Towards connecting biodiversity and geodiversity across scales with satellite remote sensing

Abstract

Issue Geodiversity (i.e., the variation in Earth's abiotic processes and features) has strong effects on biodiversity patterns. However, major gaps remain in our understanding of how relationships between biodiversity and geodiversity vary over space and time. Biodiversity data are globally sparse and concentrated in particular regions. In contrast, many forms of geodiversity can be measured continuously across the globe with satellite remote sensing. Satellite remote sensing directly measures environmental variables with grain sizes as small as tens of metres and can therefore elucidate biodiversity–geodiversity relationships across scales. Evidence We show how one important geodiversity variable, elevation, relates to alpha, beta and gamma taxonomic diversity of trees across spatial scales. We use elevation from NASA's Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) and c . 16,000 Forest Inventory and Analysis plots to quantify spatial scaling relationships between biodiversity and geodiversity with generalized linear models (for alpha and gamma diversity) and beta regression (for beta diversity) across five spatial grains ranging from 5 to 100 km. We illustrate different relationships depending on the form of diversity; beta and gamma diversity show the strongest relationship with variation in elevation. Conclusion With the onset of climate change, it is more important than ever to examine geodiversity for its potential to foster biodiversity. Widely available satellite remotely sensed geodiversity data offer an important and expanding suite of measurements for understanding and predicting changes in different forms of biodiversity across scales. Interdisciplinary research teams spanning biodiversity, geoscience and remote sensing are well poised to advance understanding of biodiversity–geodiversity relationships across scales and guide the conservation of nature.

Beyond counts and averages: Relating geodiversity to dimensions of biodiversity

“…To disentangle the effects of climatic and topographical drivers, spatially continuous remotely sensed data are necessary. Biodiversity–geodiversity relationships depend on the taxonomic group, the spatial location, the level and dimension of biodiversity considered and the grain of analysis (Zarnetske et al, ); there is no single relationship valid for all conditions. To date, biodiversity–geodiversity relationships have been characterized primarily in a few well‐studied taxa (Hjort et al, ; Meynard et al, ; Wang et al, ; but see Kaskela et al, ; Tukiainen et al, ); our study of birds and trees only hints at potential mechanisms underlying differences in relationships among taxonomic groups.…”

“…A comprehensive definition of geodiversity includes all abiotic features and processes found within Earth's atmosphere, lithosphere, hydrosphere and cryosphere (Record et al, in press;Zarnetske et al, 2019). Abiotic variation may promote increased variety of available niches for organisms (Tews et al, 2004), and high geodiversity is likely to indicate biodiversity hotspots (Lawler et al, 2015; but see Noss et al, 2015).…”

“…Recent work shows that the biodiversity-geodiversity relationship depends on spatial grain and extent (Bailey, Boyd, Hjort, Lavers, & Field, 2017;Zarnetske et al, 2019). Nevertheless, most studies have focused on alpha diversity (local diversity) measured within a plot.…”

Web of interactions among diversity approaches to identify ecosystem essential variables: Negev Highlands case study

“…Recent studies emphasize the importance of essential variables in relation to climate, geodiversity, and biodiversity (Pereira et al 2013, Bojinski et al 2014, Guerra et al 2019, Zarnetske et al 2019. A problem emerges as the selections of the variables are complicated by the presence of too many variables and the difference in their essentiality.…”

Hear every voice – working groups that work

“…As ecological research becomes more interdisciplinary, data intensive, and team oriented (Cheruvelil and Soranno 2018), ecologists must develop tools to ensure that working groups work well. After participating in several collaborative groups as junior researchers, we were given the opportunity to build our own working group via a NASA-funded project focused on connecting biodiversity to geodiversity across scales (Zarnetske et al 2019). Reflecting on our past experiences and those of others (Pavelin et al 2014;McInerny 2016), we developed an approach to group-based work aimed at expanding our networks of collaborators and strengthening the careers of early researchers.…”