To what extent can ecosystem services motivate protecting biodiversity?

Dee, Laura E.; Lara, Michel De; Costello, Christopher; Gaines, Steven D.

doi:10.1111/ele.12790

Cited by 42 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 98 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our work highlights that win‐win outcomes for ES and Biodiversity are possible, even when optimising for just one of these objectives, consistent with previous studies (e.g. Dee et al., ; Nelson et al., ; Polasky et al., ). Our results also highlight that achieving such outcomes is far from guaranteed and depends on both network structure and the trophic level of the service providers.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…As for many ecosystem services in natural ecosystems, only approximations of the total value of a service provided by an ecosystem exist. Furthermore, in most natural systems, the exact contribution of each organismal group, and the species within them, to each ecosystem service are not known at the species or group level (Dee et al., ), with the exception of provisioning services that report direct market values by species (e.g. for a fishery).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Win‐wins for biodiversity and ecosystem service conservation depend on the trophic levels of the species providing services

Xiao

Dee

Chadès

et al. 2018

Journal of Applied Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Confronted by significant impacts to ecosystems world‐wide, decision makers face the challenge of maintaining both biodiversity and the provision of ecosystem services (ES). However, the objectives of managing biodiversity and supplying ES may not always be in concert, resulting in the need for trade‐offs. Understanding these potential trade‐offs is crucial for identifying circumstances under which conservation strategies designed to maximise either biodiversity or ES will result in win‐win or win‐lose outcomes. One important factor that may influence these outcomes are species interactions and the structure of the networks in which they are embedded. We combine optimisation and network theory to investigate the difference in species prioritisation and management outcomes when targeting biodiversity or ES, by considering trophic interactions between species. We analyse 360 simulated ecosystem networks with different ecosystem structures, including the trophic level of the species providing the ES, the number of ES considered, and the food web connectivity. We then illustrate the framework on a saltmarsh case study. We find that trade‐offs between biodiversity and ES depend on the network structure of the ecosystem being managed. The trophic level of the species providing the ES is an important determinant of optimal species protection priorities and the biodiversity‐ES trade‐offs. A strategy targeting ES leads to similar levels of biodiversity conservation (a win‐win situation) only when basal species provide the services. In contrast, food web connectivity and the number of services considered have little impact on biodiversity‐ES trade‐offs. Synthesis and applications. Our research provides the first optimisation model to examine trade‐offs between a biodiversity‐ or ecosystem service‐based approach for managing a network of interacting species that provide services. Importantly, results from considering species‐services interactions in ecosystem network dynamics can provide managers with quantitative insights to identify opportunities for win‐wins and or to avoid win‐loss outcomes, by focusing on the trophic level of the species providing services. Future research could build on our model to add multiple interaction types among species, ecosystem functions, and ecosystem services to analyse optimal ecosystem management for multiple conservation objectives.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Win‐wins for biodiversity and ecosystem service conservation depend on the trophic levels of the species providing services

Xiao

Dee

Chadès

et al. 2018

Journal of Applied Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Documented examples in which biodiversity conservation has enhanced ecosystem functioning are rare, and the feasibility of protecting biodiversity to preserve ecosystem functioning has been rightly questioned (Cavanagh et al., ; Dee et al., ). Yet our synthesis confirms that protection of biodiversity is indeed feasible via area closures, and shows, for the first time, that the increased diversity resulting from protection can enhance ecosystem functioning on coral reefs (i.e., macroalgal removal).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, implementing EBM and evaluating its performance remains challenging (Link & Browman, 2014), not least because reliable indicators of, and criteria as is the development of management approaches that protect biodiversity at large (Balvanera et al, 2014). Such challenges have led to a wide chasm between scientific evidence for biodiversity-mediated effects and implementation of management actions centered on this paradigm (Cavanagh et al, 2016;Dee, De Lara, Costello, & Gaines, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marine protected areas enhance coral reef functioning by promoting fish biodiversity

Topor

Rasher

Duffy

et al. 2019

CONSERVATION LETTERS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Preserving biodiversity and ecosystem function in the Anthropocene is one of humanity's greatest challenges. Ecosystem‐based management and area closures are considered an effective way to maintain ecological processes, especially in marine systems. Although there is strong evidence that such measures positively affect community structure, their impact on the rate of key ecological processes remains unclear. Here, we provide evidence that marine protected areas enhance herbivory rates on coral reefs via direct and indirect pathways. Using meta‐analysis and a path‐analytical framework, we demonstrate that, on average, protected areas increase the species richness of herbivorous fishes, which, in turn, enhances browsing rates on macroalgae. However, in all three regions studied (the Atlantic, Indian, and Pacific Ocean), a small subset of the herbivore assemblage accounted for the majority of browsing. Our results therefore indicate that ecosystem functioning on coral reefs may respond positively to both area closures and the protection of key species.

show abstract

“…(), response diversity could be little influenced or even increase with concurrent losses in FR. These findings suggest that the link between ecosystem function and biodiversity in small waterbodies is not clear and the use of ecosystem functioning as a basis for biodiversity conservation should be carefully considered (Dee, De Lara, Costello, & Gaines, ; Srivastava & Vellend, ). However, given the large degree of turnover between ponds and concomitant changes in species dominance (Hill et al., ), the maintenance of biodiversity likely remains critical for functional resilience (Lohbeck et al., ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The functional response and resilience in small waterbodies along land‐use and environmental gradients

Thornhill

Biggs

Hill

et al. 2018

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is growing recognition of the essential services provided to humanity by functionally intact ecosystems. Freshwater ecosystems are found throughout agricultural and urban landscapes and provide a wide range of ecosystem services, but globally they are also amongst the most vulnerable. In particular, ponds (lentic waters typically less than 2 ha), provide natural flood management, sequester carbon and hold significant cultural value. However, to inform their management it is important to understand (1) how functional diversity varies in response to disturbance and (2) the link between biodiversity conservation and ecosystem function. In this study, a meta-analysis of seven separate pond studies from across England and Wales was carried out to explore the effect of urban and agricultural land-use gradients, shading, emergent vegetation, surface area and pH upon groups of functionally similar members of the macroinvertebrate fauna. Functional effect groups were first identified by carrying out a hierarchical cluster analysis using body size, voltinism and feeding habits (18 categories) that are closely related to biogeochemical processes (e.g. nutrient and carbon recycling). Secondly, the influence of the gradients upon effect group membership (functional redundancy-FR) and the breadth of traits available to aid ecosystem recovery (response diversity) was assessed using species counts and functional dispersion (FDis) using 12 response traits. The effect of land-use gradients was unpredictable, whilst there was a negative response in both FR and FDis to shading and positive responses to increases in emergent vegetation cover and surface area. An inconsistent association between FDis and FR suggested that arguments for taxonomic biodiversity conservation to augment ecosystem functioning are too simplistic. Thus, a deeper understanding of the response of functional diversity to disturbance could have greater impact with decision-makers who may relate better to the loss of ecosystem function in response to environmental degradation than species loss alone.

show abstract

To what extent can ecosystem services motivate protecting biodiversity?

Cited by 42 publications

References 98 publications

Win‐wins for biodiversity and ecosystem service conservation depend on the trophic levels of the species providing services

Win‐wins for biodiversity and ecosystem service conservation depend on the trophic levels of the species providing services

Marine protected areas enhance coral reef functioning by promoting fish biodiversity

The functional response and resilience in small waterbodies along land‐use and environmental gradients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About