scholarly journals Representation of global change drivers across biodiversity datasets

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gergana N. Daskalova ◽  
Diana Bowler ◽  
Isla Heather Myers-Smith ◽  
Maria Dornelas

Global change has altered biodiversity and impacted ecosystem functions and services around the planet. Understanding the effects of anthropogenic drivers like human use and climate change on biodiversity change has become a key challenge for science and policy. However, our knowledge of biodiversity change is limited by the available data and their biases. Over land and sea, we test the representation of three worldwide and multi-taxa biodiversity databases (Living Planet, BioTIME and PREDICTS) across spatial and temporal variation in global change and across the tree of life. We find that variation in global change drivers is better captured over space than over time around the world and across the previous 150 years. Spatial representation of global change was as high as 78% in the marine realm and 31% on land. Our findings suggest ways to improve the use of existing biodiversity data and better target future ecological monitoring.

2021 ◽  
Vol 288 (1960) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary I. O'Connor ◽  
Akira S. Mori ◽  
Andrew Gonzalez ◽  
Laura E. Dee ◽  
Michel Loreau ◽  
...  

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.


Author(s):  
Aaike De Wever ◽  
Astrid Schmidt-Kloiber ◽  
Vanessa Bremerich ◽  
Joerg Freyhof

Understanding biodiversity change and addressing questions in freshwater management and conservation requires access to biodiversity data and information. Unfortunately, large, comprehensive data sources on freshwater ecology and biodiversity are largely lacking. In this chapter, we explain how to take advantage of secondary data and improve data availability for supporting freshwater ecology research and biodiversity conservation. We emphasise the importance of secondary data, give an overview of existing databases (e.g., taxonomy, molecular or occurrence databases), discuss problems in understanding and caveats when using such data, and explain the need to make primary data publicly available.


Author(s):  
Jeffrey E. Herrick ◽  
Kris M. Havstad

Land degradation in most of the Chihuahuan Desert is characterized by a shift from grass- to shrub-dominated plant communities (Ballín Cortés 1987; Grover and Musick 1990; Fredrickson et al. 1998; see also chapter 10). This shift is associated with increased soil resource redistribution and spatial variability at the plant-interspace scale (Schlesinger et al. 1990; see also chapter 6). Earlier descriptions focused more specifically on the loss of plant species, such as black grama (Bouteloua eriopoda), which were palatable to livestock (Nelson 1934). In 1958, it was estimated that one section (3.2 km2) of black grama grassland could support 18 animal units yearlong, while a similar area dominated by mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa) dunes could support just three animal units (Jornada Experimental Range Staff 1958; see also chapter 13). It was recognized that overgrazing facilitated the increase of less palatable species, including shrubs. Consequently, the objectives of the first organized rangeland research in the Southwest were to identify proper techniques to restore grasslands that had been overgrazed (Jardine and Hurtt 1917; Havstad 1996). Today, we recognize the importance of multiple, interacting factors in addition to overgrazing, and research is more broadly focused on the recovery of ecosystem functions necessary to support multiple ecosystem services. This chapter details this extensive history of research to identify and develop technologies to revegetate, restore, reclaim, rehabilitate, or more generally remediate degraded rangelands. The Society for Ecological Restoration considers that “an ecosystem has recovered when it contains sufficient biotic and abiotic resources to continue its development without assistance or subsidy. It will demonstrate resilience to normal ranges of environmental stress and disturbance. It will interact with contiguous ecosystems in terms of biotic and abiotic flows and cultural interactions” (Society for Ecological Restoration Science and Policy Working Group 2002). Although restoration of perennial grasslands is often cited as the ultimate objective of management intervention in the Southwest, we recognize that in many if not most cases complete restoration of a preexisting plant and animal community is impossible, even if we had perfect knowledge of all of the elements they contained. We also recognize that many of the historic management interventions discussed herein had more limited objectives.


Author(s):  
Stephen Widdicombe ◽  
John I. Spicer

The vast majority of the seafloor is covered not in rocky or biogenic reefs but in unconsolidated sediments and, consequently, the majority of marine biodiversity consists of invertebrates either residing in (infauna) or on (epifauna) sediments (Snelgrove 1999). The biodiversity within these sediments is a result of complex interactions between the underlying environmental conditions (e.g. depth, temperature, organic supply, and granulometry) and the biological interactions operating between organisms (e.g. predation and competition). Not only are sediments important depositories of biodiversity but they are also critical components in many key ecosystem functions. Nowhere is this more apparent than in shallow coastal seas and oceans which, despite covering less than 10% of the earth’s surface, deliver up to 30% of marine production and 90% of marine fisheries (Gattuso et al. 1998). These areas are also the site for 80% of organic matter burial and 90% of sedimentary mineralization and nutrient–sediment biogeochemical processes. They also act as the sink for up to 90% of the suspended load in the world’s rivers and the many associated contaminants this material contains (Gattuso et al. 1998). Human beings depend heavily on the goods and services provided, for free, by the marine realm (Hassan et al. 2005 ) and it is no coincidence that nearly 70% of all humans live within 60 km of the sea or that 75% of all cities with more than 10 million inhabitants are in the coastal zone (Small and Nicholls 2003; McGranahan et al. 2007) Given these facts, it is clear that any broad-scale environmental impact that affects the diversity, structure, and function of sediment ecosystems could have a considerable impact on human health and well-being. It is therefore essential that the impacts of ocean acidification on sediment fauna, and the ecosystem functions they support, are adequately considered. This chapter will first describe the geochemical environment within which sediment organisms live. It will then explore the role that sediment organisms play as ecosystem engineers and how they alter the environment in which they live and the overall biodiversity of sediment communities.


Chemosphere ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 827-832 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel M. Kammen ◽  
Kirk R. Smith ◽  
A.Terry Rambo ◽  
M.A.K. Khalil

BioScience ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 68 (7) ◽  
pp. 481-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver T Coomes ◽  
Graham K MacDonald ◽  
Yann le Polain de Waroux

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
D.E. Bowler ◽  
A.D. Bjorkman ◽  
M. Dornelas ◽  
I.H. Myers-Smith ◽  
L. M. Navarro ◽  
...  

AbstractClimate change and other anthropogenic drivers of biodiversity change are unequally distributed across the world. The geographic patterns of different drivers, and the spatial overlap among these drivers, have important implications for the direction and pace of biodiversity change, yet are not well documented. Moreover, it is unknown if the geographic patterns of drivers differ between the terrestrial and marine realm, as expected due to marked differences in how humans interact with the land and ocean.We compiled global gridded datasets on climate change, land-use, resource exploitation, pollution, species invasions, and human population density. We used multivariate statistics to examine the spatial relationships among the datasets and to characterize the typical combinations of drivers experienced by different parts of the world.We found stronger positive correlations among drivers in the terrestrial than in the marine realm, leading to areas of high intensities of multiple drivers on land. Climate change tended to be negatively correlated with other drivers in the terrestrial realm (e.g., in the tundra and boreal forest with high climate change but low human use and pollution) whereas the opposite was true in the marine realm (e.g., in the Indo-Pacific with high climate change and high fishing).We show that different regions of the world can be defined by anthropogenic threat complexes (ATCs), distinguished by different sets of drivers with varying intensities. The ATCs can be used to test hypothesis about the pattern of biodiversity change, especially the joint effects of multiple drivers. More generally, our global analysis highlights the broad conservation priorities needed to mitigate the effects of anthropogenic change on biodiversity responses, with different priorities emerging on land and in the ocean, and in different parts of the world.


eLife ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rui Yin ◽  
Julia Siebert ◽  
Nico Eisenhauer ◽  
Martin Schädler

Global change drivers, such as climate change and land use, may profoundly influence body size, density, and biomass of soil organisms. However, it is still unclear how these concurrent drivers interact in affecting ecological communities. Here, we present the results of an experimental field study assessing the interactive effects of climate change and land-use intensification on body size, density, and biomass of soil microarthropods. We found that the projected climate change and intensive land use decreased their total biomass. Strikingly, this reduction was realized via two dissimilar pathways: climate change reduced mean body size and intensive land use decreased density. These findings highlight that two of the most pervasive global change drivers operate via different pathways when decreasing soil animal biomass. These shifts in soil communities may threaten essential ecosystem functions like organic matter turnover and nutrient cycling in future ecosystems.


Author(s):  
James R. Fleming

Apprehensions have been multiplying rapidly that we are approaching a crisis in our relationship with nature, one that could have potentially catastrophic results for the sustainability of civilization and even the habitability of the planet. Much of the concern is rightfully focused on changes in the atmosphere caused by human activities. Only a century after the discovery of the stratosphere, only five decades after the invention of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), and only two decades after atmospheric chemists warned of the destructive nature of chlorine and other compounds, we fear that ozone in the stratosphere is being damaged by human activity. Only a century after the first models of the carbon cycle were developed, only three decades after regular CO2 measurements began at Mauna Loa Observatory, and only two decades after climate modelers first doubled the CO2 in a computerized atmosphere, we fear that the Earth may experience a sudden and possibly catastrophic warming caused by industrial pollution. These and other environmental problems were brought to our attention mainly by scientists and engineers, but the problems belong to us all. Recently, policy-oriented social scientists, public officials, and diplomats have turned their attention to the complex human dimensions of these issues. New interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary collaborations have arisen between scientists and policymakers to examine the extremely challenging issues raised by global change. There has been a rising tide of literature—scholarly works, new journals, textbooks, government documents, treaties, popular accounts—some quite innovative, others derivative and somewhat repetitious. This has resulted in growing public awareness of environmental issues, new understanding of global change science and policy, widespread concerns over environmental risks, and recently formulated plans to intervene in the global environment through various forms of social and behavioral engineering, and possibly geoengineering. Global change is now at the center of an international agenda to understand, predict, protect, and possibly control the global environment. The changing nature of global change—the historical dimension—has not received adequate attention. Most writing addresses current issues in either science or policy; much of it draws on a few authoritative scientific statements such as those by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); almost none of it is informed by historical sensibility.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document