Linking human impacts to community processes in terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems.

Human impacts such as habitat loss, climate change and biological invasions are radically altering biodiversity, with greater effects projected into the future. Evidence suggests human impacts may differ substantially between terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems, but the reasons for these differences are poorly understood. We propose an integrative approach to explain these differences by linking impacts to four fundamental processes that structure communities: dispersal, speciation, species-level selection and ecological drift. Our goal is to provide process-based insights into why human impacts, and responses to impacts, may differ across ecosystem types using a mechanistic, eco-evolutionary comparative framework. To enable these insights, we review and synthesise (i) how the four processes influence diversity and dynamics in terrestrial versus freshwater communities, specifically whether the relative importance of each process differs among ecosystems, and (ii) the pathways by which human impacts can produce divergent responses across ecosystems, due to differences in the strength of processes among ecosystems we identify. Finally, we highlight research gaps and next steps, and discuss how this approach can provide new insights for conservation. By focusing on the processes that shape diversity in communities, we aim to mechanistically link human impacts to ongoing and future changes in ecosystems.

A niche for ecosystem multifunctionality in global change research.

Concern about human modification of Earth's ecosystems has recently motivated ecologists to address how global change drivers will impact the simultaneous provisioning of multiple functions, termed ecosystem multifunctionality (EMF). However, metrics of EMF have often been applied in global change studies with little consideration of the information they provide beyond single functions, or how and why EMF may respond to global change drivers. Here, we critically review the current state of this rapidly expanding field and provide a conceptual framework to guide the effective incorporation of EMF in global change research. In particular, we emphasize the need for a priori identification and explicit testing of the biotic and abiotic mechanisms through which global change drivers impact EMF, as well as assessing correlations among multiple single functions because these patterns underlie shifts in EMF. While the role of biodiversity in mediating global change effects on EMF has justifiably received much attention, empirical support for effects via other biotic and physicochemical mechanisms are also needed. Studies also frequently stated the importance of measuring EMF responses to global change drivers to understand the potential consequences for multiple ecosystem services, but explicit links between measured functions and ecosystem services were missing from many such studies. While there is clear potential for EMF to provide novel insights to global change research, predictive understanding will be greatly improved by insuring future research is strongly hypothesis-driven, is designed to explicitly test multiple abiotic and biotic mechanisms, and assesses how single functions and their covariation drive emergent EMF responses to global change drivers.

A unified classification of alien species based on the magnitude of their environmental impacts.

Species moved by human activities beyond the limits of their native geographic ranges into areas in which they do not naturally occur (termed aliens) can cause a broad range of significant changes to recipient ecosystems; however, their impacts vary greatly across species and the ecosystems into which they are introduced. There is therefore a critical need for a standardised method to evaluate, compare, and eventually predict the magnitudes of these different impacts. Here, we propose a straightforward system for classifying alien species according to the magnitude of their environmental impacts, based on the mechanisms of impact used to code species in the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Global Invasive Species Database, which are presented here for the first time. The classification system uses five semi-quantitative scenarios describing impacts under each mechanism to assign species to different levels of impact-ranging from Minimal to Massive-with assignment corresponding to the highest level of deleterious impact associated with any of the mechanisms. The scheme also includes categories for species that are Not Evaluated, have No Alien Population, or are Data Deficient, and a method for assigning uncertainty to all the classifications. We show how this classification system is applicable at different levels of ecological complexity and different spatial and temporal scales, and embraces existing impact metrics. In fact, the scheme is analogous to the already widely adopted and accepted Red List approach to categorising extinction risk, and so could conceivably be readily integrated with existing practices and policies in many regions.

Defining the impact of non-native species.

Non-native species cause changes in the ecosystems to which they are introduced. These changes, or some of them, are usually termed impacts; they can be manifold and potentially damaging to ecosystems and biodiversity. However, the impacts of most non-native species are poorly understood, and a synthesis of available information is being hindered because authors often do not clearly define impact. We argue that explicitly defining the impact of non-native species will promote progress toward a better understanding of the implications of changes to biodiversity and ecosystems caused by non-native species; help disentangle which aspects of scientific debates about non-native species are due to disparate definitions and which represent true scientific discord; and improve communication between scientists from different research disciplines and between scientists, managers, and policy makers. For these reasons and based on examples from the literature, we devised seven key questions that fall into 4 categories: directionality, classification and measurement, ecological or socio-economic changes, and scale. These questions should help in formulating clear and practical definitions of impact to suit specific scientific, stakeholder, or legislative contexts.

Drought modulates interactions between arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal diversity and barley genotype diversity.

Droughts associated with climate change alter ecosystem functions, especially in systems characterized by low biodiversity, such as agricultural fields. Management strategies aimed at buffering climate change effects include the enhancement of intraspecific crop diversity as well as the diversity of beneficial interactions with soil biota, such as arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF). However, little is known about reciprocal relations of crop and AMF diversity under drought conditions. To explore the interactive effects of plant genotype richness and AMF richness on plant yield under ambient and drought conditions, we established fully crossed diversity gradients in experimental microcosms. We expected highest crop yield and drought tolerance at both high barley and AMF diversity. While barley richness and AMF richness altered the performance of both barley and AMF, they did not mitigate detrimental drought effects on the plant and AMF. Root biomass increased with mycorrhiza colonization rate at high AMF richness and low barley richness. AMF performance increased under higher richness of both barley and AMF. Our findings indicate that antagonistic interactions between barley and AMF may occur under drought conditions, particularly so at higher AMF richness. These results suggest that unexpected alterations of plant-soil biotic interactions could occur under climate change.