The sixth R: Revitalizing the natural phosphorus pump

Abraham, Andrew; Roman, Joe; Doughty, Christopher E.

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155023

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 127 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Doughty et al 2013Doughty et al , 2016. While this suite of models has allowed us to appreciate the importance of animals as agents within local and global biogeochemical cycles in a computationally efficient manner (Schmitz et al 2018;Abraham et al 2022a), there are several shortcomings. These include issues related to poorly mapped underlying element distributions (Wolf et al 2013), a bias toward large vertebrate herbivores (Doughty et al 2016), compound effects of using inaccurate mass-based scaling parameters such as gut passage time (Abraham et al 2021a), unrealistic movement strategies which are approximated to Brownian motion (Wolf et al 2013), and no feedback between animals and their elemental environment-an important relationship that drastically impacts animal movement (McInturf et al 2019).…”

Section: Validation and Monitoring Of Zoogeochemistry At Tkrmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are numerous studies examining wildlife‐mediated element redistribution. However, most of these focus on just one or two idiosyncratic animal species (Subalusky & Post 2019; Abraham et al 2022 a ) and few explicitly explore anthropogenic influences on element redistribution (but see Post et al 1998; Abbas et al 2012; Martín‐Vélez et al 2021). While the choice of these species is usually driven by unique characteristics particularly pertinent to the transport or recycling of elements (e.g.…”

Section: Current Framework To Model Animal Element Redistributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Understanding anthropogenic impacts on zoogeochemistry is essential for ecological restoration

Abraham

Duvall

Ferraro

et al. 2022

Restoration Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological restoration is critical for climate and biodiversity resilience over the coming century. Today, there is strong evidence that wildlife can significantly influence the distribution and stoichiometry of elements across landscapes, with subsequent impacts on the composition and functioning of ecosystems. Consequently, any anthropogenic activity that modifies this important aspect of zoogeochemistry, such as changes to animal community composition, diet, or movement patterns, may support or hinder restoration goals. It is therefore imperative that the zoogeochemical effects of such anthropogenic modifications are quantified and mapped at high spatiotemporal resolutions to help inform restoration strategies. Here, we first discuss pathways through which human activities shape wildlife-mediated elemental landscapes and outline why current frameworks are inadequate to characterize these processes. We then suggest improvements required to comprehensively model, validate, and monitor element recycling and redistribution by wildlife under differing wildlife management scenarios and discuss how this might be implemented in practice through a specific example in the southern Kalahari Desert. With robust ecological forecasting, zoogeochemical impacts of wildlife can thus be used to support ecological restoration and nature-based solutions to climate change. If ignored in the restoration process, the effects of wildlife on elemental landscapes may delay, or even prevent, restoration success.

show abstract

Section: Validation and Monitoring Of Zoogeochemistry At Tkrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Current Framework To Model Animal Element Redistributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding anthropogenic impacts on zoogeochemistry is essential for ecological restoration

Abraham

Duvall

Ferraro

et al. 2022

Restoration Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Supplementary bird feeding as an overlooked contribution to local phosphorus cycles

Abraham,

Doughty,

Plummer

et al. 2024

Frontiers in Ecol & Environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Supplementary feeding of garden birds and gamebirds is a common practice worldwide. Bird feed is rich in phosphorus (P), which plays a key role in animal health and ecosystem function. However, much of the P in bird feed originates from mined rock deposits, which is then transported thousands of kilometers to feeder stations, where it represents an external source of nutrients for recipient ecosystems. Here, we demonstrate that diffusion of P by birds and other animals from feeder stations to ecosystems can represent a nontrivial contribution to local biogeochemical cycles. Using the UK as a case study, we show that supplementary bird feeding supplies 2.4 (range: 1.9–3.0) gigagrams of P per year across the UK, a flux similar in magnitude to atmospheric deposition. Phosphorus provided to garden birds alone is equal to that supplied through the application of garden fertilizers. In natural and semi‐natural ecosystems, additional feeder‐derived P inputs may exacerbate eutrophication at the local scale and adversely impact biodiversity.

show abstract