Disturbance ecology and the problem of n = 1: A proposed framework for unifying disturbance ecology studies to address theory across multiple ecological systems

Abstract

1. Disturbances are a key part of ecosystem dynamics at multiple scales. They can maintain ephemeral habitat, alter local and landscape biodiversity, drive carbon balance changes and trigger whole ecosystem regime shifts. Yet, there are few theories and only limited frameworks underlying disturbance ecology by which scientists and practitioners can anticipate the impacts of novel disturbances or changes in disturbance regimes. Much of the challenge in developing and testing theories lies in the diversity of ecosystems and disturbance processes and the general inability to (a) properly replicate studies and (b) compare results across disparate systems, from bacterial communities to boreal forests. 2. General syntheses of disturbance processes have identified key aspects of disturbance impact and response-resource stock change, resource flux change, spatial dynamics and trait diversity-that should apply across systems. Yet, application and testing remain challenging due to a lack of a common set of metrics and baselines for comparisons across systems.3. Here, I propose a discipline-wide effort to develop and publish standardized metrics (in addition to study-specific data) such that the field as a whole can build and test general theory that works across ecological systems. Ten metrics spanning event type, location/design data and biotic composition comprise this suite of 'minimum descriptors' and are directly derived from current disturbance ecology theory. Several examples of cross-system applicability, from bacterial studies to palaeoecological disturbances, are noted. These are example metrics, intended to open the conversation about the most appropriate and theory-based lines of commonality across the field, and they may be further refined through crossdisciplinary conversation.4. The result of standardizing metrics will be a coordinated dataset that allows for inter-system testing of theory, meaning disturbance ecology studies can move past disparate, seemingly unique systems with little replication to integrated research. To phrase it in another way, disturbance ecology studies should be planned, in part, to contribute to future quantitative meta-analyses. If done, we (as a community) will be much better prepared to address the challenges of emerging | 2277Methods in Ecology and Evoluঞon BUMA

Linked disturbance in the temperate forest: Earthworms, deer, and canopy gaps

“…We report proportional differences between treatments based on untransformed means, but median values also showed similar patterns with disturbance treatment. We also report data to meet several minimum descriptive standards set by Buma (2021) to simplify integration into disturbance ecology-related meta-analyses.…”

A joint framework for studying compound ecoclimatic events

“…Individual disturbances are typically stochastic and considered unpredictable, but their long-term patterns, constituting the disturbance regime, are expected to be predictable to some extent 11 . The characteristics used to describe disturbances are analogous to those used to describe climate-related hazards, for example return times 69 , and similarly rely on probabilistic definitions such as the probability of disturbance of a given intensity, disturbance severity or extent to occur 11 . However, the concept of disturbance regime in the consideration of hazards is not considered in climate risk (Fig.…”

“…1). The concept of post-disturbance recovery 65,69 , included in the disturbance regime, or disturbance history is also not considered in climate risk perspectives.…”

The eco‐evolutionary role of fire in shaping terrestrial ecosystems

“…These challenges include limited sample size and available datasets, limited functional trait knowledge, underrepresentation of ecological communities in the literature and context dependency. Establishing networks, forming interdisciplinary partnerships, unifying metrics and incorporating knowledge from diverse communities should be considered in future studies (Archibald et al, 2018; Buma, 2021; Shuman et al, 2022, Fire Community Database Network; https://firedata.ornl.gov/). Addressing these challenges and limitations will enable researchers to answer critical questions on the evolutionary responses to fire (Abs et al, 2022; McLauchlan et al, 2020).…”