1
|
Silliman BR, Hensel MJS, Gibert JP, Daleo P, Smith CS, Wieczynski DJ, Angelini C, Paxton AB, Adler AM, Zhang YS, Altieri AH, Palmer TM, Jones HP, Gittman RK, Griffin JN, O'Connor MI, van de Koppel J, Poulsen JR, Rietkerk M, He Q, Bertness MD, van der Heide T, Valdez SR. Harnessing ecological theory to enhance ecosystem restoration. Curr Biol 2024; 34:R418-R434. [PMID: 38714175 DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2024.03.043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/09/2024]
Abstract
Ecosystem restoration can increase the health and resilience of nature and humanity. As a result, the international community is championing habitat restoration as a primary solution to address the dual climate and biodiversity crises. Yet most ecosystem restoration efforts to date have underperformed, failed, or been burdened by high costs that prevent upscaling. To become a primary, scalable conservation strategy, restoration efficiency and success must increase dramatically. Here, we outline how integrating ten foundational ecological theories that have not previously received much attention - from hierarchical facilitation to macroecology - into ecosystem restoration planning and management can markedly enhance restoration success. We propose a simple, systematic approach to determining which theories best align with restoration goals and are most likely to bolster their success. Armed with a century of advances in ecological theory, restoration practitioners will be better positioned to more cost-efficiently and effectively rebuild the world's ecosystems and support the resilience of our natural resources.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian R Silliman
- Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, 135 Duke Marine Lab Road, Beaufort, NC 28516, USA.
| | - Marc J S Hensel
- Biological Sciences Department, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Point, VA 23062, USA; Nature Coast Biological Station, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Cedar Key, FL 32625, USA
| | - Jean P Gibert
- Department of Biology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Pedro Daleo
- Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras (IIMyC), FCEyN, UNMdP-CONICET, CC 1260 Correo Central, B7600WAG, Mar del Plata, Argentina
| | - Carter S Smith
- Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, 135 Duke Marine Lab Road, Beaufort, NC 28516, USA
| | | | - Christine Angelini
- Department of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA
| | - Avery B Paxton
- National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 101 Pivers Island Road, Beaufort, NC 28516, USA
| | - Alyssa M Adler
- Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, 135 Duke Marine Lab Road, Beaufort, NC 28516, USA
| | - Y Stacy Zhang
- Department of Marine, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA
| | - Andrew H Altieri
- Department of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA
| | - Todd M Palmer
- Department of Biology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA
| | - Holly P Jones
- Department of Biological Sciences and Institute for the Study of the Environment, Sustainability, and Energy, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL 60115, USA
| | - Rachel K Gittman
- Department of Biology and Coastal Studies Institute, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA
| | - John N Griffin
- Department of Biosciences, Swansea University, Swansea SA2 8PP, Wales, UK
| | - Mary I O'Connor
- Department of Zoology and Biodiversity Research Centre, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6R 1W4, Canada
| | - Johan van de Koppel
- Department of Estuarine and Delta Systems, NIOZ Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Yerseke, The Netherlands; Conservation Ecology Group, Groningen Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - John R Poulsen
- The Nature Conservancy, 2424 Spruce Street, Boulder, CO 80302, USA; Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, PO Box 90328, Durham, NC 27708, USA
| | - Max Rietkerk
- Department Environmental Sciences, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Qiang He
- Coastal Ecology Lab, MOE Key Laboratory for Biodiversity Science and Ecological Engineering, School of Life Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai 200438, China
| | - Mark D Bertness
- Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Brown University, 90 Witman Street, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Tjisse van der Heide
- Department of Coastal Systems, Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research (NIOZ), Den Burg, The Netherlands; Conservation Ecology Group, Groningen Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Stephanie R Valdez
- Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, 135 Duke Marine Lab Road, Beaufort, NC 28516, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
McCormack SA, Melbourne-Thomas J, Trebilco R, Griffith G, Hill SL, Hoover C, Johnston NM, Marina TI, Murphy EJ, Pakhomov EA, Pinkerton M, Plagányi É, Saravia LA, Subramaniam RC, Van de Putte AP, Constable AJ. Southern Ocean Food Web Modelling: Progress, Prognoses, and Future Priorities for Research and Policy Makers. Front Ecol Evol 2021. [DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2021.624763] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Graphical AbstractGraphical summary of multiple aspects of Southern Ocean food web structure and function including alternative energy pathways through pelagic food webs, climate change and fisheries impacts and the importance of microbial networks and benthic systems.
Collapse
|
3
|
O'Connor MI, Mori AS, Gonzalez A, Dee LE, Loreau M, Avolio M, Byrnes JEK, Cheung W, Cowles J, Clark AT, Hautier Y, Hector A, Komatsu K, Newbold T, Outhwaite CL, Reich PB, Seabloom E, Williams L, Wright A, Isbell F. Grand challenges in biodiversity-ecosystem functioning research in the era of science-policy platforms require explicit consideration of feedbacks. Proc Biol Sci 2021; 288:20210783. [PMID: 34641733 PMCID: PMC8511742 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2021.0783] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Feedbacks are an essential feature of resilient socio-economic systems, yet the feedbacks between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human wellbeing are not fully accounted for in global policy efforts that consider future scenarios for human activities and their consequences for nature. Failure to integrate feedbacks in our knowledge frameworks exacerbates uncertainty in future projections and potentially prevents us from realizing the full benefits of actions we can take to enhance sustainability. We identify six scientific research challenges that, if addressed, could allow future policy, conservation and monitoring efforts to quantitatively account for ecosystem and societal consequences of biodiversity change. Placing feedbacks prominently in our frameworks would lead to (i) coordinated observation of biodiversity change, ecosystem functions and human actions, (ii) joint experiment and observation programmes, (iii) more effective use of emerging technologies in biodiversity science and policy, and (iv) a more inclusive and integrated global community of biodiversity observers. To meet these challenges, we outline a five-point action plan for collaboration and connection among scientists and policymakers that emphasizes diversity, inclusion and open access. Efforts to protect biodiversity require the best possible scientific understanding of human activities, biodiversity trends, ecosystem functions and—critically—the feedbacks among them.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mary I O'Connor
- Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.,Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Akira S Mori
- Graduate School of Environment and Information Sciences, Yokohama National University, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Andrew Gonzalez
- Department of Biology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Laura E Dee
- Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA
| | - Michel Loreau
- Theoretical and Empirical Ecology Station, CNRS, Moulis, France
| | - Meghan Avolio
- Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA
| | - Jarrett E K Byrnes
- College of Science and Mathematics, University of Massachusetts-Boston, Boston, MA, USA
| | - William Cheung
- Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.,Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Jane Cowles
- Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA
| | - Adam T Clark
- Institute of Biology, University of Graz, Holteigasse 6, 8010 Graz, Austria
| | - Yann Hautier
- Ecology and Biodiversity Group, Department of Biology, Utrecht University, Padualaan 8, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Andrew Hector
- Department of Plant Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Tim Newbold
- Centre for Biodiversity and Environment Research, Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, UK
| | - Charlotte L Outhwaite
- Centre for Biodiversity and Environment Research, Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, UK
| | - Peter B Reich
- Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN 55108 USA.,Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW 2753, Australia.,Institute for Global Change Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.,School for Environment and Sustainability, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
| | - Eric Seabloom
- Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA
| | - Laura Williams
- Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN 55108 USA
| | - Alexandra Wright
- Biological Sciences Department, California State University Los Angeles, 5151 State University Drive, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Forest Isbell
- Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
De Palma A, Hoskins A, Gonzalez RE, Börger L, Newbold T, Sanchez-Ortiz K, Ferrier S, Purvis A. Annual changes in the Biodiversity Intactness Index in tropical and subtropical forest biomes, 2001-2012. Sci Rep 2021; 11:20249. [PMID: 34642362 PMCID: PMC8511124 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-98811-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2019] [Accepted: 09/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Few biodiversity indicators are available that reflect the state of broad-sense biodiversity—rather than of particular taxa—at fine spatial and temporal resolution. One such indicator, the Biodiversity Intactness Index (BII), estimates how the average abundance of the native terrestrial species in a region compares with their abundances in the absence of pronounced human impacts. We produced annual maps of modelled BII at 30-arc-second resolution (roughly 1 km at the equator) across tropical and subtropical forested biomes, by combining annual data on land use, human population density and road networks, and statistical models of how these variables affect overall abundance and compositional similarity of plants, fungi, invertebrates and vertebrates. Across tropical and subtropical biomes, BII fell by an average of 1.9 percentage points between 2001 and 2012, with 81 countries seeing an average reduction and 43 an average increase; the extent of primary forest fell by 3.9% over the same period. We did not find strong relationships between changes in BII and countries’ rates of economic growth over the same period; however, limitations in mapping BII in plantation forests may hinder our ability to identify these relationships. This is the first time temporal change in BII has been estimated across such a large region.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adriana De Palma
- Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, London, SW7 5BD, UK.
| | - Andrew Hoskins
- CSIRO Land and Water, Canberra, ACT, Australia.,CSIRO Health and Biosecurity, Townsville, Qld, Australia
| | - Ricardo E Gonzalez
- Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, Ascot, SL5 7PY, UK
| | - Luca Börger
- Department of Biosciences, University of Swansea, Swansea, SA2 8PP, UK
| | - Tim Newbold
- Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, Centre for Biodiversity and Environment Research, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Katia Sanchez-Ortiz
- Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, London, SW7 5BD, UK.,Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, Ascot, SL5 7PY, UK
| | | | - Andy Purvis
- Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, London, SW7 5BD, UK.,Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, Ascot, SL5 7PY, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Siewert MB, Olofsson J. UAV reveals substantial but heterogeneous effects of herbivores on Arctic vegetation. Sci Rep 2021; 11:19468. [PMID: 34593844 PMCID: PMC8484448 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-98497-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2021] [Accepted: 09/06/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Understanding how herbivores shape plant biomass and distribution is a core challenge in ecology. Yet, the lack of suitable remote sensing technology limits our knowledge of temporal and spatial impacts of mammal herbivores in the Earth system. The regular interannual density fluctuations of voles and lemmings are exceptional with their large reduction of plant biomass in Arctic landscapes during peak years (12-24%) as previously shown at large spatial scales using satellites. This provides evidence that herbivores are important drivers of observed global changes in vegetation productivity. Here, we use a novel approach with repeated unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) flights, to map vegetation impact by rodents, indicating that many important aspects of vegetation dynamics otherwise hidden by the coarse resolution of satellite images, including plant-herbivore interactions, can be revealed using UAVs. We quantify areas impacted by rodents at four complex Arctic landscapes with very high spatial resolution UAV imagery to get a new perspective on how herbivores shape Arctic ecosystems. The area impacted by voles and lemmings is indeed substantial, larger at higher altitude tundra environments, varies between habitats depending on local snow cover and plant community composition, and is heterogeneous even within habitats at submeter scales. Coupling this with spectral reflectance of vegetation (NDVI), we can show that the impact on central ecosystem properties like GPP and biomass is stronger than currently accounted for in Arctic ecosystems. As an emerging technology, UAVs will allow us to better disentangle important information on how herbivores maintain spatial heterogeneity, function and diversity in natural ecosystems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthias B. Siewert
- grid.12650.300000 0001 1034 3451Department of Ecology and Environmental Science, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Johan Olofsson
- grid.12650.300000 0001 1034 3451Department of Ecology and Environmental Science, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Sivel E, Planque B, Lindstrøm U, Yoccoz NG. Multiple configurations and fluctuating trophic control in the Barents Sea food-web. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0254015. [PMID: 34242282 PMCID: PMC8270156 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2020] [Accepted: 06/17/2021] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
The Barents Sea is a subarctic shelf sea which has experienced major changes during the past decades. From ecological time-series, three different food-web configurations, reflecting successive shifts of dominance of pelagic fish, demersal fish, and zooplankton, as well as varying trophic control have been identified in the last decades. This covers a relatively short time-period as available ecological time-series are often relatively short. As we lack information for prior time-periods, we use a chance and necessity model to investigate if there are other possible configurations of the Barents Sea food-web than those observed in the ecological time-series, and if this food-web is characterized by a persistent trophic control. We perform food-web simulations using the Non-Deterministic Network Dynamic model (NDND) for the Barents Sea, identify food-web configurations and compare those to historical reconstructions of food-web dynamics. Biomass configurations fall into four major types and three trophic pathways. Reconstructed data match one of the major biomass configurations but is characterized by a different trophic pathway than most of the simulated configurations. The simulated biomass displays fluctuations between bottom-up and top-down trophic control over time rather than persistent trophic control. Our results show that the configurations we have reconstructed are strongly overlapping with our simulated configurations, though they represent only a subset of the possible configurations of the Barents Sea food-web.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elliot Sivel
- Institute of Marine Research, Ecosystem Processes Group, Fram Centre, Tromsø, Norway
- Department of Arctic and Marine Biology, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
- * E-mail:
| | - Benjamin Planque
- Institute of Marine Research, Ecosystem Processes Group, Fram Centre, Tromsø, Norway
| | - Ulf Lindstrøm
- Institute of Marine Research, Ecosystem Processes Group, Fram Centre, Tromsø, Norway
- Department of Arctic and Marine Biology, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
| | - Nigel G. Yoccoz
- Department of Arctic and Marine Biology, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Chacón-Moreno E, Rodríguez-Morales M, Paredes D, Suárez del Moral P, Albarrán A. Impacts of Global Change on the Spatial Dynamics of Treeline in Venezuelan Andes. Front Ecol Evol 2021. [DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2021.615223] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
The treeline in the Andes is considered an essential ecotone between the Montane forest and Páramo. This treeline in the Venezuelan Andes corresponds with a transitional ecosystem defined as the Páramo forest. In this work, we identify and analyze the impact of climate warming and land transformation as agents altering the Páramo forest ecosystem’s spatial dynamics along the Venezuelan Andes’ altitudinal gradient. We carry out multitemporal studies of 57 years of the land transformation at different landscapes of the Cordillera de Mérida and made a detailed analysis to understand the replacement of the ecosystems potential distribution. We found that the main ecosystem transition is from Páramo to the Páramo forest and from Páramo to the Montane forest. Based on the difference between the current lower Páramo limit and the Forest upper limit for 1952, the treeline border’s displacement is 72.7 m in the 57 years of study, representing ∼12.8 m per decade. These changes are mainly driven by climate warming and are carried out through an ecological process of densification of the woody composition instead of the shrubland structure. We found that Páramo forest ecosystems practically have been replaced by the Pastures and fallow vegetation, and the Crops. We present a synthesis of the transition and displacement of the different ecosystems and vegetation types in the treeline zone. The impact of climate warming and deforestation on the Páramo forest as a representative ecosystem of the treeline shows us that this study is necessary for an integrated global change adaptation plan.
Collapse
|
8
|
Sadchatheeswaran S, Branch GM, Shannon LJ, Moloney CL, Coll M, Robinson TB. Modelling changes in trophic and structural impacts of alien ecosystem engineers on a rocky-shore island. Ecol Modell 2020. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2020.109227] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
|
9
|
Application of machine learning algorithms to identify cryptic reproductive habitats using diverse information sources. Oecologia 2020; 194:283-298. [PMID: 33006076 DOI: 10.1007/s00442-020-04753-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2020] [Accepted: 09/08/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
Information on ecological systems often comes from diverse sources with varied levels of complexity, bias, and uncertainty. Accordingly, analytical techniques continue to evolve that address these challenges to reveal the characteristics of ecological systems and inform conservation actions. We applied multiple statistical learning algorithms (i.e., machine learning) with a range of information sources including fish tracking data, environmental data, and visual surveys to identify potential spawning aggregation sites for a marine fish species, permit (Trachinotus falcatus), in the Florida Keys. Recognizing the potential complementarity and some level of uncertainty in each information source, we applied supervised (classic and conditional random forests; RF) and unsupervised (fuzzy k-means; FKM) algorithms. The two RF models had similar predictive performance, but generated different predictor variable importance structures and spawning site predictions. Unsupervised clustering using FKM identified unique site groupings that were similar to the likely spawning sites identified with RF. The conservation of aggregate spawning fish species depends heavily on the protection of key spawning sites; many of these potential sites were identified here for permit in the Florida Keys, which consisted of relatively deep-water natural and artificial reefs with high mean permit residency periods. The application of multiple machine learning algorithms enabled the integration of diverse information sources to develop models of an ecological system. Faced with increasingly complex and diverse data sources, ecologists, and conservation practitioners should find increasing value in machine learning algorithms, which we discuss here and provide resources to increase accessibility.
Collapse
|
10
|
A guide to ecosystem models and their environmental applications. Nat Ecol Evol 2020; 4:1459-1471. [PMID: 32929239 DOI: 10.1038/s41559-020-01298-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2019] [Accepted: 08/04/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Applied ecology has traditionally approached management problems through a simplified, single-species lens. Repeated failures of single-species management have led us to a new paradigm - managing at the ecosystem level. Ecosystem management involves a complex array of interacting organisms, processes and scientific disciplines. Accounting for interactions, feedback loops and dependencies between ecosystem components is therefore fundamental to understanding and managing ecosystems. We provide an overview of the main types of ecosystem models and their uses, and discuss challenges related to modelling complex ecological systems. Existing modelling approaches typically attempt to do one or more of the following: describe and disentangle ecosystem components and interactions; make predictions about future ecosystem states; and inform decision making by comparing alternative strategies and identifying important uncertainties. Modelling ecosystems is challenging, particularly when balancing the desire to represent many components of an ecosystem with the limitations of available data and the modelling objective. Explicitly considering different forms of uncertainty is therefore a primary concern. We provide some recommended strategies (such as ensemble ecosystem models and multi-model approaches) to aid the explicit consideration of uncertainty while also meeting the challenges of modelling ecosystems.
Collapse
|