Microbial Contributions to Biodiversity in Deserts

Author(s):  
Peter M. Groffman ◽  
Moshe Shachak

The number of species living in the soil may well represent the largest reservoir of biodiversity on earth (Giller 1996, Wardle and Giller 1996, Service 1997). Five thousand microbial species have been described and identified (Amann and Kuhl 1998), but the actual number of species may be greater than 1 million (American Society for Microbiology 1994), larger even than the number of insect species (Service 1997). Over the last 10 to 15 years, interest in soil biodiversity has soared, driven by advances in molecular techniques that allow for identification and analysis of soil microbes, many of which are difficult to extract and culture (Kennedy and Gewin 1997). However, the factors that control soil microbial biodiversity and the links between soil biodiversity and ecosystem function are still unclear (Beare et al. 1995, Schimel 1995, Freckman et al. 1997, Brussard et al. 1997, Wall and Moore 1999). Soil may represent an excellent venue for exploring links between biodiversity and ecosystem function. The vast numbers of species in soil and methodological problems have long necessitated a functional approach in soil studies. As a result, soil functions important to organic matter degradation, nutrient cycling, water quality, and air chemistry are well studied (Groffman and Bohlen 1999). As our knowledge of soil biodiversity increases, this information may provide a strong basis for evaluating links between biodiversity and these functions. Evaluating functional diversity of soil communities requires considering how microbes interact with plants and soil fauna to produce patterns of ecosystem processes (Wall and Moore 1999). These interactions vary within and between ecosystems (i.e., across landscapes). Throughout this book, we suggest that the science of biodiversity must consider links to ecosystem processes and interactions with landscape diversity (Shachak et al. this volume). The need for these links is particularly clear when considering soil biodiversity. There have been relatively few studies of microbial processes in desert soils, and very little analysis of desert soil biodiversity (Parker et al. 1984, Schlesinger et al. 1987, Peterjohn 1991, Fließbach et al. 1994, Zaady et al. 1996a,b, Steinberger et al. 1999).

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos A. Guerra ◽  
Anna Heintz-Buschart ◽  
Johannes Sikorski ◽  
Antonis Chatzinotas ◽  
Nathaly Guerrero-Ramírez ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos A. Guerra ◽  
Anna Heintz-Buschart ◽  
Johannes Sikorski ◽  
Antonis Chatzinotas ◽  
Nathaly Guerrero-Ramírez ◽  
...  

AbstractSoils harbor a substantial fraction of the world’s biodiversity, contributing to many crucial ecosystem functions. It is thus essential to identify general macroecological patterns related to the distribution and functioning of soil organisms to support their conservation and governance. Here we identify and characterize the existing gaps in soil biodiversity and ecosystem function data across soil macroecological studies and >11,000 sampling sites. These include significant spatial, environmental, taxonomic, and functional gaps, and an almost complete absence of temporally explicit data. We also identify the limitations of soil macroecological studies to explore general patterns in soil biodiversity-ecosystem functioning relationships, with only 0.6% of all sampling sites having a non-systematic coverage of both biodiversity and function datasets. Based on this information, we provide clear priorities to support and expand soil macroecological research.


2022 ◽  
Vol 169 ◽  
pp. 104209
Author(s):  
Jonas Inkotte ◽  
Barbara Bomfim ◽  
Sarah Camelo da Silva ◽  
Marco Bruno Xavier Valadão ◽  
Márcio Gonçalves da Rosa ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Peter Contos ◽  
Jennifer Wood ◽  
Nicholas Murphy ◽  
Heloise Gibb

1. Restoration ecology has historically focused on reconstructing communities of highly visible taxa whilst less visible taxa, such as invertebrates and microbes, are ignored. This is problematic as invertebrates and microbes make up the vast bulk of biodiversity and drive many key ecosystem processes, yet they are rarely actively reintroduced following restoration, potentially limiting ecosystem function and biodiversity in these areas. 2. In this review, we discuss the current (limited) incorporation of invertebrates and microbes in restoration and rewilding projects. We argue that these groups should be actively rewilded during restoration to improve biodiversity and ecosystem function outcomes and highlight how they can be used to greater effect in the future. For example, invertebrates and microbes are easily manipulated, meaning whole communities can potentially be rewilded through habitat transplants in a practice that we refer to as “whole-of-community” rewilding. 3. We provide a framework for whole-of-community rewilding and describe empirical case studies as practical applications of this under-researched restoration tool that land managers can use to improve restoration outcomes. 4. We hope this new perspective on whole-of-community restoration will promote applied research into restoration that incorporates all biota, irrespective of size, whilst also enabling a better understanding of fundamental ecological theory, such as colonisation- competition trade-offs. This may be a necessary consideration as invertebrates that are important in providing ecosystem services are declining globally; targeting invertebrate communities during restoration may be crucial in stemming this decline.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document