Scaling up biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships: the role of environmental heterogeneity in space and time
Patrick L. ThompsonSonia KéfiYuval R. ZelnikLaura E. DeeShaopeng WangClaire de MazancourtMichel LoreauAndrew Gonzalez
37
Citation
43
Reference
10
Related Paper
Citation Trend
Abstract:
The biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (BEF) relationship is expected to be scale-dependent. The autocorrelation of environmental heterogeneity is hypothesized to explain this scale dependence because it influences how quickly biodiversity accumulates over space or time. However, this link has yet to be demonstrated in a formal model. Here, we use a Lotka-Volterra competition model to simulate community dynamics when environmental conditions vary across either space or time. Species differ in their optimal environmental conditions, which results in turnover in community composition. We vary biodiversity by modelling communities with different sized regional species pools and ask how the amount of biomass per unit area depends on the number of species present, and the spatial or temporal scale at which it is measured. We find that more biodiversity is required to maintain functioning at larger temporal and spatial scales. The number of species required increases quickly when environmental autocorrelation is low, and slowly when autocorrelation is high. Both spatial and temporal environmental heterogeneity lead to scale dependence in BEF, but autocorrelation has larger impacts when environmental change is temporal. These findings show how the biodiversity required to maintain functioning is expected to increase over space and time.Keywords:
Spatial heterogeneity
Temporal scales
Organisms usually benefit from heterogeneous conditions, but, by doing so, may reduce the degree of heterogeneity. The question therefore arises how heterogeneity is maintained. We investigated within-year spatiotemporal patterns in a monospecific stand of a submerged plant (fennel pondweed, Potamogeton pectinatus), with the novelty that we distinguished between different forms of heterogeneity: spatial variance (the frequency distribution of densities) and spatial pattern (the spatial distribution of densities). We repeatedly measured plant biomass that was affected by swan predation, winter mortality, and summer regrowth. Spatial variance was enhanced mostly by swan foraging, despite the fact that swans appear to exploit patches to the same threshold level. Spatial pattern, which had vanished after swan foraging, reestablished due to spatial pattern in winter mortality and was further enhanced by plant regrowth. We found that variance and pattern each have their own temporal dynamics and are maintained by different biological processes. We therefore advocate that it is pivotal to distinguish between variance and pattern in the study of spatial heterogeneity.
Persistence (discontinuity)
Cite
Citations (12)
The dynamic equilibrium of aquatic ecosystems is the result of the interaction between multi-scale biological process and non-biological process,and it is easy to be disturbed.Based on an analysis of the interference factors and composition of the aquatic ecosystems,the ecosystems were classified into 4 scales from the angle of engineering,i.e.t he micro-scale,the small-scale,the medium-scale,and the macro-scale,and the temporal and spatial scales corresponding to the 4 scales were generalized.Furthermore,the relationships between the different scales were discussed,and the application and effectiveness of the temporal and spatial scales in ecological rehabilitation were introduced.
Temporal scales
Cite
Citations (1)
Natural disturbances affect spatial and temporal heterogeneity in plant communities, but effects vary depending on type of disturbance and scale of analysis. In this study, we examined the effects of fire frequency (1-, 4-, and 20-yr intervals) and grazing by bison on spatial and temporal heterogeneity in species composition in tallgrass prairie plant communities. Compositional heterogeneity was estimated at 10-, 50-, and 200-m2 scales. For each measurement scale, we used the average Euclidean Distance (ED) between samples within a year (2000) to measure spatial heterogeneity and between all time steps (1993–2000) for each sample to measure temporal heterogeneity. The main effects of fire and grazing were scale independent. Spatial and temporal heterogeneity were lowest on annually burned sites and highest on infrequently burned (20-yr) sites at all scales. Grazing reduced spatial heterogeneity and increased temporal heterogeneity at all scales. The rate of community change over time decreased as fire frequency increased at all scales, whereas grazing had no effect on rate of community change over time at any spatial scale. The interactive effects of fire and grazing on spatial and temporal heterogeneity differed with scale. At the 10-m2 scale, grazing increased spatial heterogeneity in annually burned grassland but decreased heterogeneity in less frequently burned areas. At the 50-m2 scale, grazing decreased spatial heterogeneity on 4-yr burns but had no effect at other fire frequencies. At the 10-m2 scale, grazing increased temporal heterogeneity only on 1- and 20-yr burn sites. Our results show that the individual effects of fire and grazing on spatial and temporal heterogeneity in mesic prairie are scale independent, but the interactive effects of these disturbances on community heterogeneity change with scale of measurement. These patterns reflect the homogenizing impact of fire at all spatial scales, and the different frequency, intensity, and scale of patch grazing by bison in frequently burned vs. infrequently burned areas.
Spatial heterogeneity
Cite
Citations (201)
It has recently been proposed that losses in farmland habitat heterogeneity may have been a primary driver of the profound declines exhibited by many farmland bird species in recent decades. However, it has yet to be demonstrated which facets of heterogeneity and what spatial scales are most important for birds. Here we analyse the relationship between abundance and features of landscape heterogeneity at three spatial scales (1, 9 and 25 km 2 ) for 32 bird species commonly associated with farmland. Heterogeneity was quantified using three contrasting indices reflecting 1) the spatial mixing of land uses, 2) variation in field sizes and 3) the density of field boundaries. The spatial mixing of land‐uses explained, on average, the most variation in, and was most likely to be positively associated with, abundance at all spatial scales. The majority of species (66–75%, depending on the spatial scale) were more common in heterogeneous landscapes overall; however, migrants, those under a high level of conservation concern and farmland specialist species tended to be less abundant in more heterogeneous landscapes at all scales. Ground‐nesting species were also more likely to be found in more homogeneous habitats than non‐ground‐nesters, but only at the finest spatial scale. Relationships between abundance and heterogeneity were generally consistent across spatial scales; however, species of high conservation concern had more variable associations compared with other species. These results highlight a potential role for farmland habitat heterogeneity in determining the abundance of many farmland species but suggest that population responses to an increase in heterogeneity would not be unanimously positive and would probably have negative impacts on some species, notably those that are already threatened.
Spatial heterogeneity
Breeding bird survey
Cite
Citations (79)
Spatial heterogeneity
Point pattern analysis
Cite
Citations (66)
Abstract Spatial patterns are ubiquitous in nature, and ecological systems exhibit patchiness (heterogeneity) across a range of spatial and temporal scales. Landscape ecology is explicitly concerned with understanding how scale affects the measurement of heterogeneity and the scale(s) at which spatial pattern is important for ecological phenomena. Patterns and processes measured at fine spatial scales and over short time periods are unlikely to behave similarly at broader scales and extended time periods. An understanding of pattern-process linkages, a major research focus in landscape ecology, thus requires an understanding of how patterns change with scale, spatially and temporally. The development of methods for extrapolating information across scales is necessary for predicting how landscapes will change over time as well as for ecological forecasting. This chapter explores how scaling issues affect ecological investigations, discusses problems in identifying the correct scale for research, and outlines when and how ecological data can be extrapolated.
Temporal scales
Cite
Citations (2)
The functional relationship between habitat utilization and landscape spatial heterogeneity is fundamental to understanding the spatial nature of animal distribution across scales. Although structural and functional properties of landscape spatial heterogeneity can have different consequences for animal species, few studies have explicitly considered both forms of heterogeneity, partly due to the lack of general methods for direct assessment of scale‐specific associations between variables. We present a wavelet‐based approach to evaluate the roles of structural and functional landscape spatial heterogeneity in animal space use at multiple spatial scales. As a case study, we examined scale‐specific space use patterns of American black bears Ursus americanus in response to structural and functional spatial heterogeneity as well as spatial patterns of vegetation age‐classes in a Canadian boreal forest. We found strong differences in the effects of structural and functional spatial heterogeneity and the scales at which they are associated with the patterns of habitat use by black bears. Functional heterogeneity alone affected space use at 800 and 1600‐m scales, but had significant effects when interacting with structural heterogeneity at 400, 800, and 1600‐m scales. Compared with male bears, female black bears were most sensitive to patterns of forage abundance at intermediate scales, or more specifically, in young and regenerating forests that provide abundant soft mast in boreal forests. Our study highlights the importance of accounting for scale‐dependent properties of (structural and functional) spatial heterogeneity in assessing the ecological effects of landscape components and the effectiveness of the wavelet transform technique in identifying such scale‐specific relationships.
Spatial heterogeneity
Temporal scales
Cite
Citations (11)
Spatial heterogeneity
Steppe
Cite
Citations (28)
Spatial heterogeneity
Cite
Citations (872)
Abstract Ecology has a rich history of studying ecosystem dynamics across time and space that has been motivated by both practical management needs and the need to develop basic ideas about pattern and process in nature. In situations in which both spatial and temporal observations are available, similarities in temporal behavior among sites (i.e., synchrony) provide a means of understanding underlying processes that create patterns over space and time. We used pattern analysis algorithms and data spanning 22–25 yr from 601 lakes to ask three questions: What are the temporal patterns of lake water clarity at sub‐continental scales? What are the spatial patterns (i.e., geography) of synchrony for lake water clarity? And, what are the drivers of spatial and temporal patterns in lake water clarity? We found that the synchrony of water clarity among lakes is not spatially structured at sub‐continental scales. Our results also provide strong evidence that the drivers related to spatial patterns in water clarity are not related to the temporal patterns of water clarity. This analysis of long‐term patterns of water clarity and possible drivers contributes to understanding of broad‐scale spatial patterns in the geography of synchrony and complex relationships between spatial and temporal patterns across ecosystems.
CLARITY
Temporal scales
Cite
Citations (27)