Stochastic disturbance regimes alter patterns of ecosystem variability and recovery

Abstract

Altered ecosystem variability is an important ecological response to disturbance yet understanding of how various attributes of disturbance regimes affect ecosystem variability is limited. To improve the framework for understanding the disturbance regime attributes that affect ecosystem variability, we examine how the introduction of stochasticity to disturbance parameters (frequency, severity and extent) alters simulated recovery when compared to deterministic outcomes from a spatially explicit simulation model. We also examine the agreement between results from empirical studies and deterministic and stochastic configurations of the model. We find that stochasticity in disturbance frequency and spatial extent leads to the greatest increase in the variance of simulated dynamics, although stochastic severity also contributes to departures from the deterministic case. The incorporation of stochasticity in disturbance attributes improves agreement between empirical and simulated responses, with 71% of empirical responses correctly classified by stochastic configurations of the model as compared to 47% using the purely deterministic model. By comparison, only 2% of empirical responses were correctly classified by the deterministic model and misclassified by stochastic configurations of the model. These results indicate that stochasticity in the attributes of a disturbance regime alters the patterns and classification of ecosystem variability, suggesting altered recovery dynamics. Incorporating stochastic disturbance processes into models may thus be critical for anticipating the ecological resilience of ecosystems. OPEN ACCESS Citation: Fraterrigo JM, Langille AB, Rusak JA (2020) Stochastic disturbance regimes alter patterns of ecosystem variability and recovery. PLoS ONE 15(3): e0229927. https://doi.

Effects of short‐interval disturbances continue to accumulate, overwhelming variability in local resilience

“…Given the well‐documented role of burn severity in altering competitive dynamics between coniferous and deciduous species in the North American boreal (Johnstone and Chapin 2006, Whitman et al 2018), this variation between topographic position indicates that black spruce may retain competitive advantage longer in lowlands under single fires or reburn events. However, lowland plots still underwent a transition to deciduous communities linked with a removal of organic layers, indicating potential resilience via initially lower soil consumption (implying lower fire intensity) is limited and that, as predicted by theory, frequency of events is as important as any disturbance characteristic in driving recovery trajectories (Fraterrigo et al 2020).…”

“…Long-term shifts to different disturbance regimes (e.g., higher frequency) or other feedbacks can allow new community types to persist, driving fundamental shifts in ecosystem structure (e.g., grazing and fires, Archibald et al 2005; coral reef functioning, Jones et al 2004). Theoretical modeling agrees and further suggests changes in disturbance frequency are more important than changes to severity or other disturbance characteristics (Fraterrigo et al 2020) in driving variability in recovery.…”

“…In addition, effects on ecosystems are mediated by external factors, such as topography and local site conditions, which theoretically may modulate cumulative impacts (Paine et al 1998). However, if frequency is truly the most significant factor (Fraterrigo et al 2020), then that moderation effect should disappear with ongoing events. This too has not been empirically investigated.…”

Non‐additive effects of foundation species determine the response of aquatic ecosystems to nutrient perturbation

“…Furthermore, we could explore how a progressive increase in pulse intensity might affect the capacity of the system to recover between individual pulses and compare this to ecosystem recovery over a prolonged period without direct manipulation. Indeed, variation in the nature of ecosystem disturbance (e.g., frequency and intensity of pulses, duration and timing of disturbance) can have important consequences for ecosystem variability in general (Fraterrigo et al 2020), and for recovery dynamics in particular (Zelnik et al 2018). Across the entire study, we found that the strong non‐additivity of ecosystem responses to our nutrient manipulations were remarkably similar in both years.…”

Processes driving understory community dynamics in Ulleungdo Island broadleaved forest, South Korea

“…The understory vegetation developmental process in a young tree stand at the stem exclusion stage can be generally explained, whereas little is known regarding the changes in this process over midor long-term observational periods (Halpern & Lutz, 2013). Efforts are underway to understand the relative importance of heterogeneous processes that change in line with the successional processes in an ecosystem (Chase & Myers, 2011;Fraterrigo et al, 2020;Liu et al, 2018;Royo & Ristau, 2013).…”