Anthropogenic disruptions to longstanding patterns of trophic-size structure in vertebrates

Navigating uncertainty in maximum body size in marine metazoans

Body size is a fundamental biological trait shaping ecological interactions, evolutionary processes, and our understanding of the structure and dynamics of marine communities on a global scale. Accurately defining a species' body size, despite the ease of measurement, poses significant challenges due to varied methodologies, tool usage, and subjectivity among researchers, resulting in multiple, often discrepant size estimates. These discrepancies, stemming from diverse measurement approaches and inherent variability, could substantially impact the reliability and precision of ecological and evolutionary studies reliant on body size data across extensive species datasets. This study examines the variation in reported maximum body sizes across 69,570 individual measurements of maximum size, ranging from <0.2 μm to >45 m, for 27,271 species of marine metazoans. The research aims to investigate how reported maximum size variations within species relate to organism size, taxonomy, habitat, and the presence of skeletal structures. The investigation particularly focuses on understanding why discrepancies in maximum size estimates arise and their potential implications for broader ecological and evolutionary studies relying on body size data. Variation in reported maximum sizes is zero for 38% of species, and low for most species, although it exceeds two orders of magnitude for some species. The likelihood of zero variation in maximum size decreased with more measurements and increased in larger species, though this varied across phyla and habitats. Pelagic organisms consistently had low maximum size range values, while small species with unspecified habitats had the highest variation. Variations in maximum size within a species were notably smaller than interspecific variation at higher taxonomic levels. Significant variation in maximum size estimates exists within marine species, and partially explained by organism size, taxonomic group, and habitat. Variation in maximum size could be reduced by standardized measurement protocols and improved meta-data. Despite the variation, egregious errors in published maximum size measurements are rare, and their impact on comparative macroecological and macroevolutionary research is likely minimal.

Trophic distribution of nutrient production in coral reef fisheries

Coral reef fisheries supply nutritious catch to tropical coastal communities, where the quality of reef seafood is determined by both the rate of biomass production and nutritional value of reef fishes. Yet our understanding of reef fisheries typically uses targets of total reef fish biomass rather than individual growth (i.e. biomass production) and nutrient content (i.e. nutritional value of reef fish), limiting the ability of management to sustain the productivity of nutritious catches. Here, we use modelled growth coefficients and nutrient concentrations to develop a new metric of nutrient productivity of coral reef fishes. We then evaluate this metric with underwater visual surveys of reef fish assemblages from four tropical countries to examine nutrient productivity of reef fish food webs. Species' growth coefficients were associated with nutrients that vary with body size (calcium, iron, selenium and zinc), but not total nutrient density. When integrated with fish abundance data, we find that herbivorous species typically dominate standing biomass, biomass turnover and nutrient production on coral reefs. Such bottom-heavy trophic distributions of nutrients were consistent across gradients of fishing pressure and benthic composition. We conclude that management restrictions that promote sustainability of herbivores and other low trophic-level species can sustain biomass and nutrient production from reef fisheries that is critical to the food security of over 500 million people in the tropics.

Homo medicus: The transition to meat eating increased pathogen pressure and the use of pharmacological plants in Homo

The human lineage transitioned to a more carnivorous niche 2.6 mya and evolved a large body size and slower life history, which likely increased zoonotic pathogen pressure. Evidence for this increase includes increased zoonotic infections in modern hunter-gatherers and bushmeat hunters, exceptionally low stomach pH compared to other primates, and divergence in immune-related genes. These all point to change, and probably intensification, in the infectious disease environment of Homo compared to earlier hominins and other apes. At the same time, the brain, an organ in which immune responses are constrained, began to triple in size. We propose that the combination of increased zoonotic pathogen pressure and the challenges of defending a large brain and body from pathogens in a long-lived mammal, selected for intensification of the plant-based self-medication strategies already in place in apes and other primates. In support, there is evidence of medicinal plant use by hominins in the middle Paleolithic, and all cultures today have sophisticated, plant-based medical systems, add spices to food, and regularly consume psychoactive plant substances that are harmful to helminths and other pathogens. We propose that the computational challenges of discovering effective plant-based treatments, the consequent ability to consume more energy-rich animal foods, and the reduced reliance on energetically-costly immune responses helped select for increased cognitive abilities and unique exchange relationships in Homo. In the story of human evolution, which has long emphasized hunting skills, medical skills had an equal role to play.