Loss of only the smallest patches will reduce species diversity in most discrete habitat networks

Complex nonmonotonic responses of biodiversity to habitat destruction

It has typically been assumed that habitat destruction, characterized by habitat loss and fragmentation, has consistently negative effects on biodiversity. While numerous empirical studies have shown the detrimental effects of habitat loss, debate continues as to whether habitat fragmentation has universally negative effects. To explore the effects of habitat fragmentation, we developed a simple model for site-occupancy dynamics in fragmented landscapes. With the model, we demonstrate that a competition-colonization trade-off can result in nonlinear oscillatory responses in biodiversity to both habitat loss and fragmentation. However, the overall pattern of habitat loss reducing species richness is still established, in line with empirical observations. Interestingly, the existence of localized oscillations in biodiversity can explain the mixed responses of species richness to habitat fragmentation per se observed in nature, thereby reconciling the debate on the fragmentation-diversity relationship. Therefore, this study offers a parsimonious mechanistic explanation for empirically observed biodiversity patterns in response to habitat destruction.

Obstruction of biodiversity conservation by minimum patch size criteria

Minimum patch size criteria for habitat protection reflect the conservation principle that a single large (SL) patch of habitat has higher biodiversity than several small (SS) patches of the same total area (SL > SS). Nonetheless, this principle is often incorrect, and biodiversity conservation requires placing more emphasis on protection of large numbers of small patches (SS > SL). We used a global database reporting the abundances of species across hundreds of patches to assess the SL > SS principle in systems where small patches are much smaller than the typical minimum patch size criteria applied for biodiversity conservation (i.e., ∼85% of patches <100 ha). The 76 metacommunities we examined included 4401 species in 1190 patches. From each metacommunity, we resampled species-area accumulation curves to evaluate how biodiversity responded to habitat existing as a few large patches or as many small patches. Counter to the SL > SS principle and consistent with previous syntheses, species richness accumulated more rapidly when adding several small patches (45.2% SS > SL vs. 19.9% SL > SS) to reach the same cumulative area, even for the very small patches in our data set. Responses of taxa to habitat fragmentation differed, which suggests that when a given total area of habitat is to be protected, overall biodiversity conservation will be most effective if that habitat is composed of as many small patches as possible, plus a few large ones. Because minimum patch size criteria often require larger patches than the small patches we examined, our results suggest that such criteria hinder efforts to protect biodiversity.

Two dominant forms of multisite similarity decline - Their origins and interpretation

The number of species shared by two or more sites is a fundamental measure of spatial variation in species composition. As more sites are included in the comparison of species composition, the average number of species shared across them declines, with a rate increasingly dependent on only the most widespread species. In over 80% of empirical communities, models of decline in shared species across multiple sites (multisite similarity decline) follow one of two distinct forms. An exponential form is assumed to reflect stochastic assembly and a power law form niche-based sorting, yet these explanations are largely untested, and little is known of how the two forms arise in nature. Using simulations, we first show that the distribution of the most widespread species largely differentiates the two forms, with the power law increasingly favored where such species occupy more than ~75% of sites. We reasoned the less cosmopolitan distribution of widespread species within exponential communities would manifest as differences in community biodiversity properties, specifically more aggregated within-species distributions, less even relative abundance distributions, and weaker between-species spatial associations. We tested and largely confirmed these relationships using 80 empirical datasets, suggesting that the form of multisite similarity decline offers a basis to predict how landscape-scale loss or gain of widespread species is reflected in different local-scale community structures. Such understanding could, for example, be used to predict changes in local-scale competitive interactions following shifts in widespread species' distributions. We propose multiple explanations for the origin of exponential decline, including high among-site abiotic variation, sampling of highly specialized (narrow niche width) taxa, and strong dispersal limitation. We recommend these are evaluated as alternative hypotheses to stochastic assembly.

Landscape-scale habitat fragmentation is positively related to biodiversity, despite patch-scale ecosystem decay

Positive effects of habitat patch size on biodiversity are often extrapolated to infer negative effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity at landscape scales. However, such cross-scale extrapolations typically fail. A recent, landmark, patch-scale analysis (Chase et al., 2020, Nature 584, 238-243) demonstrates positive patch size effects on biodiversity, that is, 'ecosystem decay' in small patches. Other authors have already extrapolated this result to infer negative fragmentation effects, that is, higher biodiversity in a few large than many small patches of the same cumulative habitat area. We test whether this extrapolation is valid. We find that landscape-scale patterns are opposite to their analogous patch-scale patterns: for sets of patches with equal total habitat area, species richness and evenness decrease with increasing mean size of the patches comprising that area, even when considering only species of conservation concern. Preserving small habitat patches will, therefore, be key to sustain biodiversity amidst ongoing environmental crises.

Species accumulation in small–large vs large–small order: more species but not all species?

Although groups of small habitat patches often support more species than large patches of equal total area, their biodiversity value remains controversial. An important line of evidence in this debate compares species accumulation curves, where patches are ordered from small–large and large–small (aka ‘SLOSS analysis’). However, this method counts species equally and is unable to distinguish patch size dependence in species’ occupancies. Moreover, because of the species–area relationship, richness differences typically only contribute to accumulation in small–large order, maximizing the probability of adding species in this direction. Using a null model to control for this, I tested 202 published datasets from archipelagos, habitat islands and fragments for patch size dependence in species accumulation and compared conclusions regarding relative species accumulation with SLOSS analysis. Relative to null model expectations, species accumulation was on average 2.7% higher in large–small than small–large order. The effect was strongest in archipelagos (5%), intermediate for fragments (1.5%) and smallest for habitat islands (1.1%). There was no difference in effect size among taxonomic groups, but each shared this same trend. Results suggest most meta-communities include species that either prefer, or depend upon, larger habitat patches. Relative to SLOSS analysis, null models found lower frequency of greater small-patch importance for species representation (e.g., for fragments: 69 vs 16% respectively) and increased frequency for large patches (fragments: 3 vs 25%). I suggest SLOSS analysis provides unreliable inference on species accumulation and the outcome largely depends on island species–area relationships, not the relative diversity value of small vs large patches.

Ecosystem Metabolism in Small Ponds: The Effects of Floating-Leaved Macrophytes

Small ponds constitute a significant number of standing water bodies on earth and may contribute to CO2 uptake or release into the atmosphere. Despite their importance, few studies have examined ecosystem metabolism in ponds, especially in ponds that may be dominated by floating-leaved macrophytes. In this study, we examined ecosystem metabolism by measuring changes in dissolved oxygen levels every 10 min from late May through late October for four shallow ponds (0.5–1.5 m) in east-central Minnesota, USA. Ponds had varying levels of floating-leaved macrophytes from sparse (<1% coverage) to abundant (61% coverage). We found significant differences in a number of physical/chemical factors including P, N, DOC, water temperature and light penetration. We also found significant difference in gross primary production (GPP—average ranged from 2.2 to 5.5 mg O2/L/day), respiration (R—average ranged from −6.8 to −3.6 mg O2/L/day) and net ecosystem production (NEP—average ranged from −1.5 to −0.1 mg O2/L/day) among the ponds. On average, all of the ponds were heterotrophic (R > GPP). While it appeared that floating-leaved macrophytes provided a significant impact on ecosystem metabolism, there was not a one-to-one correspondence between the amount of macrophytes and the level of ecosystem metabolism.