* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Community Ecology - Home
Unified neutral theory of biodiversity wikipedia , lookup
Restoration ecology wikipedia , lookup
Occupancy–abundance relationship wikipedia , lookup
Introduced species wikipedia , lookup
Storage effect wikipedia , lookup
Ecological fitting wikipedia , lookup
Human impact on the nitrogen cycle wikipedia , lookup
Biological Dynamics of Forest Fragments Project wikipedia , lookup
Biodiversity action plan wikipedia , lookup
Overexploitation wikipedia , lookup
Reconciliation ecology wikipedia , lookup
Ecological succession wikipedia , lookup
Habitat conservation wikipedia , lookup
Biogeography wikipedia , lookup
Latitudinal gradients in species diversity wikipedia , lookup
Renewable resource wikipedia , lookup
Predation-Amensalism Summary • Gause did early predator-prey experiments, and concluded that cycles in nature result from constant migration, because he couldn’t get coexistence in his experiments. • Huffaker found habitat complexity allowed coexistence • Holling studied Functional response – relationship between prey density and the rate at which an individual predator consumes prey and Numerical response- increase in predator numbers with increases in prey abundance • Predation-Amensalism Summary • 3 types of functional response curves, I, II, and III • Search image- Only when the prey population increases above some threshold level does the predator form a search image and begin to recognize that prey item as a valuable food source. The predator then focuses on and exploits that food source heavily • Prudent predation occurs without altruism • Predation can cause: changes in size distribution; both decreases and increases in diversity; morphological modifications (spines, mimicry, crypsis) Predation-Amensalism Summary • Paine’s exp. led to keystone species concept • Optimal foraging-comcerns types of feeding behaviors that maximize food (energy( intake rate • Inducible defenses are brought on by predation threat and serve to deter predators • Indirect effects of predation: sub-lethal predation; TMII; trophic cascades • Parasites are either ecto- or endo-parasites Predation-Amensalism Summary • Parasites exploit host behavior to maximize transmission • Host defenses are behavioral, structural or immunological • Herbivory is the first step in the transfer of energy in food webs; provides for the cycling of nutrients; and can affect the productivity and structure of plant communities. It increases prevalence of species with: – Low nutritive value (low nitrogen) – Chemical Defenses (secondary compounds) – Structural Defenses (calcareous skeletons) – Shifts in functional groups (from fast to slow growers) Predation-Amensalism Summary • Secondary compounds can deter herbivores but entail tradeoffs in energy allocation • Mutualisms- usually have one species providing nutrition while the other provides protection or cleaning services. Can be obligatory or facultative • Mutualisms common in tropics and likely evolved from host-parasite relationships • Commensalism and trophic amensalism less common Review Questions Community Ecology • A community is a group of interacting populations, all living in the same place at the same time – the focus is on the interactions between species or populations including competition, predation , succession, invasion, mutualism, predation, etc. Community Structure and Change • Community Structure - a description of the community members (species list) and their relative abundances • Community Dynamics - the changes that occur over time and space in a community. (Even though communities have an underlying structure, the structure may change over time Emergent Properties • Properties not predictable from study of component populations • Only apparent at level of community Why is this important? Appropriate unit of study: - If the community is more than the sum of its parts, then we must study the entire community (holistic approach) - If not then entire picture can be put together from individual pieces (reductionist approach) The Study of Ecological Communities • Properties & patterns – Diversity (Number of species) – Species’ relative abundances – Morphology – Succession • Processes – Disturbances – Trophic interactions – Competition – Mutualism – Indirect effects Two Views on Communities • Community as a superorganism (equilibrium community, Clements) • Species not replaceable • Species need one another to survive • Community as a group of individual species (non-equilibrium community, Gleason) • Species are replaceable • Random association of species Community Dynamics: Succession • Succession - The change in numbers and kinds of organisms in an area leading to a stable (climax) community. • Pioneer community - the first community to develop in a successional sequence • Sere - any successional community between pioneer and climax community Types of Succession 1. Primary – situation where barren substrate is available for habitation (inorganic substrates= lava flows/ spreading centers 2. Secondary – occurs in areas where communities have previously existed (after fires or hurricane; much more rapid) Succession in community traits increasing size and longevity of organisms shift from predominantly "r-selected" to predominantly "K-selected" species increasing biomass increasing independence of physical/chemical environment Succession in community traits (2) decreasing rate of change increasing species diversity and complexity of physical and trophic structures increasing habitat modification and buffering of environmental extremes increasing complexity of energy and nutrient flows increasingly closed system re-cycling of organic and inorganic materials Opposing Views of Communities Superorganism View Individualistic View (Clements, 1916) (Gleason, 1925) - tightly evolved, interacting - randomly assembled - functions as a single organism - Similar resource requirements - developmental process (succession) - homeostasis (self maintaining – stable) - underlying “balance of nature” Types of Species Early successional Late Successional - good colonizers - rapid growth - short lived (r-selected) -poor colonizers - slow growth - long lived (k-selected) Early Late Under Equilibrium Models • Community returns to same position after disturbance • At equilibrium, processes that structure the community produce no net change Equilibrium Theory Single stable state Multiple stable states Outcomes of integrated view • Equilibrium assumed (not tested) • Explained succession • Super-organism concept widely accepted • Dominated community ecology until the 1950’s and beyond Non-equilibrium models • Disturbance is the norm rather than the exception • Disturbed patches provide opportunities for colonization by dispersive species • Patchiness promotes diversity on a larger scale Evidence for each view: • Superorganism: • remove plants or autotrophs, the community will disappear • mutualisms and symbiotic relationships are common (example: herbivore gut bacteria) • Non-equilibrium • high-level consumers can sometimes be removed without major effects on community • disturbances often play a role in determining community structure; these are random Alternative succession models Connell and Slatyer (1977) – outlined 3 models: 1. Facilitation – Clementsian succession 2. Tolerance 3. Inhibition Based on effect of initial spp. on subsequent spp. Facilitation Model Early Stand Recruitment E L E Growth E E E Facilitation Disturbance Recruitment E L L L L L L Late Successionals only Mortality L E E L Mixed Stand L Tolerance Model Mixed Stand Recruitment E L L Growth E L L Tolerance Recruitment Disturbance E E L L L L L L L Late Successionals only Mortality L E L E Inhibition Model Mixed Stand Recruitment E L L Growth E L E L L L L L L Late Successionals only Mortality L Inhibition Recruitment Disturbance E L E L E Succession •Can occur without invoking the existence of a “Super-organism” •Sequential replacement a consequence of individual species properties Physical disturbance What are the components of disturbance? • The frequency of a disturbance • The intensity of the disturbance • The timing of the disturbance – Influences the availability of larvae to recolonize the disturbed area Intermediate Disturbance Hypothesis (Connell 1972) • Disturbance (e.g., tree falls, storms) creates patchiness and new space to be colonized •Patchwork is created across the landscape with - early and late successional species - inferior and superior competitors This theory is a non-equilibrium view of how natural communities are structured because landscape is a patchwork of different stages of succession. Intermediate Disturbance Hypothesis (2) Disturbance is critically important in structuring communities because it can prevent competitively dominant species from excluding others. Weak/infrequent disturbances are insufficient to prevent competitive exclusion Intense/frequent disturbances exclude species sensitive to disturbance Highest diversity might therefore be expected at intermediate frequency or intensities of disturbance Intermediate Disturbance Hypothesis (Connell) Top-down vs. bottom-up control Community structure could be controlled from the bottom-up by nutrients: predators herbivores community structure can be changed by manipulating the lower levels autotrophs nutrients numbers of autotrophs are limited by mineral nutrients Community structure could be controlled top-down by predators (trophic cascade model) predicts a series of +/- effects if upper levels are manipulated predators herbivores autotrophs nutrients numbers of herbivores are controlled by predators Trophic cascades Reintroduction and protection of otters has reduced urchin barrens Predation by orcas has increased urchin barrens Species-area Relationships Known for a long time that there is a relationship between the size of an island and the number of species present on the island. This relationship, which exists for all taxa studied to date, whether on land or in the sea, is known as the Species-area Relationship. Species-area relationships • Species-area curve - the larger the geographic area, the greater the number of species • Larger areas have more diverse habitat • This can be used to predict how habitat loss may affect key species fig 53.25 Species Area Relationships • As a rule of thumb for every 10x increase in habitat area you can expect a doubling in species number • this relationship is best described by the regression formula S=cAz – where: S = the number of species, c= a constant measuring the number of species/unit area, A= habitat area, and z is another constant measuring the shape of the line relating S & A Often linearized • ln (S ) = ln (c ) + z ln (A ) – z is now the slope – ln (c ) is now the intercept ln (S ) ln (A ) Top: Species-area curve for corals in coral reefs on Rasdu Atoll, Maldives, and on Heron Island, Great Barrier Reef. Adapted from Scheer (1978). Bottom: Relation of number of species and number of individuals in a sample, based on twenty samples of benthic invertebrates collected from Buzzards Bay, Why do Species-Area Relationships Exist? Habitat heterogeneity - as area increases so will habitat number, and species number Area per se - extinction rates will go down with increasing area as populations increase Passive sampling - as area increases there is a larger “target for immigrants to “hit” – Disturbance - smaller areas will be subject to more disturbance (DI mortality) and species number will be frequently “set back” Importance of Islands in Ecology Islands can provide opportunities for natural experiments because different islands in an archipelago can have different species of potential competitors, or lack certain predators. Thus, the effects of processes such as competition and predation can be easily studied on islands. Islands are also widespread, even on land, because any isolated patch of habitat is effectively an island (e.g., lakes, coral reefs, kelp beds) for the species living there. Island Biogeography Because of the generality of the species-area relationship, Preston (1962) and MacArthur & Wilson (1963, 1967) proposed that islands were supporting as many species as possible. Since islands continuously receive immigrants, yet species number stays constant, there must be a balance between immigration and extinction. Preston and MacArthur & Wilson proposed that the number of species on an island is in a dynamic equilibrium between immigration and extinction. Island Biogeography (MacArthur and Wilson, 1960’s) The number of species on an island is in a dynamic equilibrium determined by imm. and ext. rates • immigration rate decreases with Sp. N since it becomes more likely that immigrants will not be new species • extinction rate increases with Sp. N because of greater incidence of competitive exclusion • equilibrium reached when immigration and extinction rates are equal • equilibrium number is correlated with area and distance from mainland fig 53.26a Island Biogeography (2) This “dynamic equilibrium” between immigration and extinction was developed into a quantitative theory that was termed The Theory of Island Biogeography. The theory of Island Biogeography has two major points: the area and distance effects. Area effect B A Mainland Area Effect Island size influences immigration and extinction rates because…… • larger islands are more likely to be found by immigrants which increases immigration rate • organisms are less likely to go extinct on larger islands because there is more available habitat • equilibrium number is higher on larger islands because of both higher immigration and lower extinction fig 53.26b B Distance effect A Mainland Distance Effect Distance from the mainland influences immigration and extinction rates • given islands of the same size, immigration will be higher on near islands since they are more likely to be found by immigrants • extinction rates the same (same size islands) • equilibrium number is higher on near islands because of higher immigration fig 53.26c Island biogeography is a simple model and we must also take into account abiotic disturbance, adaptive changes, and speciation events Latitudinal species richness gradients • Species richness of many taxa declines from equator to poles Land birds • Why? NOT CLEAR Could be evolutionary or ecological factors, or both? fig 53.23 Diversity along geographical gradients. Corals from the Great Barrier Reef; copepods from the Pacific; remaining data from all oceans. After Thorson (1957) and Fischer (1970). Factors Proposed to Explain Latitudinal Diversity Gradients • History (more time permits more speciation) • Spatial Heterogeneity (more complex habitats provide more niches and permit more species to exist) • Competition (competition favors reduced niche breadth, but competition can also eliminate species!) • Predation (predation retards competitive exclusion) Factors Proposed to Explain Latitudinal Diversity Gradients(2) • Climate (climatically favorable conditions allow more species to co-exist) • Climate Stability (stable climates allow specialization to occur) • Productivity (Diversity is limited by the amount of energy that can be partitioned) • Disturbance (moderate disturbance retards competitive exclusion= intermediate disturbance hypothesis) Recent Explanations for Latitudinal Diversity Gradients increased area of the tropics increased effective evolutionary time due to shorter generation times in the tropics The world’s tropical lands cover about four times the area s the world’s second largest biome, the tundra. Tropical oceans also cover more surface than oceans in other climate zones. From Rosenzweig (1992). Island Biogeography and Conservation In many areas, (1) the total area of natural habitats is shrinking, and (2) formerly contiguous habitats are being fragmented. In island biogeographic terms, this means that island areas are shrinking and large islands are being broken into archipelagos. Island Biogeography and Conservation (2) Island biogeographic theory allows predictions to be made about the effects of reducing and fragmenting habitats, and to make recommendations for conservation Areas of application: (1) How large should preserves be? (2)How does isolation affect species number in reserves? (3) What kinds of species will survive if area is reduced? Application of biogeographic principles to the design of nature preserves. In each pair of figures the design on the left is preferred over that on the right, even though both incorporate the same area. The concepts are: A, a continuous reserve is better than a fragmented one; B, the ratio of area to perimeter should be maximized; C, distance between refuges should be minimized; and D, dispersal corridors should be provided between fragments. (from Ecology and Evolution of Communities, ed. M. L. Cody and J. M. Diamond, 1975 . Ecosystems Ecology Food Chains • The energy flow from one trophic level to the other is the food chain • A food chain involves one type of organism at each trophic level – – – – – Producers (Autotrophs) Primary Consumers – eat producers Secondary Consumers – eat the primary consumers Tertiary Consumers – eat the secondary consumers Decomposers – bacteria and fungi that break down dead organisms and recycle materials What is a Food Web? • Describes which organisms in communities eat other kinds of organisms • Community food web is a description of feeding habits of a set of organisms based on taxonomy, location or other criteria • Webs were derived from natural History approaches to describing community structure What is a Food Web (2)? • Food webs portray flows of matter and energy within the community • Web omits some information about community properties – e.g., minor energy flows, constraints on predation, population dynamics Food Webs: Methods 1. Identify component species 2. Sample to determine who is eating whom 3. Sampling and gut analysis to quantify frequency of encounters 4. Exclosures and removals of species to determine net effects 5. Stable isotopes 6. Mathematical models Descriptive Food Webs Interaction or functional food webs depict the most influential link or dynamic in the community What is a Food Web (cont.): Complexity meets reality • Fallacy of linear food chains as a adequate description of natural food webs – Food webs are reticulate – Discrete homogeneous trophic levels an abstraction or an idealism – omnivory is rampant – ontogenetic diet shifts (sometimes called life history omnivory) – environmental diet shifts – spatial & temporal heterogeneity in diet What is a food web (cont.)? • Modern Approaches to Food Web Analysis – Connectivity relationships – Importance of predators and interaction strength in altering community composition and dynamics Are trophic levels useful? • Even if organisms are not strict herbivores, primary carnivores, etc., as long as they are mostly feeding at one trophic level, the concept can have value (e.g., trophic cascade concept). Energy Flows Respiration, maintenance Gross primary production (GPP) Net primary production (NPP) Measuring NPP in nature • Units: energy per unit area per year – kJ per m2 per yr, or W per m2 • 1 g C assimilated = 39 kJ energy – can use plant biomass or CO2 uptake as an estimate of energy • Ignoring roots – annual aboveground net productivity (AANP), a.k.a., net aboveground primary productivity (NAPP) Transfer of energy across trophic levels • All energy used by higher trophic levels originates with primary producers • With each step in the food chain, 80-95% of energy is lost Primary productivity limits secondary productivity Consumption efficiency determines pathways of energy flow through ecosystem Energy allocation Ecological efficiency – proportion of the biomass of one trophic levels transformed into biomass at the next higher trophic level • For heterotrophs, ecological efficiencies average 5-20% • Why? – indigestible tissues • hair, feathers, insect exoskeletons, cartilage, bone • cellulose, lignin – maintenance costs – loss of energy as heat (entropy) • Exploitation efficiency – proportion of production on one trophic level consumed by the next higher level – usually less than 100% • Not all food consumed by heterotrophs is transformed into biomass Respiration, maintenance Gross primary production (GPP) Net primary production (NPP) Exploitation efficiency = Ingestion/NPP Ingestion by herbivores Gross production efficiency = (biomass production)/(ingested energy) – 1-5% for warm-blooded animals – 5-15% for insects – up to 30% for aquatic animals Respiration, maintenance Gross primary production (GPP) Net primary production (NPP) Gross production efficiency= Growth/Ingestion Ingestion by herbivores Indigestible Respiration, maintenance Assimilation Growth • Amount of energy actually absorbed from food is assimilated energy • Assimilation efficiency – proportion of ingested energy actually absorbed by the body – – – – – seeds – 80% young vegetation – 60-70% grazing/browsing – 30-40% wood – 15% animals – 60-90% Respiration, maintenance Gross primary production (GPP) Net primary production (NPP) Assimilation efficiency = Assimilation/Ingestion Ingestion by herbivores Indigestible Assimilation • Growth and reproduction in heterotrophs adds biomass • Net production efficiency = (biomass production)/(assimilated energy) – the proportion of energy not used for maintenance and not lost as heat – birds: 1% – small mammals: 6% – cold-blooded animals: 75% • For plants, net production efficiency = NPP/GPP – fast-growing temperate plants – 75-85% – tropical species – 40-60% Respiration, maintenance Gross primary production (GPP) Net primary production (NPP) Net Production Efficiency = Growth/Assimilation Ingestion by herbivores Indigestible Respiration, maintenance Assimilation Growth Respiration, maintenance Decomposition Gross primary production (GPP) Net primary production (NPP) Ingestion by herbivores Indigestible Respiration, maintenance Assimilation Growth Respiration, maintenance Decomposition Gross primary production (GPP) Net primary production (NPP) Ingestion by herbivores Indigestible Respiration, maintenance Assimilation Ingestion by predators Growth Detritus (dead stuff) • Assimilation efficiency of herbivores is only 30-70% – most plant tissue is not digested by animals and ends up as detritus • Two independent food chains – herbivores • most important in plankton communities – detritivores • terrestrial communities • Residence time – average time that energy spends on one trophic level = (energy stored in biomass)/(net productivity) • Biomass accumulation ratio – residence time based on biomass rather than energy = (biomass)/(rate of biomass production) Food Webs • A pyramid of biomass is the amount of energy, fixed in biomass, at different trophic levels at a given point in time • The energy available to any trophic level is limited by the energy stored in the level below. • Because energy is lost in the transfer between levels, there is successively less total energy at higher trophic levels. Food Webs in the Ocean • In the oceans the total amount of biomass in algae is usually small. A pyramid of biomass for the oceans can appear inverted • However, a pyramid of energy, which shows rates of production rather than biomass, must have the pyramid shape. Algae can double in days, while zooplankton might double in months, and fish might only reproduce once a year. Thus, a pyramid of energy takes into account turnover rate, and can never be inverted. Decomposition and Mineralization • Most material is derived from plants • Involves: • Release of chemical energy • Mineralization (= organic --> inorganic) • Note immobilization = reverse of mineralization • Net mineralization rate = mineralization immobilization Terrestrial communities: Nutrient sources • • • • Weathering of rock (K, P, Ca and many others) Fixation of CO2 (photosynthesis) and N2 Dryfall (particles in the atmosphere) Wetfall (snow & rain); contains – Oxides of S, N – Aerosols • particles high in Na, Mg, Cl, S • produced by evaporation of droplets – Dust particles from fires, volcanoes • Ca, K, S Terrestrial communities: Nutrient losses • Release to atmosphere – – – – CO2 from respiration Volatile hydrocarbons from leaves Aerosols NH3 (decomposition), N2 (denitrification) • Loss in streamflow – Dissolved nutrients – Particles Oceans • • No outflow Detritus sinks --> mineralization --> nutrients end up 1. Being carried back to surface in upwelling currents, o 2. Trapped in bottom sediments (e.g., phosphorus: 1% lost to sediment with each cycling) CARBON CYCLE 4 PROCESSES MOVE CARBON THROUGH ITS CYCLE: CO2 1) Biological 2) Geochemical 3) Mixed biochemical 4) Human Activity CO2 NITROGEN CYCLE N2 in Atmosphere Nitrogen-containing nutrients include: 1) Ammonia (NH3) 2) Nitrate (NO3-) 3) Nitrite (NO2-) 4) ORGANISMS NEED NITROGEN TO MAKE AMINO ACIDS FOR BUILDING PROTEINS!!! N03NH3 & N02- The nitrogen cycle PHOSPHORUS CYCLE PHOSPHORUS FORMS PART OF IMPORTANT LIFE-SUSTAINING MOLECULES (ex. DNA & RNA) The phosphorus cycle We’re in the Driver’s Seat - Human Activities Dominate Many Biogeochemical Cycles Disturbance simplified • The greater the disturbance the more habitat that will be opened up Factors Hypothesized to Influence Biodiversity (Factor/ Rationale) Factor Rationale 1. History More time permits more complete colonization and the evolution of new species 2. Spatial heterogeneity Physically or biologically complex habitats furnish more niches 3. Competition a. Competition favors reduced niche breadth b. Competitive exclusion eliminates species 4. Predation Predation retards competitive exclusion 5. Climate Climatically favorable conditions permit more species 6. Climatic variability Stability permits specialization 7. Productivity Richness is limited by the partitioning of production among species 8. Disturbance Moderate disturbance retards competitive exclusion Source: Modified after Pianka (1988) and Currie (1991). Time 0 Disturbance opens space; slate wiped clean Time 1 Only certain species can establish themselves in open space; Opportunists, Fugitives, Weeds Time 2 First colonists modify environment so it becomes less suitable for their further recruitment but more suitable for other species Time 3 Process continues until residents no longer facilitate recruitment of other species Model FACILITATION No special requirements for first colonizers First colonists make environment less suitable for their own further recruitment, but this has little or no effect on other species First colonists make environment less suitable for all subsequent species Process continues until no species can invade and grow in presence of residents First colonists continue to hold space and exclude all others (First Come, First Served) TOLERANCE INHIBITION Tests of the Island Biogeographic Theory Lots of small scale colonization studies were consistent with the Theory Best know test is the “million dollar experiment” of Simberloff and Wilson Although the results of this study continue to be cited in support of the Theory, Simberloff says they only provide weak support. Tests of Island Biogeographic Theory (2) This was because many of his extinctions were found to be transients that could not survive on his mangrove islands, or species that visited the islands as part of a larger range (e.g., wasps). Thus, much of the measured turnover was “pseudoturnover”. He concluded that the Theory still needed verification, as have others since then. Insect recolonization of four defaunated mangrove islands. The y axis indicates the predefaunation species richness of each island. Most of the islands reached an equilibrium species number after 250 days that was approximately the same as the initial richness. (From Simberloff and Wilson 1969.) F.E. Clements (1916, 1936) idea of succession • • • • Succession Sere Climax Ecosystem = superorganism Succession b A b Early Colonizing c B c Mid Mixed Time c C Late Climax c Energy flow through ecosystems • Energy transfer between trophic levels is not 100% efficient, and energy is lost as it passes up a food chain. • Herbivores eat a small proportion of total plant biomass; they also use only a small proportion of plant material consumed for their growth. The rest is lost in feces or respiration • Thus, less energy is available for the next trophic levels Trophic Basis of Production • Assimilation efficiency varies with resource – – – – – – 10% for vascular plant detritus 30% for diatoms and filamentous algae 50% for fungi 70% for animals 50% for microbes (bacteria and protozoans) 27% for amorphous detritus • Net Production Efficiency production/assimilation ~ 40% Marine Ecology: Food Webs • Ecological efficiency is the energy supply available to trophic level N + 1, divided by the energy consumed by trophic level N. You might think of it as the efficiency of copepods at converting plants into fish food. • In general, only about 10% of the energy consumed by one level is available to the next.=, but this can vary substantially. • Difficult to measure so scientists focus on measures of assimilation efficiency for selected groups of animals. Respiration, maintenance Decomposition Gross primary production (GPP) Net primary production (NPP) Ecological Efficiency = Biomass (higher level)/ Biomass (lower level) Ingestion by herbivores Indigestible Respiration, maintenance Assimilation Growth