Global nutrient transport in a world of giants.

The past was a world of giants, with abundant whales in the sea and large animals roaming the land. However, that world came to an end following massive late-Quaternary megafauna extinctions on land and widespread population reductions in great whale populations over the past few centuries. These losses are likely to have had important consequences for broad-scale nutrient cycling, because recent literature suggests that large animals disproportionately drive nutrient movement. We estimate that the capacity of animals to move nutrients away from concentration patches has decreased to about 8% of the preextinction value on land and about 5% of historic values in oceans. For phosphorus (P), a key nutrient, upward movement in the ocean by marine mammals is about 23% of its former capacity (previously about 340 million kg of P per year). Movements by seabirds and anadromous fish provide important transfer of nutrients from the sea to land, totalling ∼150 million kg of P per year globally in the past, a transfer that has declined to less than 4% of this value as a result of the decimation of seabird colonies and anadromous fish populations. We propose that in the past, marine mammals, seabirds, anadromous fish, and terrestrial animals likely formed an interlinked system recycling nutrients from the ocean depths to the continental interiors, with marine mammals moving nutrients from the deep sea to surface waters, seabirds and anadromous fish moving nutrients from the ocean to land, and large animals moving nutrients away from hotspots into the continental interior.

Different responses of predator and prey functional diversity to fragmentation.

The study of functional diversity, or the range of species' ecological roles in a community, is a rapidly expanding area in ecology. Given the extent that ecosystems are being altered, effort should shift toward assessing variation in functional diversity across landscapes with the goal of improving land use management decisions. We construct a workflow that creates three-dimensional surfaces and maps of functional diversity to examine changes in beetle functional diversity across an Indiana, USA landscape. We sampled 105 prey wood-borer and predator beetle species along a gradient of forest fragmentation across Indiana and used a number of functional traits from literature sources to capture their functional roles. We developed newly measured functional traits to estimate several traits relevant to beetles' ecological function that was unknown and not easily measured. Functional diversity indices (FRic, FDis, FDiv, and FEve) were calculated from species abundance and functional traits and used to assess changes in functional diversity along the fragmentation gradient. We predicted that habitat fragmentation would have a greater negative impact on predator beetle functional diversity than prey wood-borer functional diversity. Landscape metrics most important to the functional diversity of both wood-borer and predator beetle communities were landscape division index (LDI, an assessment of landscape subdivision) and mean shape index (MSI, a measure of patch shape complexity). Overall, three-dimensional surfaces of functional diversity and functional diversity maps across the Indiana landscape revealed that beetle functional diversity was greatest with minimal landscape subdivision. Opposite to what we predicted, we found that the prey wood-borer functional diversity was more negatively impacted by LDI than the predator beetle functional diversity. Furthermore, predator beetle functional diversity was greater with increasing MSI. The map predicted predator FRic to be highest in forested areas with intact habitat and also less sensitive to habitat fragmentation adjacent to more continuous forest. We propose that land management may be guided by revealing landscapes that are most appropriate for maximizing functional diversity of multiple communities or shifting the relative abundance within prey and beneficial predator beetle functional groups with the use of three-dimensional plots or maps.

Functional diversity response to hardwood forest management varies across taxa and spatial scales.

Contemporary forest management offers a trade-off between the potential positive effects of habitat heterogeneity on biodiversity, and the potential harm to mature forest communities caused by habitat loss and perforation of the forest canopy. While the response of taxonomic diversity to forest management has received a great deal of scrutiny, the response of functional diversity is largely unexplored. However, functional diversity may represent a more direct link between biodiversity and ecosystem function. To examine how forest management affects diversity at multiple spatial scales, we analyzed a long-term data set that captured changes in taxonomic and functional diversity of moths (Lepidoptera), longhorned beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae), and breeding birds in response to contemporary silvicultural systems in oak-hickory hardwood forests. We used these data sets to address the following questions: how do even- and uneven-aged silvicultural systems affect taxonomic and functional diversity at the scale of managed landscapes compared to the individual harvested and unharvested forest patches that comprise the landscapes, and how do these silvicultural systems affect the functional similarity of assemblages at the scale of managed landscapes and patches? Due to increased heterogeneity within landscapes, we expected even-aged silviculture to increase and uneven-aged silviculture to decrease functional diversity at the landscape level regardless of impacts at the patch level. Functional diversity responses were taxon-specific with respect to the direction of change and time since harvest. Responses were also consistent across patch and landscape levels within each taxon. Moth assemblage species richness, functional richness, and functional divergence were negatively affected by harvesting, with stronger effects resulting from uneven-aged than even-aged management. Longhorned beetle assemblages exhibited a peak in species richness two years after harvesting, while functional diversity metrics did not differ between harvested and unharvested patches and managed landscapes. The species and functional richness of breeding bird assemblages increased in response to harvesting with more persistent effects in uneven- than in even-aged managed landscapes. For moth and bird assemblages, species turnover was driven by species with more extreme trait combinations. Our study highlights the variability of multi-taxon functional diversity in response to forest management across multiple spatial scales.

Population Dynamics in Complex Landscapes: A Case Study.

The abundance and distribution of natural populations can be strongly influenced by the types and arrangement of habitat patches within a landscape. The impact of landscape changes on population dynamics is difficult to study using conventional population models and field techniques. Spatially explicit simulation models provide a powerful method for modelling landscape and population changes at large spatial scales and may prove useful as a management tool for mobile animal populations. As an example of this approach, we present a model designed to elucidate the effects of landscape-level variation in habitat dispersion on the size and extinction probability of avian populations in a region managed for timber production. In the model, habitat suitability and availability within the landscape change annually as a function of timber harvest and management strategies. The model incorporates life history characteristics of Bachman's Sparrow (Aimophila aestivalis), a species of management concern in the southeastern United States, and the landscape characteristics of the Savannah River Site, South Carolina, an area managed for timber production where the sparrow is relatively common. Life history characteristics used in the model include dispersal, survivorship, and reproductive success information reported for Bachman's Sparrow at this site or elsewhere in its range. Results of the simulations suggest that variation in demographic variables affects population size more than variation in dispersal ability. Changes in adult and juvenile survivorship have especially large impacts on the probability of population extinction. The presence of habitat types that serve as permanent sources of dispersers increases the total population size in the landscape, and lowers the probability of extinction. Results of models such as BACHMAP can suggest modifications to current management plans that would increase the probability of population persistence for species of special concern in managed landscapes.

Emerging Issues in Population Viability Analysis.

Population viability analysis ( PVA) has become a commonly used tool in endangered species management. There is no single process that constitutes PVA, but all approaches have in common an assessment of a population's risk of extinction (or quasi extinction) or its projected population growth either under current conditions or expected from proposed management. As model sophistication increases, and software programs that facilitate PVA without the need for modeling expertise become more available, there is greater potential for the misuse of models and increased confusion over interpreting their results. Consequently, we discuss the practical use and limitations of PVA in conservation planning, and we discuss some emerging issues of PVA. We review extant issues that have become prominent in PVA, including spatially explicit modeling, sensitivity analysis, incorporating genetics into PVA, PVA in plants, and PVA software packages, but our coverage of emerging issues is not comprehensive. We conclude that PVA is a powerful tool in conservation biology for comparing alternative research plans and relative extinction risks among species, but we suggest caution in its use: (1) because PVA is a model, its validity depends on the appropriateness of the model's structure and data quality; (2) results should be presented with appropriate assessment of confidence; (3) model construction and results should be subject to external review, and (4) model structure, input, and results should be treated as hypotheses to be tested. We also suggest (5) restricting the definition of PVA to development of a formal quantitative model, (6) focusing more research on determining how pervasive density-dependence feedback is across species, and (7) not using PVA to determine minimum population size or (8) the specific probability of reaching extinction. The most appropriate use of PVA may be for comparing the relative effects of potential management actions on population growth or persistence.

RESUMEN: El análisis de viabilidad poblacional (AVP) es una herramienta de uso común en el manejo de especies en peligro. No hay un proceso único que constituya al AVP, pero todos los enfoques tienen en común la estimación del riesgo de extinción (o cuasi extinción) o la proyección del crecimiento poblacional, ya sea bajo las condiciones actuales o las esperadas del manejo propuesto. A medida que aumenta la sofisticación del modelo, y que se dispone de programas de cómputo que facilitan el AVP sin necesidad de experiencia en modelaje, hay una mayor posibilidad de desaprovechar el modelo y una mayor confusión en la interpretación de los resultados. En consecuencia, discutimos el uso práctico y las limitaciones del AVP en la planificación de conservación y discutimos algunos temas emergentes del AVP. Revisamos temas vigentes que son prominentes en el AVP, incluyendo el modelaje espacialmente explícito, el análisis de sensibilidad, la inclusión de la genética en el AVP, AVP en plantas y paquetes de cómputo de AVP, sin embargo nuestra revisión de los temas emergentes no es amplia. Concluimos que el AVP es una herramienta poderosa para la biología de la conservación para comparar planes de investigación alternos y los riesgos de extinción entre especies, pero sugerimos precaución en su uso: (1) porque el AVP es un modelo cuya validez depende en la eficacia de la estructura del modelo y la calidad de los datos, (2) los resultados deberían presentarse con la evaluación de su confiabilidad, (3) la construcción del modelo y sus resultados deberían ser sometidos a revisión externa y (4) la estructura del modelo, los datos y los resultados deberían ser tratadas como hipótesis a probar. También sugerimos (5) restringir la definición del AVP para desarrollar un modelo cuantitativo formal, (6) realizar más investigación para determinar que tan extensa es la reacción de las especies a la denso-dependencia y (7) no utilizar el AVP para determinar el tamaño poblacional mínimo u (8) la probabilidad específica de extinción. El uso más adecuado del AVP puede ser para comparar los efectos relativos de las acciones de manejo sobre el crecimiento de la población o su persistencia.