Editorial: thematic series “Integrating movement ecology with biodiversity research”

Jeltsch, Florian; Grimm, Volker

doi:10.1186/s40462-020-00210-0

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 31 publications

(35 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…l −1 , the male diffusion coefficient is a factor of about 1.2 larger than the female one. This suggests that, on average, males move faster than females, consistently with previous experiments that also measured the diffusion coefficient for the same species [38].…”

Section: Mean Square Displacementsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Investigating the modalities by which individual organisms integrate exogenous information from their environment as well endogenous stimuli, and use them accordingly to modulate their behaviour, is central to relate movement ecology to community theory and biodiversity research [39]. Individual movement in animal kingdom displays a wide gamut of patterns and typologies [40,41].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Homeostatic swimming of zooplankton upon crowding: the case of the copepod Centropages typicus

Uttieri

Hinow

Pastore

et al. 2021

J. R. Soc. Interface.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crowding has a major impact on the dynamics of many material and biological systems, inducing effects as diverse as glassy dynamics and swarming. While this issue has been deeply investigated for a variety of living organisms, more research remains to be done on the effect of crowding on the behaviour of copepods, the most abundant metazoans on Earth. To this aim, we experimentally investigate the swimming behaviour, used as a dynamic proxy of animal adaptations, of males and females of the calanoid copepod Centropages typicus at different densities of individuals (10, 50 and 100 ind. l −1 ) by performing three-dimensional single-organism tracking. We find that the C. typicus motion is surprisingly unaffected by crowding over the investigated density range. Indeed, the mean square displacements as a function of time always show a crossover from ballistic to Fickian regime, with poor variations of the diffusion constant on increasing the density. Close to the crossover, the displacement distributions display exponential tails with a nearly density-independent decay length. The trajectory fractal dimension, D 3D ≅ 1.5, and the recently proposed ‘ecological temperature’ also remain stable on increasing the individual density. This suggests that, at least over the range of animal densities used, crowding does not impact on the characteristics of C. typicus swimming motion, and that a homeostatic mechanism preserves the stability of its swimming performance.

show abstract

Section: Mean Square Displacementsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Homeostatic swimming of zooplankton upon crowding: the case of the copepod Centropages typicus

Uttieri

Hinow

Pastore

et al. 2021

J. R. Soc. Interface.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…). Specifically, animals can displace resources, or serve as ‘mobile links’ (Jeltsch et al, ), within and among ecosystems, generating nutrient inputs that are referred to as ‘active subsidies’ (Earl & Zollner, ). Active subsidies often differ in their physical form (nutrient composition, lability, etc.…”

Section: Introduction: Animals As Important Vectors Of Nutrient Transmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vectors with autonomy: what distinguishes animal‐mediated nutrient transport from abiotic vectors?

McInturf

Pollack²,

Yang

et al. 2019

Biological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animal movements are important drivers of nutrient redistribution that can affect primary productivity and biodiversity across various spatial scales. Recent work indicates that incorporating these movements into ecosystem models can enhance our ability to predict the spatio‐temporal distribution of nutrients. However, the role of animal behaviour in animal‐mediated nutrient transport (i.e. active subsidies) remains under‐explored. Here we review the current literature on active subsidies to show how the behaviour of active subsidy agents makes them both ecologically important and qualitatively distinct from abiotic processes (i.e. passive subsidies). We first propose that animal movement patterns can create similar ecological effects (i.e. press and pulse disturbances) in recipient ecosystems, which can be equal in magnitude to or greater than those of passive subsidies. We then highlight three key behavioural features distinguishing active subsidies. First, organisms can transport nutrients counter‐directionally to abiotic forces and potential energy gradients (e.g. upstream). Second, unlike passive subsidies, organisms respond to the patterns of nutrients that they generate. Third, animal agents interact with each other. The latter two features can form positive‐ or negative‐feedback loops, creating patterns in space or time that can reinforce nutrient hotspots in places of mass aggregations and/or create lasting impacts within ecosystems. Because human‐driven changes can affect both the space‐use of active subsidy species and their composition at both population (i.e. individual variation) and community levels (i.e. species interactions), predicting patterns in nutrient flows under future modified environmental conditions depends on understanding the behavioural mechanisms that underlie active subsidies and variation among agents' contributions. We conclude by advocating for the integration of animal behaviour, animal movement data, and individual variation into future conservation efforts in order to provide more accurate and realistic assessments of changing ecosystem function.

show abstract

Editorial: thematic series “Integrating movement ecology with biodiversity research”

Cited by 2 publications

References 31 publications

Homeostatic swimming of zooplankton upon crowding: the case of the copepod Centropages typicus

Homeostatic swimming of zooplankton upon crowding: the case of the copepod Centropages typicus

Vectors with autonomy: what distinguishes animal‐mediated nutrient transport from abiotic vectors?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About