantify activity and body temperature of blacktip reef sharks (Carcharhinus melanopterus) at a tropical atoll. Behavioural observations were used to concurrently measure bite rates in herbivorous reef fishes, as an index of activity for potential diurnal prey. Sharks showed early evening peaks in activity, particularly during ebbing high tides, while body temperatures peaked several hours prior to the period of maximal activity. Herbivores also displayed peaks in activity several hours earlier than the peaks in shark activity. Sharks appeared to be least active while their body temperatures were highest and most active while temperatures were cooling, although we hypothesize that due to thermal inertia they were still warmer than their smaller prey during this period. Sharks may be most active during early evening periods as they have a sensory advantage under low light conditions and/or a thermal advantage over cooler prey. Sharks swam into shallow water during daytime low tide periods potentially to warm up and increase rates of digestion before the nocturnal activity period, which may be a strategy to maximize ingestion rates. "Hunt warm, rest warmer" may help explain the early evening activity seen in other ectothermic predators.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Human-driven threats are changing biodiversity, impacting ecosystem services. The loss of one species can trigger secondary extinctions of additional species, because species interact-yet the ...consequences of these secondary extinctions for services remain underexplored. Herein, we compare robustness of food webs and the ecosystem services (hereafter 'services') they provide; and investigate factors determining service responses to secondary extinctions. Simulating twelve extinction scenarios for estuarine food webs with seven services, we find that food web and service robustness are highly correlated, but that robustness varies across services depending on their trophic level and redundancy. Further, we find that species providing services do not play a critical role in stabilizing food webs - whereas species playing supporting roles in services through interactions are critical to the robustness of both food webs and services. Together, our results reveal indirect risks to services through secondary species losses and predictable differences in vulnerability across services.
Evaluating the effects of multiple stressors on ecosystems is becoming increasingly vital with global changes. The role of species interactions in propagating the effects of stressors, although ...widely acknowledged, has yet to be formally explored. Here, we conceptualise how stressors propagate through food webs and explore how they affect simulated three‐species motifs and food webs of the Canadian St. Lawrence System. We find that overlooking species interactions invariably underestimate the effects of stressors, and that synergistic and antagonistic effects through food webs are prevalent. We also find that interaction type influences a species’ susceptibility to stressors; species in omnivory and tri‐trophic food chain interactions in particular are sensitive and prone to synergistic and antagonistic effects. Finally, we find that apex predators were negatively affected and mesopredators benefited from the effects of stressors due to their trophic position in the St. Lawrence System, but that species sensitivity is dependent on food web structure. In conceptualising the effects of multiple stressors on food webs, we bring theory closer to practice and show that considering the intricacies of ecological communities is key to assess the net effects of stressors on species.
The role of species interactions in propagating the effects of stressors, although widely acknowledged, has yet to be formally explored. Here, we conceptualise how stressors propagate through food webs and we find that overlooking species interactions invariably underestimate the effects of stressors. In conceptualising the effects of multiple stressors on food webs, we bring theory closer to practice and show that considering the intricacies of ecological communities is key to assess the net effects of stressors on species.
When Do Ecosystem Services Depend on Rare Species? Dee, Laura E.; Cowles, Jane; Isbell, Forest ...
Trends in ecology & evolution (Amsterdam),
August 2019, 2019-08-00, 20190801, Letnik:
34, Številka:
8
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Conservation aims to preserve species and ecosystem services. If rare species contribute little to ecosystem services, yet are those most in need of preservation, tradeoffs may exist for these ...contrasting objectives. However, little attention has focused on identifying how, when, and where rare species contribute to ecosystem services and at what scales. Here, we review distinct ways that ecosystem services can positively depend on the presence, abundance, disproportionate contribution or, counterintuitively, the scarcity of rare species. By contrast, ecosystem services are less likely to depend on rare species that do not have a unique role in any service or become abundant enough to contribute substantially. We propose a research agenda to identify when rare species may contribute significantly to services.
Most species in all ecosystems are rare in some form.
Rare species are often assumed to contribute little to ecosystem functioning and services, but evidence has accumulated that rare species can substantially contribute to some ecosystem services in a variety of ways.
Rare species can have direct and indirect contributions to ecosystem services through species interactions.
Research on functional trait uniqueness could provide new insights into the role of rare species in ecosystem services, yet explicit tests of connections between functional traits and measurable contributions to ecosystem processes and services are still needed.
The knowledge of when and to what extent rare species can affect ecosystem services is important for identifying situations in which multiple conservation objectives (protecting biodiversity and providing other ecosystem services) are more or less aligned.
Summary
Extensive research shows that more species‐rich assemblages are generally more productive and efficient in resource use than comparable assemblages with fewer species. But the question of how ...diversity simultaneously affects the wide variety of ecological functions that ecosystems perform remains relatively understudied. It presents several analytical and empirical challenges that remain unresolved. In particular, researchers have developed several disparate metrics to quantify multifunctionality, each characterizing different aspects of the concept and each with pros and cons.
We compare four approaches to characterizing multifunctionality and its dependence on biodiversity, quantifying (i) magnitudes of multiple individual functions separately, (ii) the extent to which different species promote different functions, (iii) the average level of a suite of functions and (iv) the number of functions that simultaneously exceeds a critical threshold.
We illustrate each approach using data from the pan‐European BIODEPTH experiment and the R multifunc package developed for this purpose, evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each approach and implement several methodological improvements.
We conclude that an extension of the fourth approach that systematically explores all possible threshold values provides the most comprehensive description of multifunctionality to date. We outline this method and recommend its use in future research.
The biotic mechanisms underlying ecosystem functioning and stability have been extensively—but separately—explored in the literature, making it difficult to understand the relationship between ...functioning and stability. In this study, we used community models to examine how complementarity and selection, the two major biodiversity mechanisms known to enhance ecosystem biomass production, affect ecosystem stability. Our analytic and simulation results show that although complementarity promotes stability, selection impairs it. The negative effects of selection on stability operate through weakening portfolio effects and selecting species that have high productivity but low tolerance to perturbations (“risk-prone” species). In contrast, complementarity enhances stability by increasing portfolio effects and reducing the relative abundance of risk-prone species. Consequently, ecosystem functioning and stability exhibit either a synergy, if complementarity effects prevail, or trade-off, if selection effects prevail. Across species richness levels, ecosystem functioning and stability tend to be positively related, but negative relationships can occur when selection co-varies with richness. Our findings provide novel insights for understanding the functioning-stability relationship, with potential implications for both ecological research and ecosystem management.
PDF
