How ecologists define drought,and why we should do better

Drought, widely studied as an important driver of ecosystem dynamics, is predicted to increase in frequency and severity globally. To study drought, ecologists must define or at least operationalize what constitutes a drought. How this is accomplished in practice is unclear, particularly given that climatologists have long struggled to agree on definitions of drought, beyond general variants of “an abnormal deficiency of water.” We conducted a literature review of ecological drought studies (564 papers) to assess how ecologists describe and study drought. We found that ecologists characterize drought in a wide variety of ways (reduced precipitation, low soil moisture, reduced streamflow, etc.), but relatively few publications (~32%) explicitly define what are, and are not, drought conditions. More troubling, a surprising number of papers (~30%) simply equated “dry conditions” with “drought” and provided little characterization of the drought conditions studied. For a subset of these, we calculated Standardized Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index values for the reported drought periods. We found that while almost 90% of the studies were conducted under conditions quantifiable as slightly to extremely drier than average, ~50% were within the range of normal climatic variability. We conclude that the current state of the ecological drought literature hinders synthesis and our ability to draw broad ecological inferences because drought is often declared but is not explicitly defined or well characterized. We suggest that future drought publications provide at least one of the following: (a) the climatic context of the drought period based on long‐term records; (b) standardized climatic index values; (c) published metrics from drought‐monitoring organizations; (d) a quantitative definition of what the authors consider to be drought conditions for their system. With more detailed and consistent quantification of drought conditions, comparisons among studies can be more rigorous, increasing our understanding of the ecological effects of drought.     

The Challenge to Restore Processes in Face of Nonlinear Dynamics—On the Crucial Role of Disturbance Regimes

Increasingly, restoration ecologists and managers are challenged to restore ecological processes that lead to self‐sustaining ecosystem dynamics. Due to changing environmental conditions, however, restoration goals need to include novel regimes beyond prior reference conditions or reference dynamics. In face of these fundamental challenges in process‐based restoration ecology, disturbance ecology can offer useful insights. Here, I discuss the contribution of disturbance ecology to understanding assembly rules, ecosystem dynamics, regime shifts, and nonlinear dynamics. Using the patch and multipatch concept, all insights are organized according to two spatial and two temporal categories: “patch–event,”“patch–multievent,”“multipatch–event,” and “multipatch–multievent.” This concept implies the consideration of both spatial patterns and temporal rhythms inside and outside of a restoration site. Emerging issues, such as uncoupling of internal and external dynamics, are considered.     

Le Osservazioni Fitofenologiche Della Rete Italiana Nel 1929 (Annata VIII)

Abstract

Correlative techniques for estimating environmental requirements of species – variably termed ecological niche modeling or species distribution modeling – are becoming very popular tools for ecologists and biogeographers in understanding diverse aspects of biodiversity. These tools, however, are frequently applied in ways that do not fit well into knowledge frameworks in population ecology and biogeography, or into the realities of sampling biodiversity over real-world landscapes. We offer 10 “fixes” – adjustments to typical methodologies that will take into account population ecological and biogeographic frameworks to produce better models.     

Invasion ecology goes to town: from disdain to sympathy

How can one understand the increasing interest in “urban invasions”, or biological invasions in urban environments? We argue that interest in urban invasions echoes a broader evolution in how ecologists view “the city” in relation to “the natural”. Previously stark categorical distinctions between urban and natural, human and wild, city and ecology have floundered. Drawing on conceptual material and an analysis of key texts, we first show how the ecological sciences in general—and then invasion science in particular—previously had a blind spot for cities, despite a number of important historical and continental European exceptions. Then, we document the advent of an urban turn in ecology and, more recently, in invasion ecology, and how this has challenged fundamental concepts about “nativity”, “naturalness”, and human agency in nature. The urban turn necessitates more explicit and direct attention to human roles and judgements. Ecology has moved from contempt (or indifference) for cities, towards interest or even sympathy.     

Context and connectivity in plant metapopulations and landscape mosaics: does the matrix matter?

Recent reviews of evidence for plant metapopulation prevalence in nature have concluded that most species appear not to be arranged as metapopulations – hence other frameworks may be necessary for understanding large‐scale, regional dynamics in plants. Separate but related paradigms from the disciplines of landscape ecology and metapopulation ecology exist for understanding patterns of regional population variation. The major models of both paradigms assume a binary landscape mosaic composed of “suitable habitat” and background “matrix.” An important distinction between the two approaches is that metapopulation models essentially ignore features of the matrix. A binary approach to the landscape seems inappropriate for plants for several reasons. First, plants probably do not have a binary perception of the landscape, but rather respond to gradients of resource quality. Thus properties of patches, or the matrix per se, may be less important than the nature of the landscape mosaic, in particular as this is reflected in terms of connectivity. Secondly, many plants rely on a range of other agents for dispersal of pollen and seed, all of which are also affected by their environment in terms of connectivity. Furthermore the various components of the mosaic, including physical, spatial and functional elements can significantly influence plant movements. We review important effects of the matrix – via composition and configuration of habitat patches, extent of edges, patterns of land use, etc., upon plant populations. We describe evidence supporting a general integration of metapopulation and landscape ecological approaches for understanding regional dynamics in plants, emphasizing notions of connectivity (traditionally measured in very different ways by metapopulation and landscape ecologists), and context, an emerging concept describing components of variability in the landscape from a species‐specific perspective. Finally, we describe a functional landscape mosaic approach that treats structural and functional features of the landscape and show how these interact to determine the fate of plant populations.     

To Model or not to Model,That is no Longer the Question for Ecologists

Here, I argue that we should abandon the division between “field ecologists” and “modelers,” and embrace modeling and empirical research as two powerful and often complementary approaches in the toolbox of 21st century ecologists, to be deployed alone or in combination depending on the task at hand. As empirical research has the longer tradition in ecology, and modeling is the more recent addition to the methodological arsenal, I provide both practical and theoretical reasons for integrating modeling more deeply into ecosystem research. Empirical research has epistemological priority over modeling; however, that is, for models to realize their full potential, and for modelers to wield this power wisely, empirical research is of fundamental importance. Combining both methodological approaches or forming “super ties” with colleagues using different methods are promising pathways to creatively exploit the methodological possibilities resulting from increasing computing power. To improve the proficiency of the growing group of model users and ensure future innovation in model development, we need to increase the modeling literacy among ecology students. However, an improved training in modeling must not curtail education in basic ecological principles and field methods, as these skills form the foundation for building and applying models in ecology.     

Renewal ecology: conservation for the Anthropocene

The global scale and rapidity of environmental change is challenging ecologists to reimagine their theoretical principles and management practices. Increasingly, historical ecological conditions are inadequate targets for restoration ecology, geographically circumscribed nature reserves are incapable of protecting all biodiversity, and the precautionary principle applied to management interventions no longer ensures avoidance of ecological harm. In addition, human responses to global environmental changes, such as migration, building of protective infrastructures, and land use change, are having their own negative environmental impacts. We use examples from wildlands, urban, and degraded environments, as well as marine and freshwater ecosystems, to show that human adaptation responses to rapid ecological change can be explicitly designed to benefit biodiversity. This approach, which we call “renewal ecology,” is based on acceptance that environmental change will have transformative effects on coupled human and natural systems and recognizes the need to harmonize biodiversity with human infrastructure, for the benefit of both.     

Levels of organization in biology: on the nature and nomenclature of ecology's fourth level

Viewing the universe as being composed of hierarchically arranged systems is widely accepted as a useful model of reality. In ecology, three levels of organization are generally recognized: organisms, populations, and communities (biocoenoses). For half a century increasing numbers of ecologists have concluded that recognition of a fourth level would facilitate increased understanding of ecological phenomena. Sometimes the word "ecosystem" is used for this level, but this is arguably inappropriate. Since 1986, I and others have argued that the term "landscape" would be a suitable term for a level of organization defined as an ecological system containing more than one community type. However, "landscape" and "landscape level" continue to be used extensively by ecologists in the popular sense of a large expanse of space. I therefore now propose that the term "ecoscape" be used instead for this fourth level of organization. A clearly defined fourth level for ecology would focus attention on the emergent properties of this level, and maintain the spatial and temporal scale-free nature inherent in this hierarchy of organizational levels for living entities.     

The stability–complexity relationship at age 40: a random matrix perspective

Since the work of Robert May in 1972, the local asymptotic stability of large ecological systems has been a focus of theoretical ecology. Here we review May's work in the light of random matrix theory, the field of mathematics devoted to the study of large matrices whose coefficients are randomly sampled from distributions with given characteristics. We show how May's celebrated “stability criterion” can be derived using random matrix theory, and how extensions of the so-called circular law for the limiting distribution of the eigenvalues of large random matrix can further our understanding of ecological systems. Our goal is to present the more technical material in an accessible way, and to provide pointers to the primary mathematical literature on this subject. We conclude by enumerating a number of challenges, whose solution is going to greatly improve our ability to predict the stability of large ecological networks.     

Perception,pattern, chance and the structure of reef fish communities

The recent history of attempts to understand the ecology of fish on coral reefs is surveyed as an example of the way in which science progresses. Scientists are trapped, both by their sensory equipment and by their preconceptions, into viewing the world in certain ways. Paradigms fall only slowly. Scientists are trained to seek pattern in their data, yet in some cases the largely stochastic variation of a system around its mean condition is the more important key to understanding its ecology. The reef fish assemblage provides such a case. It is unlikely that our present understanding of the nature of reef fish communities will survive unchanged by future research. And it is also unlikely that reef fish ecologists are the only ecologists who have difficulty discovering truth! Editorial     

Talking Frogs: The Role of Communication in Ecological Research on Private Land

This paper argues that improving the communication between landholders and ecologists will result in better conservation outcomes for ecosystem management on private land. It examines a case study of ecological research on frogs undertaken on private, agricultural land in south-eastern Australia. The paper questions the traditional separation of ecological science from landholders specifically and the public in general. In addressing this issue the authors wish to improve the relevance of ecology for landholders, raise the profile of social science for ecologists working on private land and examine the implications of improving ecologist – landholder relationships. For landholders, an improved understanding of the ecological context of their agricultural activities may lead to sustainability gains. For ecologists, a deeper appreciation for the social context of their ecological research provides an opportunity to see how their work is perceived and/or acted upon in practice. For both parties, a communicative relationship may minimise future need for ecosystem repair. Such an approach (for both landholders and ecologists) can lead to the break down of stereotypes and/or a greater appreciation of the others’ perspectives, constraints and values with respect to conservation on private land. In the productive discussions arising from conversations between landholders and ecologists, new approaches to sustainable land management and nature conservation may emerge.     

Colpodean ciliate phylogeny and reference alignments for phylogenetic placements

The Colpodea form a major clade of ciliates that are often found in environmental DNA sequencing studies. They are united by similar somatic ciliature, but differentiated by complex oral structures. Although there are four well supported colpodean subclades, there is disagreement in molecular phylogenetic inferences about their branching order. Using available nuclear SSU-rRNA sequences, we evaluated if the bursariomorphids or the platyophryids are sister to the remaining colpodeans. We inferred the “platyophryids-early” topologies using different alignment and masking methods, but constrained analyses could not reject the “bursariomorphids-early” topology. Both bursariomorphids and platyophryids clades have a similar number of nucleotide positions shared with the outgroup, and both are interconnected with the outgroup in phylogenetic networks. Based on these discordant results, it is hard to determine which clade branched off first, although the “platyophryids-early topology” is also supported by mitochondrial SSU-rRNA data. We also offer different reference alignments that can be used to phylogenetically place short- and long-read data from environmental DNA sequencing studies, and we propose some tentative evolutionary and ecological interpretations of those placements.     

Life in the colonies: learning the alien ways of colonial organisms

Who needs to go to outer space to study alien beings when the oceans of our own planet abound with bizarre and unknown creatures? Many of them belong to sessile clonal and colonial groups, including sponges, hydroids, corals, octocorals, ascidians, bryozoans, and some polychaetes. Their life histories, in many ways unlike our own, are a challenge for biologists. Studying their ecology, behavior, and taxonomy means trying to “think like a colony” to understand the factors important in their lives. Until the 1980s, most marine ecologists ignored these difficult modular organisms. Plant ecologists showed them ways to deal with the two levels of asexually produced modules and genetic individuals, leading to a surge in research on the ecology of clonal and colonial marine invertebrates. Bryozoans make excellent model colonial animals. Their life histories range from ephemeral to perennial. Aspects of their lives such as growth, reproduction, partial mortality due to predation or fouling, and the behavior of both autozooids and polymorphs can be studied at the level of the colony, as well as that of the individual module, in living colonies and over time.     

Ecological Stability: Reality,Misconceptions, and Implications for Risk Assessment

Over a long time frame, an ecological system may not exhibit constancy due to successional and evolutionary changes in the species composing the system. However, over shorter time frames an ecological system exhibits a certain degree of constancy (i.e., varies within defined bounds). Traditionally, ecologists considered this short-term constancy to reflect a “balance of nature,” which was viewed akin to the simple homeostatic dynamics of physiological systems. This is an appealing perspective because the disruption of the system's “balance” (i.e., its ”health“) can be ascertained by comparing the system's current state after the imposition of a perturbation with the societally desired state (i.e., baseline). Recently, ecologists have started to develop a much more complex, and perhaps more realistic, perspective regarding ecosystem dynamics, which does not depend upon homeostasis with a single baseline state. This new view includes stochastic variation, nonlinear dynamics and alternative states, and poses a challenge for assessing environmental “health” and the risk of creating “unhealthy” ecological systems     

From forest fires to fisheries management: Anthropology,conservation biology,and historical ecology

Human‐environmental relationships have long been of interest to a variety of scientists, including ecologists, biologists, anthropologists, and many others. 1 , 2 In anthropology, this interest was especially prevalent among cultural ecologists of the 1970s and earlier, who tended to explain culture as the result of techno‐environmental constraints. 3 More recently researchers have used historical ecology, an approach that focuses on the long‐term dialectical relationship between humans and their environments, as well as long‐term prehuman ecological datasets. 4 - 7 An important contribution of anthropology to historical ecology is that anthropological datasets dealing with ethnohistory, traditional ecological knowledge, and human skeletal analysis, as well as archeological datasets on faunal and floral remains, artifacts, geochemistry, and stratigraphic analysis, provide a deep time perspective (across decades, centuries, and millennia) on the evolution of ecosystems and the place of people in those larger systems. Historical ecological data also have an applied component that can provide important information on the relative abundances of flora and fauna, changes in biogeography, alternations in food webs, landscape evolution, and much more.     

The niche concept: Suggestions for its use in human ecology

The Hutchinsonian concept of the ecological niche can be made operational for studies in human ecology by defining it in terms of thedistinctive ways of using resources for subsistence that set “cultural species” apart. Subsistence variety, the number of resources used for subsistence, and how much each is depended on are measures of distinctiveness, and the amount of variety present can be defined as thewidth of the ecological niche. The calculation of niche width from subsistence data is discussed, and examples are given from several human groups with reference to total resource variety, resource variety in space, and resource variety in time. The importance of selecting niche dimensions for niche width measurement is stressed, and examples are given of width differences resulting from measuring variety in quantity (biomass or calories) and variety in quality (protein, essential minerals, etc.). Finally, some implications of niche width measurements for human ecology are discussed.     

Value of long‐term ecological studies

Long‐term ecological studies are critical for providing key insights in ecology, environmental change, natural resource management and biodiversity conservation. In this paper, we briefly discuss five key values of such studies. These are: (1) quantifying ecological responses to drivers of ecosystem change; (2) understanding complex ecosystem processes that occur over prolonged periods; (3) providing core ecological data that may be used to develop theoretical ecological models and to parameterize and validate simulation models; (4) acting as platforms for collaborative studies, thus promoting multidisciplinary research; and (5) providing data and understanding at scales relevant to management, and hence critically supporting evidence‐based policy, decision making and the management of ecosystems. We suggest that the ecological research community needs to put higher priority on communicating the benefits of long‐term ecological studies to resource managers, policy makers and the general public. Long‐term research will be especially important for tackling large‐scale emerging problems confronting humanity such as resource management for a rapidly increasing human population, mass species extinction, and climate change detection, mitigation and adaptation. While some ecologically relevant, long‐term data sets are now becoming more generally available, these are exceptions. This deficiency occurs because ecological studies can be difficult to maintain for long periods as they exceed the length of government administrations and funding cycles. We argue that the ecological research community will need to coordinate ongoing efforts in an open and collaborative way, to ensure that discoverable long‐term ecological studies do not become a long‐term deficiency. It is important to maintain publishing outlets for empirical field‐based ecology, while simultaneously developing new systems of recognition that reward ecologists for the use and collaborative sharing of their long‐term data sets. Funding schemes must be re‐crafted to emphasize collaborative partnerships between field‐based ecologists, theoreticians and modellers, and to provide financial support that is committed over commensurate time frames.