Regional Index of Ecological Integrity: A need for sustainable management of natural resources

An ecosystem is a complex composition of physical, chemical and biological components. This complex system remains in a healthy state if the system can maintain the ecological equilibrium among its components. Anthropogenic disturbances are the prime stressors that affect this equilibrium through creating fragmentation, ecosystem sensitivity, loosening landscape connectivity and disrupting ecological integrity. As different types of ecosystem are interconnected, a comprehensive monitoring and evaluating criteria is needed for measuring its integrity at regional level for conservation planning. A Regional Index of Ecological Integrity can be a suitable approach for sustainable management of regional ecosystem. Therefore, this paper presents (i) the characteristics of ecological integrity, (ii) the spatial processes induced by anthropogenic stressors and (iii) an approach to develop a composite Regional Index of Ecological Integrity (RIEI). The prime objective is to establish a thought and a way to develop a composite index of ecological integrity at the regional level. Here, we demonstrate different compositional, structural and functional indicators/indices related to fragmentation, representativeness of protected area, ecosystem sensitivity, and landscape connectivity for the development of a Regional Index of Ecological Integrity (RIEI).     

Extinction order and altered community structure rapidly disrupt ecosystem functioning

By causing extinctions and altering community structure, anthropogenic disturbances can disrupt processes that maintain ecosystem integrity. However, the relationship between community structure and ecosystem functioning in natural systems is poorly understood. Here we show that habitat loss appeared to disrupt ecosystem functioning by affecting extinction order, species richness and abundance. We studied pollination by bees in a mosaic of agricultural and natural habitats in California and dung burial by dung beetles on recently created islands in Venezuela. We found that large-bodied bee and beetle species tended to be both most extinction-prone and most functionally efficient, contributing to rapid functional loss. Simulations confirmed that extinction order led to greater disruption of function than predicted by random species loss. Total abundance declined with richness and also appeared to contribute to loss of function. We demonstrate conceptually and empirically how the non-random response of communities to disturbance can have unexpectedly large functional consequences.     

Response diversity determines the resilience of ecosystems to environmental change

A growing body of evidence highlights the importance of biodiversity for ecosystem stability and the maintenance of optimal ecosystem functionality. Conservation measures are thus essential to safeguard the ecosystem services that biodiversity provides and human society needs. Current anthropogenic threats may lead to detrimental (and perhaps irreversible) ecosystem degradation, providing strong motivation to evaluate the response of ecological communities to various anthropogenic pressures. In particular, ecosystem functions that sustain key ecosystem services should be identified and prioritized for conservation action. Traditional diversity measures (e.g. ‘species richness’) may not adequately capture the aspects of biodiversity most relevant to ecosystem stability and functionality, but several new concepts may be more appropriate. These include ‘response diversity’, describing the variation of responses to environmental change among species of a particular community. Response diversity may also be a key determinant of ecosystem resilience in the face of anthropogenic pressures and environmental uncertainty. However, current understanding of response diversity is poor, and we see an urgent need to disentangle the conceptual strands that pervade studies of the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Our review clarifies the links between response diversity and the maintenance of ecosystem functionality by focusing on the insurance hypothesis of biodiversity and the concept of functional redundancy. We provide a conceptual model to describe how loss of response diversity may cause ecosystem degradation through decreased ecosystem resilience. We explicitly explain how response diversity contributes to functional compensation and to spatio‐temporal complementarity among species, leading to long‐term maintenance of ecosystem multifunctionality. Recent quantitative studies suggest that traditional diversity measures may often be uncoupled from measures (such as response diversity) that may be more effective proxies for ecosystem stability and resilience. Certain conclusions and recommendations of earlier studies using these traditional measures as indicators of ecosystem resilience thus may be suspect. We believe that functional ecology perspectives incorporating the effects and responses of diversity are essential for development of management strategies to safeguard (and restore) optimal ecosystem functionality (especially multifunctionality). Our review highlights these issues and we envision our work generating debate around the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functionality, and leading to improved conservation priorities and biodiversity management practices that maximize ecosystem resilience in the face of uncertain environmental change.     

How is ecosystem health defined and measured? A critical review of freshwater and estuarine studies

Assessing ecosystem health is an ongoing priority for governments, scientists and managers worldwide. There are several decades of scientific literature discussing ecosystem health and approaches to assess it, with applications to aquatic and terrestrial environments incorporating economic, environmental and social processes. We conducted a systematic review of studies that assess ecosystem health to update our current understanding of how ecosystem health is being defined, and provide new ideas and directions on how it can be measured. We focused the review on studies that used the term ‘ecosystem health’ or the equivalent terms ‘ecosystem integrity’, ‘ecosystem quality’ and ‘ecosystem protection’, in lotic freshwater and estuarine environments, and examined how many of these included explicit definitions of what ecosystem health means for their study system. We collected information about the temporal and geographical distribution of studies, and the types of indicators (biological, physical or chemical) used in the assessments. We found few studies clearly defined ecosystem health and justified the choice of indicators. Given the broad use of the term it seems impractical to have an overarching definition of ecosystem health, but rather an approach that is able to define and measure health on a case by case basis. A combination of biological, physical and chemical indicators was commonly used to assess ecosystem health in both estuarine and freshwater studies, with a strong bias towards fish and macroinvertebrate community metrics (e.g. diversity, abundance and composition). We found only two studies that simultaneously considered both freshwater and estuarine sections of the ecosystem, highlighting the significant knowledge gap in our understanding of the transfer of flow, nutrients and biota between the different systems—all key factors that influence ecosystem health. This review is the first to combine knowledge from both freshwater and estuarine ecosystem assessments and critically review how aquatic ecosystem health is defined and measured since the late-1990s, providing the basis for setting achievable management goals relating to ecosystem health into the future.     

生态系统健康评价的研究进展

生态系统健康评价是环境管理和生态系统监控的基础,生态系统监控可促进生态系统健康评价。首先介绍了生态系统健康概念的产生,发展及其不同的内涵,并着重回顾和讨论了生态系统健康评价指标及其存在的问题,生态系统健康评价指标包括生态指标,物理化学指标,人类健康与社会经济指标3大类,生态指标是反映生态系统特征和状态的生物指标,它分为生态系统,群落和种群与个体等不同层次的指标或指标体系,物理化学指标是检测生态系统的非生物环境的指标。人类健康与社会经济指标着眼于生态系统对人类生存与社会发展的支持作用,采用经济参数和社会发展的环境压力指标等来衡量生态服务的质量与可持续性,根据其敏感程度和功能性,生态系统健康评价指标分为早期预警指标,适宜程度指标和诊断指标3类,一个完整的生态系统评价应包括上述3大类指标或指标体系,但在具体的评价实践中往往因评价目的和对象的不同而有所选择,生态系统健康评价目前有两个亟待解决的问题,如何有效确立评价标准与参照系以及如何正确区分人为压力和自然干扰。     

APPLIED ISSUES: Exploring the response of functional indicators of stream health to land‐use gradients

1. Broad‐scale assessment of stream health is often based on correlative relationships between catchment land‐use categories and measurements of stream biota or water chemistry. Few studies have attempted to characterise the response curves that describe how measures of ecosystem function change along gradients of catchment land use, or explored how these responses vary at broad spatial scales. 2. In autumn 2008, we conducted a survey of 84 streams in three bioregions of New Zealand to assess the sensitivity of functional indicators to three land‐use gradients: percentage of native vegetation cover, percentage of impervious cover (IC) and predicted nitrogen (N) concentration. We examined these relationships using general linear models and boosted regression trees to explore monotonic, non‐monotonic and potential threshold components of the response curves. 3. When viewing the responses to individual land‐use gradients, four of five functional indicators were positively correlated with the removal of native vegetation cover and N. In general, weaker and less responsive models were observed for the IC gradient. An analysis of the response to multiple stressors showed δ¹⁵N of primary consumers and gross primary productivity (GPP) to be the most responsive functional indicators to land‐use gradients. The multivariate models identified thresholds for change in the relationship between the functional indicators and all three land‐use gradients. Apparent thresholds were <10%IC, between 40 and 80% loss of native vegetation cover and at 0.5 and 3.2 mg L^?1 N. 4. The strength of regression models and the nature of the response curves suggest that measures of ecosystem function exhibit predictable relationships with land use. Furthermore, the responses of functional indicators varied little among three bioregions. This information provides a strong argument for the inclusion of functional indicators in a holistic assessment of stream health.     

Spatial heterogeneity of ecosystem health and its sensitivity to pressure in the waters of nearshore archipelago

The ecosystem-based management of nearshore waters requires synthesis of spatial data on the distribution of ecological conditions and intensity of anthropogenic perturbations, and the overlay of their effects on the ecosystem health. An assessment framework for ecosystem health incorporating 4 components namely vigor, organization, resilience and maintenance was proposed in this paper, based on which an analytical approach was developed to quantify the integrated effects of island mass and anthropogenic pressures on the waters of nearshore archipelago. The southern waters of Miaodao Archipelago, which are located in the intersection of the Bohai Sea and the Yellow Sea, China, were taken as a typical example to acquire the spatial heterogeneity of the ecosystem health and its sensitivity to multiple anthropogenic pressures. Results indicated that there was a relatively significant performance of the spatial heterogeneity for the ecosystem health. It presented that the interisland waters were poorer health than the external waters, and the waters adjacent to the continent functioned less well than those in a relatively open area. This phenomenon was primarily determined by the performance of vigor as well as resilience of ecosystem. For the 4 components of ecosystem health, there were an obvious spatial heterogeneity of vigor as well as the resilience, a seasonal succession of organization, and a spatiotemporal uniformity of maintenance. Moreover, the ecosystem health was more sensitive to the stressors of inland activities and coastline exploitation especially in the waters of Miaodao Bay and Changdao Port. The analytical process and resulting maps provide flexible tools for regional efforts to implement ecosystem-based management in the waters of archipelago and further nearshore waters so as to promote their sustainable development.     

应用生物完整性指数评价水生态系统健康的研究进展

生物完整性指数(IBI)法是评价水生态系统健康的一种重要且被广泛应用的方法.本文综述了生物完整性指数的指示物种选择原因、构建方法以及在水生态系统健康评价中的应用,并总结了现阶段生态系统评估常用的鱼类完整性指数（F_IBI）、底栖无脊椎动物完整性指数（B_IBI）和着生藻类完整性指数（P_IBI)中候选生物状况参数指标,提出了使用微生物完整性指数(M_IBI)评价水生态系统健康的可行性和必要性.     

Adding value to water resource management through biological assessment of rivers

Water resource management encompasses a variety of regulations and mandates relevant to water protection and restoration. Awareness of the value-added biological monitoring and assessment to water resource management is increasing worldwide, but especially in countries that have implemented proactive water law and regulatory frameworks for protection of surface waters. Biological communities provide an integrated response to pollutants and human disturbance within watersheds through their continuous exposure to the magnitude, duration, and frequency of stressors, and, thus, are important for assessing ecosystem health. The selection of proper bioindicators can provide additional benefits through their use in causal analysis of impaired waters and measurement of ecosystem recovery after restoration. A process for implementing biological indicators in a monitoring and assessment framework is outlined for managers and practitioners of water resource protection and restoration.     

生态系统健康评价——概念构架与指标选择

在探讨生态系统健康概念构架的基础上,寻求对管理景观中的生态系统健康进行整体性评价的合适指标.健康的生态系统不仅在生态学意义上是健康的,并能维持健康的人类群体及有利于社会经济的发展.健康生态系统的一般特征是恢复力、多样性和生产力.建立生态系统健康评价指标的第一步是指标选择原则的确定,根据生态系统健康评价的目的和指标筛选的原则,把生态系统健康指标体系(Ecosystem Health Indicaror,EHI)分为生物物理指标、生态学指标和社会经济指标.     

生态系统健康评价—概念构架与指标选择

在探讨了生态系统健康概念构架的基础上,寻求对管理景观中的生态系统健康进行整体性评价的合适指标,健康的生态系统不仅在生态学意义上是健康的,并能维持健康的人类群体及有利于社会经济的发展,健康生态系统的一般特征是恢复力,多样性和生产力,建立生态系统健康评价指标的第一步是指标选择原则的确定,根据生态系统健康评价的目的和指标筛选的原则,把生态系统健康指标体系（Ecosystem Health Indicator,EHI)分为生物物理指标,生态学指标和社会经济指标。     

Quantifying Patterns of Change in Marine Ecosystem Response to Multiple Pressures

The ability to understand and ultimately predict ecosystem response to multiple pressures is paramount to successfully implement ecosystem-based management. Thresholds shifts and nonlinear patterns in ecosystem responses can be used to determine reference points that identify levels of a pressure that may drastically alter ecosystem status, which can inform management action. However, quantifying ecosystem reference points has proven elusive due in large part to the multi-dimensional nature of both ecosystem pressures and ecosystem responses. We used ecological indicators, synthetic measures of ecosystem status and functioning, to enumerate important ecosystem attributes and to reduce the complexity of the Northeast Shelf Large Marine Ecosystem (NES LME). Random forests were used to quantify the importance of four environmental and four anthropogenic pressure variables to the value of ecological indicators, and to quantify shifts in aggregate ecological indicator response along pressure gradients. Anthropogenic pressure variables were critical defining features and were able to predict an average of 8-13% (up to 25-66% for individual ecological indicators) of the variation in ecological indicator values, whereas environmental pressures were able to predict an average of 1-5 % (up to 9-26% for individual ecological indicators) of ecological indicator variation. Each pressure variable predicted a different suite of ecological indicator’s variation and the shapes of ecological indicator responses along pressure gradients were generally nonlinear. Threshold shifts in ecosystem response to exploitation, the most important pressure variable, occurred when commercial landings were 20 and 60% of total surveyed biomass. Although present, threshold shifts in ecosystem response to environmental pressures were much less important, which suggests that anthropogenic pressures have significantly altered the ecosystem structure and functioning of the NES LME. Gradient response curves provide ecologically informed transformations of pressure variables to explain patterns of ecosystem structure and functioning. By concurrently identifying thresholds for a suite of ecological indicator responses to multiple pressures, we demonstrate that ecosystem reference points can be evaluated and used to support ecosystem-based management.     

Compilation and discussion of driver,pressure, and state indicators for the Grand Bank ecosystem,Northwest Atlantic

There are global calls for new ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) approaches. Scientific support for EBFM includes assessing ecosystem indicators of biological communities, environmental conditions, and human activities. As part of a broader research project we have synthesized a suite of traditional and new indicators for the Grand Bank in Atlantic Canada, which we share here. This is an ideal ecosystem for indicator analysis because it experienced dramatic changes over the past three decades, including a collapse in fish biomass that had profound socio-economic consequences. We exploit the wealth of data for this ecosystem to investigate how individual indicators reflect observed changes in the ecosystem, and then illustrate two applications of this indicator suite. Correlations were used to show that relationships among the fish functional groups changed after the collapse, and that a subset of indicators is sufficient to characterize each ecosystem category. Lagged correlations highlighted how changes in the drivers and pressures are often not immediately manifest in the fish community structure. We also organized indicators into the DPSIR (driver-pressure-state-impact-response) management framework. This exercise illustrated that indicator categorization is contextual and not straightforward, and we advocate for use of simpler categories that clearly show what is actionable. Additional future analyses that can be performed with our newly published suite of indicators are recommended.     

Perspectives for ecosystem management based on ecosystem resilience and ecological thresholds against multiple and stochastic disturbances

Ecosystem resilience is the inherent ability to absorb various disturbances and reorganize while undergoing state changes to maintain critical functions. When ecosystem resilience is sufficiently degraded by disturbances, ecosystem is exposed at high risk of shifting from a desirable state to an undesirable state. Ecological thresholds represent the points where even small changes in environmental conditions associated with disturbances lead to switch between ecosystem states. There is a growing body of empirical evidence for such state transitions caused by anthropogenic disturbances in a variety of ecosystems. However, fewer studies addressed the interaction of anthropogenic and natural disturbances that often force an ecosystem to cross a threshold which an anthropogenic disturbance or a natural disturbance alone would not have achieved. This fact highlights how little is known about ecosystem dynamics under uncertainties around multiple and stochastic disturbances. Here, we present two perspectives for providing a predictive scientific basis to the management and conservation of ecosystems against multiple and stochastic disturbances. The first is management of predictable anthropogenic disturbances to maintain a sufficient level of biodiversity for ensuring ecosystem resilience (i.e., resilience-based management). Several biological diversity elements appear to confer ecosystem resilience, such as functional redundancy, response diversity, a dominant species, a foundation species, or a keystone species. The greatest research challenge is to identify key elements of biodiversity conferring ecosystem resilience for each context and to examine how we can manage and conserve them. The second is the identification of ecological thresholds along existing or experimental disturbance gradients. This will facilitate the development of indicators of proximity to thresholds as well as the understanding of threshold mechanisms. The implementation of forewarning indicators will be critical particularly when resilience-based management fails. The ability to detect an ecological threshold along disturbance gradients should therefore be essential to establish a backstop for preventing the threshold from being crossed. These perspectives can take us beyond simply invoking the precautionary principle of conserving biodiversity to a predictive science that informs practical solutions to cope with uncertainties and ecological surprises in a changing world.     

Multidecadal changes in functional diversity lag behind the recovery of taxonomic diversity

While there has been increasing interest in how taxonomic diversity is changing over time, less is known about how long‐term taxonomic changes may affect ecosystem functioning and resilience. Exploring long‐term patterns of functional diversity can provide key insights into the capacity of a community to carry out ecological processes and the redundancy of species’ roles. We focus on a protected freshwater system located in a national park in southeast Germany. We use a high‐resolution benthic macroinvertebrate dataset spanning 32 years (1983–2014) and test whether changes in functional diversity are reflected in taxonomic diversity using a multidimensional trait‐based approach and regression analyses. Specifically, we asked: (i) How has functional diversity changed over time? (ii) How functionally distinct are the community''s taxa? (iii) Are changes in functional diversity concurrent with taxonomic diversity? And (iv) what is the extent of community functional redundancy? Resultant from acidification mitigation, macroinvertebrate taxonomic diversity increased over the study period. Recovery of functional diversity was less pronounced, lagging behind responses of taxonomic diversity. Over multidecadal timescales, the macroinvertebrate community has become more homogenous with a high degree of functional redundancy, despite being isolated from direct anthropogenic activity. While taxonomic diversity increased over time, functional diversity has yet to catch up. These results demonstrate that anthropogenic pressures can remain a threat to biotic communities even in protected areas. The differences in taxonomic and functional recovery processes highlight the need to incorporate functional traits in assessments of biodiversity responses to global change.     

Biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and food webs in fresh waters: assembling the jigsaw puzzle

1. Dramatic advances have been made recently in the study of biodiversity–ecosystem functioning (B-EF) relations and food web ecology. These fields are now starting to converge, and this fusion has the potential to improve our understanding of how environmental stressors modulate ecosystem processes and the supply of 'goods and services'.
2. Food web structure and dynamics can exert particularly strong influences on B-EF relations in fresh waters, as consumer–resource interactions (e.g. trophic cascades) are often more important than horizontal interactions within trophic levels. For instance, many freshwater food webs are size structured, with large organisms tending to occupy the higher trophic levels and often exerting powerful effects on ecosystem processes. However, because they are also vulnerable to perturbations, non-random losses of these large taxa can alter both food web structure and ecosystem functioning profoundly.
3. Recently, the focus of food web research has shifted away from exploring patterns, towards developing an understanding of processes (e.g. quantifying fluxes of individuals, biomass, energy, nutrients) and how the two interact. Many of the best-characterized food webs are from fresh waters, and these ecosystems are now being used to address some of the shortcomings of earlier B-EF studies. I have identified several key gaps in our current knowledge and highlighted potentially fruitful avenues of future B-EF and food web research.
4. A major challenge for this newly emerging research is to place it within a unified theoretical framework. The application of metabolic theory and ecological stoichiometry may help to achieve this goal by considering biological systems within the constraints imposed upon them by physical and chemical laws.     

A method for lake ecosystem health assessment: an Ecological Modeling Method (EMM) and its application

Ecosystem health is a newly proposed concept that sets new goals for environmental management. Its definition, indexing and assessment methods are still being perfected. An Ecological Modeling Method (EMM) for lake ecosystem health assessment is proposed in this paper. The EMM's procedures are: (1) to analyze the ecosystem structure of a lake in order to determine the structure and complexity of the lake's ecological model; (2) to develop a model having ecological health indicators, by designing a conceptual diagram, establishing model equations, estimating model parameters and being integrated with ecological indicators; (3) to compare the simulated and observed values of important state variables and process rates (i.e. model calibration) in order to evaluate the applicability of the model to lake ecosystem health assessment; (4) to calculate ecosystem health indicators based on the developed model; and (5) to assess lake ecosystem health according to the values of the ecosystem health indicators. The EMM was applied, as a case study, to the ecosystem health assessment of a eutrophic Chinese lake (Lake Chao) between April 1987 and March 1988. A relative order of health states from poor to good was determined as follows: August–October 1987 > April–May 1987 > June–July 1987 > November–December 1987 > January–March 1988. These results compared quite favourably with the actual current conditions at Lake Chao. The EMM method, therefore, was suitable in assessing lake ecosystem health at Lake Chao.     

What is a healthy ecosystem?

Rapid deterioration of the world's major ecosystems has intensified the need for effective environmental monitoring and the development of operational indicators of ecosystem health. Ecosystem health represents a desired endpoint of environmental management, but it requires adaptive, ongoing definition and assessment. We propose that a healthy ecosystem is one that is sustainable – that is, it has the ability to maintain its structure (organization) and function (vigor) over time in the face of external stress (resilience). Various methods to quantify these three ecosystem attributes (vigor, organization, and resilience) are discussed. These attributes are then folded into a comprehensive assessment of ecosystem health. A network analysis based ecosystem health assessment is developed and tested using trophic exchange networks representing several different aquatic ecosystems. Results indicate the potential of such an ecosystem health assessment for evaluating the relative health of similar ecosystems, and quantifying the effects of natural or anthropogenic stress on the health of a particular ecosystem over time.     

湿地生态系统健康评价指标体系Ⅰ.理论

湿地生态系统健康是一个新的研究领域。主要从湿地生态系统指标的概念出发,阐述了选择生态系统指标的基本理论,分析了湿地生态特征指标体系,湿地功能整合性指标体系和湿地社会政治环境指标体系所包含的基本内涵,特别强调了生态系统结构和内在功能是生态特征的主要表现。功能整合性是湿地生态系统健康的外在表现,同时,社会政治环境因素中,政策法规,总体规划,政策保障,公众参与程度,代际周期的社会公平性,个人接受能力,团体接受能力等是影响湿地生态系统健康的重要因素。     

海峡西岸经济区生态系统健康评价

基于活力、组织结构、恢复力、生态功能、人类健康等区域生态系统健康标准,综合考虑人为压力、响应措施等因素,构建了海峡西岸经济区(海西区)生态系统健康评价指标体系;针对区域生态系统健康的自然特性与人工特性,采用均方差法和层次分析法,确定了各指标权重;运用模糊综合评价法,建立了海西区生态系统健康评价模型.结果表明： 2008年,海西区生态系统健康状态优越,人为压力较轻,区域生态系统健康状况总体较好,但具有显著的空间差异;受固定资产投资、教育经费支出等响应指标的制约,部分地市生态系统健康状况劣于其健康状态.与1992年相比,2000和2008年海西区生态系统健康状况相对较优,驱动要素以经济活力、组织结构、人类健康、人口压力和投资调整等为主;但受建设用地扩张及其引起的自然景观减少、人类干扰增强等制约,2008年海西区生态系统健康状况劣于2000年.