How do ecological resilience metrics relate to community stability and collapse?

Abstract

The concept of ecological resilience (the amount of disturbance a system can absorb before collapsing and reorganizing) holds potential for predicting community change and collapse-increasingly common issues in the Anthropocene. Yet neither the predictions nor metrics of resilience have received rigorous testing. The crossscale resilience model, a leading operationalization of resilience, proposes resilience can be quantified by the combination of diversity and redundancy of functions performed by species operating at different scales. Here, we use 48 years of sub-continental avian community data aggregated at multiple spatial scales to calculate resilience metrics derived from the cross-scale resilience model (i.e., cross-scale diversity, cross-scale redundancy, within-scale redundancy, and number of body mass aggregations) and test core predictions inherent to community persistence and change. Specifically, we ask how cross-scale resilience metrics relate community stability and collapse. We found low mean cross-correlation between species richness and cross-scale resilience metrics. Resilience metrics constrained the magnitude of community fluctuations over time (mean species turnover), but resilience metrics but did not influence variability of community fluctuations (variance in turnover). We show shifts in resilience metrics closely predict community collapse: shifts in cross-scale redundancy preceded abrupt changes in community composition, and shifts in cross-scale diversity synchronized with abrupt changes in community composition. However, we found resilience metrics only weakly relate to maintenance of particular species assemblages over time. Our results distinguish ecological resilience from ecological stability and allied concepts such as elasticity and resistance: we show communities may fluctuate widely yet still be resilient. Our findings also differentiate the roles of functional redundancy and diversity as metrics of resilience and reemphasize the importance of considering resilience metrics from a multivariate perspective. Finally, we support the contention that ecological stability is nested within ecological resilience: stability predicts the behavior of systems within an ecological regime, and resilience predicts the maintenance of regimes and behavior of systems collapsing into alternative regimes.

Lakes in the era of global change: moving beyond single‐lake thinking in maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem services

“…Surrogates of resilience have been developed, and an increasing amount of data is available that would allow such comparisons (Nash et al ., 2014; Angeler et al ., 2016). Comparison of resilience‐based assessments with traditional biodiversity studies should be made because these approaches may not show congruent results (Roberts et al ., 2019 b ).…”

Climate variability supersedes grazing to determine the anatomy and physiology of a dominant grassland species

“…5 C). This diversity in functional trait responses has been previously reported to protect individuals and populations from detrimental effects of drought (Mori et al 2013 ; Kreyling et al 2017 ; Roberts et al 2019 ). In addition, such variation may also aid in protecting populations from the potentially negative effects from grazing.…”

Functional Responses of Bird Assemblages to Land-Use Change in the Colombian Llanos Region

“…The identity of natural systems is determined by the functional traits that make them up, and their resilience is based on maintaining their functional space (Allen et al, 2005;Gladstone-Gallagher et al, 2019;Roberts et al, 2019). Differential responses between functional groups result in a turnover of functional groups and species, modifying the functional space of traits between land cover types, thus resulting in changes in the species number, composition, functional diversity, and functional redundancy (i.e., frequency of representation of the same attribute traits) (Figure 5).…”