Mass coral bleaching causes biotic homogenization of reef fish assemblages

Richardson, Laura E.; Graham, Nicholas A. J.; Pratchett, Morgan S.; Eurich, Jacob G.; Hoey, Andrew S.

doi:10.1111/gcb.14119

Cited by 150 publications

(141 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

133

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…carnivore), schooling behaviour (solitary, pairing, schooling), mobility (sedentary, mobile), position in water column (benthic or pelagic) and activity patterns (nocturnal/diurnal). These traits have revealed useful insights from global distributions of trait combinations (Mouillot et al, ; Stuart‐Smith et al, ) to local changes in community composition (Brandl et al, ; Richardson, Graham, Pratchett, Eurich, & Hoey, ).…”

Section: Functional Traits and Ecosystem Functions In A Changing Worldmentioning

confidence: 99%

The meaning of the term ‘function’ in ecology: A coral reef perspective

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The inherent complexity of high‐diversity systems can make them particularly difficult to understand. The relatively recent introduction of functional approaches, which seek to infer ecosystem functioning based on species’ ecological traits, has revolutionized our understanding of these high‐diversity systems. Today, the functional structure of an assemblage is widely regarded as a key indicator of the status or resilience of an ecosystem. Indeed, functional evaluations have become a mainstay of monitoring and management approaches. But is the heavy focus on broad metrics of functional structure grounded in empirical research? On tropical coral reefs, the ocean’s most diverse ecosystems, remarkably few studies directly quantify ecosystem functions and the term ‘function’ is widely used but rarely defined, especially when applied to reef fishes. Our review suggests that most ‘functional’ studies do not study function as it relates to ecological processes. Rather, they look at easy‐to‐measure traits or proxies that are thought to have functional significance. However, these links are rarely tested empirically, severely limiting our capacity to extend results from community structure to the dynamic processes operating within high‐diversity ecosystems such as coral reefs. With rapid changes in global ecosystems, and in their capacity to deliver ecosystem services, there is an urgent need to understand and empirically measure the role of organisms in various ecosystem functions. We suggest that if we are to understand and manage transitioning coral reefs in the Anthropocene, a broad definition of the word ‘function’ is needed along with a focus on ecological processes and the empirical quantification of functional roles. In this review, we propose a universal operational definition of the term ‘function’ that works from a cellular to a global level. Specifically, it is the movement or storage of energy or material. Within this broad definitional framework, all functions are part of a continuum that is tied together by the process‐based unifier of material fluxes. With this universal definition at hand, we then present a path forward that will allow us to fully harness the power of functional approaches in understanding and managing high‐diversity systems such as coral reefs. A plain language summary is available for this article.

show abstract

Section: Functional Traits and Ecosystem Functions In A Changing Worldmentioning

confidence: 99%

The meaning of the term ‘function’ in ecology: A coral reef perspective

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Throughout the region, the few species responsible for most of the structural complexity on reefs have been replaced by opportunistic species (Green, Edmunds, & Carpenter, ). Although it has been proposed that species reconfiguration may prevent ecosystem collapse as populations of remaining coral species could maintain ecosystem integrity under future climate change (Hughes et al., ), a growing body of evidence shows that simplified reef communities alter ecosystem functioning and productivity, and jeopardise the persistence of ecosystem goods and services (Alvarez‐Filip et al., ; Hughes et al., ; Richardson, Graham, Pratchett, Eurich, & Hoey, ). This is because shifted reefs are dominated by rapid coloniser species that whilst relatively tolerant to thermal and/or physical stressors, have different morphofunctional characteristics (Alvarez‐Filip et al., ) and typically provide less structural habitat complexity (Green et al., ; van Woesik et al., ; Darling et al., ).…”

Section: Impacts Associated With Eco‐morphological Taxa Transitions (mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dominance patterns of coral assemblages therefore seem to be the most important driver of the functioning of coral reefs, and thus, the future of these ecosystems might depend not only on general reductions of local and global stressors, but also on the maintenance of keystone coral species. As anthropogenic pressures continue, understanding how initial habitat configurations prior to disturbance will influence changes in coral communities, and reef‐associated species such as fish (Alvarez‐Filip, Gill, et al., ; Richardson, Graham, Pratchett, & Hoey, ; Richardson et al., ), will be critical for developing forewarnings of resilience loss and the threat of functional collapse, such that management efforts may be appropriately assigned.…”

Section: Impacts Associated With Eco‐morphological Taxa Transitions (mentioning

confidence: 99%

Changing geo‐ecological functions of coral reefs in the Anthropocene

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ecology of many coral reefs has changed markedly over recent decades in response to various combinations of local and global stressors. These ecological changes have important implications for the abundance of taxa that regulate the production and erosion of skeletal carbonates, and thus for many of the geo‐ecological functions that coral reefs provide, including reef framework production and sediment generation, the maintenance of reef habitat complexity and reef growth potential. These functional attributes underpin many of the ecosystem goods and services that reefs provide to society. Rapidly changing conditions of reefs in the Anthropocene are likely to significantly impact the capacity of reefs to sustain these geo‐ecological functions. Although the Anthropocene footprint of disturbance will be expressed differently across ecoregions and habitats, the end point for many reefs may be broadly similar: (a) progressively shifting towards net neutral or negative carbonate budget states; (b) becoming structurally flatter; and (c) having lower vertical growth rates. It is also likely that a progressive depth‐homogenisation will occur in terms of these processes. The Anthropocene is likely to be defined by an increasing disconnect between the ecological processes that drive carbonate production on the reef surface, and the net geological outcome of that production, that is, the accumulation of the underlying reef structure. Reef structures are thus likely to become increasingly relict or senescent features, which will reduce reef habitat complexity and sediment generation rates, and limit reef potential to accrete vertically at rates that can track rising sea levels. In the absence of pervasive stressors, recovery of degraded coral communities has been observed, resulting in high net‐positive budgets being regained. However, the frequency and intensity of climate‐driven bleaching events are predicted to increase over the next decades. This would increase the spatial footprint of disturbances and exacerbate the magnitude of the changes described here, limiting the capacity of many reefs to maintain their geo‐ecological functions. The enforcement of effective marine protection or the benefits of geographic isolation or of favourable environmental conditions (“refugia” sites) may offer the hope of more optimistic futures in some locations. A >plain language summary is available for this article.

show abstract

“…Subsequently, Olden and Rooney (2006) emphasised the multidimensional and multifaceted nature of this process occurring between two or more locations over a specified time interval, due to which ecosystems lose their biological uniqueness in space. Although biotic homogenisation has gained much attention in recent decades (Castaño-Sánchez et al 2018, Richardson et al 2018, it is still unclear how this process is acting at different levels of biodiversity through time in different ecosystems. This is especially the case in the lake-rich boreal region, which covers large areas across the Northern Hemisphere and is only moderately impacted by human activities compared to many other regions and ecosystems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…across sites) through time have gained less attention. There is also growing evidence that beta diversity patterns generally could reveal more about changes in biodiversity compared with alpha diversity through time (Dornelas et al 2014, Winegardner et al 2017, Richardson et al 2018. Therefore, beta diversity patterns can reveal the ongoing signs of degradation of ecosystems and the spatial aspects of biodiversity loss, biotic homogenisation (Rahel 2002, Olden andRooney 2006) or differentiation (Olden and Poff 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

No biotic homogenisation across decades but consistent effects of landscape position and pH on macrophyte communities in boreal lakes

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been predicted that spatial beta diversity shows a decreasing trend in the Anthropocene due to increasing human impact, causing biotic homogenisation. We aimed to discover if vascular aquatic macrophyte communities show different spatial patterns in beta diversity in relation to land use and environmental characteristics in different decades from 1940s to 2010s. We aimed to discover if spatial structures differ between species-, phylogeny-and functional-based beta diversity. We used presenceabsence data of aquatic macrophytes from five decades from small boreal lakes. We utilized generalised dissimilarity modelling to analyse spatial patterns in beta diversity in relation to environmental gradients. We found that lake elevation and pH were the most important variables in each decade, while land use was not particularly important in shaping beta diversity patterns. We did not find signs of a decreasing trend in spatial beta diversity in our study area during the past 70 yr. We did not find signs of either biotic homogenisation or biotic differentiation (taxonomic, phylogenetic or functional). Vascular aquatic macrophyte communities showed only slightly different beta diversity patterns in relation to human impact across decades. The patterns of different facets of beta diversity diverged only slightly from each other. Lake position in the landscape, reflecting both natural connectivity and lake characteristics, explained the patterns found in beta diversity, probably because our study area has faced only modest changes in land use from 1940s to 2010s when compared globally. Our study highlights the fact that biotic homogenisation is not an unambiguous process acting similarly at all spatial and temporal scales or in different environments and different organism groups.

show abstract

Mass coral bleaching causes biotic homogenization of reef fish assemblages

Cited by 150 publications

References 69 publications

The meaning of the term ‘function’ in ecology: A coral reef perspective

The meaning of the term ‘function’ in ecology: A coral reef perspective

Changing geo‐ecological functions of coral reefs in the Anthropocene

No biotic homogenisation across decades but consistent effects of landscape position and pH on macrophyte communities in boreal lakes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About