Marine biodiversity–ecosystem functions under uncertain environmental futures

Bulling, Mark T.; Hicks, Natalie; Murray, Leigh W.; Paterson, David M.; Raffaelli, David; White, Piran C. L.; Solan, Martin

doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0022

Cited by 82 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ecologists are traditionally well-suited to quantifying effects of a changing environment (e.g. warming climate and ocean acidification through increased atmospheric CO2 levels) on marine biodiversity (Hicks et al 2011) and how these impacts links back to changes in ecosystem functioning (Bulling et al 2010, Murray et al 2013. However, empirical evidence on the link between functions and services is in low supply.…”

Section: Is the Science Fit For Purpose?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Valuation of Marine and Coastal Ecosystems: Is it currently fit for purpose?

Hanley¹,

Hynes²,

Patterson³

et al. 2015

Journal of Ocean and Coastal Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Is the Science Fit For Purpose?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Valuation of Marine and Coastal Ecosystems: Is it currently fit for purpose?

Hanley¹,

Hynes²,

Patterson³

et al. 2015

Journal of Ocean and Coastal Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Species with small population sizes or which are highly specialized are likely to be most affected under these multiple stressors acting simultaneously. We need to move beyond investigations of the impacts of single factors, and Bulling et al (2010) reveal how this can be addressed experimentally. These authors examine the roles of temperature and concentration of atmospheric CO 2 on the relationship between invertebrate species richness and nutrient release in an estuarine system.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate change, biotic interactions and ecosystem services

Montoya

Raffaelli

2010

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

266

187

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change is real. The wrangling debates are over, and we now need to move onto a predictive ecology that will allow managers of landscapes and policy makers to adapt to the likely changes in biodiversity over the coming decades. There is ample evidence that ecological responses are already occurring at the individual species (population) level. The challenge is how to synthesize the growing list of such observations with a coherent body of theory that will enable us to predict where and when changes will occur, what the consequences might be for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and what we might do practically in order to maintain those systems in as good condition as possible. It is thus necessary to investigate the effects of climate change at the ecosystem level and to consider novel emergent ecosystems composed of new species assemblages arising from differential rates of range shifts of species. Here, we present current knowledge on the effects of climate change on biotic interactions and ecosystem services supply, and summarize the papers included in this volume. We discuss how resilient ecosystems are in the face of the multiple components that characterize climate change, and suggest which current ecological theories may be used as a starting point to predict ecosystem-level effects of climate change.Keywords: climate change; ecosystem services; biotic interactions; biodiversity; ecological networks; resilience CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS BEYOND INDIVIDUAL SPECIESClimate change is real. It is expected to be the major threat to biodiversity and one of the main factors affecting human health and well-being over the coming decades (Thomas et al. 2004;ME Assessment 2005; Schröter et al. 2005;Pimm 2009). Recent studies suggest CO 2 concentrations are over the safe boundary beyond which the risk of irreversible climate change is extremely high, such as the loss of major ice sheets, accelerated sea-level rise and abrupt changes in ecosystems, including agrosystems (Rockström et al. 2009).There is ample evidence that ecological responses are already occurring. First, data on many taxa in the Northern Hemisphere show a consistent trend of northward or westward expansion of species ranges and altitudinal shifts (Parmesan et al. 1999;Thomas et al. 2001;Walther et al. 2002;Walther 2010). Second, globally rising temperatures trigger spring advancement of phenology (Root et al. 2003;Edwards & Richardson 2004;Parmesan 2006). And third, reduction in body size owing to warming is generalized in aquatic systems (Daufresne et al. 2009;Moran et al. 2010). At the individual species (population) level, much progress has been made in the area of range shifts and effects on population dynamics. But scaling from populations through to communities, let alone ecosystems, will be challenging (Kareiva et al. 1993;Schmitz et al. 2003;Tylianakis et al. 2008;Berg et al. 2010;Fenton & Spencer 2010). The population responses of many species to climate change are unlikely to be simply additive and their combinational...

show abstract

“…Owing to the large number of combinations involved (n ¼ 150), mesocosms were randomized across five experimental runs (n ¼ 30 mesocosms per run) of 10 days duration (sufficient time to allow faunal-mediated nutrient generation, while avoiding vertical homogenization of luminophore tracers through bioturbation; e.g. [39]). …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Habitat structure mediates biodiversity effects on ecosystem properties

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much of what we know about the role of biodiversity in mediating ecosystem processes and function stems from manipulative experiments, which have largely been performed in isolated, homogeneous environments that do not incorporate habitat structure or allow natural community dynamics to develop. Here, we use a range of habitat configurations in a model marine benthic system to investigate the effects of species composition, resource heterogeneity and patch connectivity on ecosystem properties at both the patch (bioturbation intensity) and multi-patch (nutrient concentration) scale. We show that allowing fauna to move and preferentially select patches alters local species composition and density distributions, which has negative effects on ecosystem processes (bioturbation intensity) at the patch scale, but overall positive effects on ecosystem functioning (nutrient concentration) at the multi-patch scale. Our findings provide important evidence that community dynamics alter in response to localized resource heterogeneity and that these small-scale variations in habitat structure influence species contributions to ecosystem properties at larger scales. We conclude that habitat complexity forms an important buffer against disturbance and that contemporary estimates of the level of biodiversity required for maintaining future multi-functional systems may need to be revised.

show abstract

Marine biodiversity–ecosystem functions under uncertain environmental futures

Cited by 82 publications

References 52 publications

Economic Valuation of Marine and Coastal Ecosystems: Is it currently fit for purpose?

Economic Valuation of Marine and Coastal Ecosystems: Is it currently fit for purpose?

Climate change, biotic interactions and ecosystem services

Habitat structure mediates biodiversity effects on ecosystem properties

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About