Search

Frugivory, that is feeding on fruits, pulp or seeds by animals, is usually considered a mutualism when interactions involve seed dispersal, and an antagonism when it results in the predation and destruction of seeds. Nevertheless, most frugivory interactions involve both benefits and disadvantages for plants, and the net interaction outcomes thus tend to vary along a continuum from mutualism to antagonism. Quantifying outcome variation is challenging and the ecological contribution of frugivorous animals to plant demography thus remains little explored. This is particularly true for interactions in which animals do not ingest entire fruits, that is in seed-eating and pulp-eating. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of Neotropical palm-frugivore interactions, with a focus on how frugivore consumption behaviour (i.e. digestive processing, fruit-handling ability and caching behaviour) and feeding types (fruit-eating, pulp-eating and seed-eating) influence interaction outcomes at different demographic stages of palms. We compiled a total of 1043 species-level palm-frugivore interaction records that explicitly captured information on which parts of palm fruits are eaten by animals. These records showed consumption of fruits of 106 Neotropical palm species by 273 vertebrate species, especially birds (50%) and mammals (45%), but also fish (3%) and reptiles (2%). Fruit-eating involved all four taxonomic vertebrate classes whereas seed-eating and pulp-eating were only recorded among birds and mammals. Most fruit-eating interactions (77%) resulted in positive interaction outcomes for plants (e.g. gut-passed seeds are viable or seeds are successfully dispersed), regardless of the digestive processing type of vertebrate consumers (seed defecation versus regurgitation). The majority of pulp-eating interactions (91%) also resulted in positive interaction outcomes, for instance via pulp removal that promoted seed germination or via dispersal of intact palm seeds by external transport, especially if animals have a good fruit-handling ability (e.g. primates, and some parrots). By contrast, seed-eating interactions mostly resulted in dual outcomes (60%), where interactions had both negative effects on seed survival and positive outcomes through seed caching and external (non-digestive) seed dispersal. A detailed synthesis of available field studies with qualitative and quantitative information provided evidence that 12 families and 27 species of mammals and birds are predominantly on the mutualistic side of the continuum whereas five mammalian families, six mammal and one reptile species are on the antagonistic side. The synthesis also revealed that most species can act as partial mutualists, even if they are typically considered antagonists. Our review demonstrates how different consumption behaviours and feeding types of vertebrate fruit consumers can influence seed dispersal and regeneration of palms, and thus ultimately affect the structure and functioning of tropical ecosystems. Variation in feeding types of animal consumers will influence ecosystem dynamics via effects on plant population dynamics and differences in long-distance seed dispersal, and may subsequently affect ecosystem functions such as carbon storage. The quantification of intra- and inter-specific variation in outcomes of plant-frugivore interactions - and their positive and negative effects on the seed-to-seedling transition of animal-dispersed plants - should be a key research focus to understand better the mutualism-antagonism continuum and its importance for ecosystem dynamics., (© 2021 The Authors. Biological Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Cambridge Philosophical Society.)

Much biodiversity data is collected worldwide, but it remains challenging to assemble the scattered knowledge for assessing biodiversity status and trends. The concept of Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) was introduced to structure biodiversity monitoring globally, and to harmonize and standardize biodiversity data from disparate sources to capture a minimum set of critical variables required to study, report and manage biodiversity change. Here, we assess the challenges of a 'Big Data' approach to building global EBV data products across taxa and spatiotemporal scales, focusing on species distribution and abundance. The majority of currently available data on species distributions derives from incidentally reported observations or from surveys where presence-only or presence-absence data are sampled repeatedly with standardized protocols. Most abundance data come from opportunistic population counts or from population time series using standardized protocols (e.g. repeated surveys of the same population from single or multiple sites). Enormous complexity exists in integrating these heterogeneous, multi-source data sets across space, time, taxa and different sampling methods. Integration of such data into global EBV data products requires correcting biases introduced by imperfect detection and varying sampling effort, dealing with different spatial resolution and extents, harmonizing measurement units from different data sources or sampling methods, applying statistical tools and models for spatial inter- or extrapolation, and quantifying sources of uncertainty and errors in data and models. To support the development of EBVs by the Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO BON), we identify 11 key workflow steps that will operationalize the process of building EBV data products within and across research infrastructures worldwide. These workflow steps take multiple sequential activities into account, including identification and aggregation of various raw data sources, data quality control, taxonomic name matching and statistical modelling of integrated data. We illustrate these steps with concrete examples from existing citizen science and professional monitoring projects, including eBird, the Tropical Ecology Assessment and Monitoring network, the Living Planet Index and the Baltic Sea zooplankton monitoring. The identified workflow steps are applicable to both terrestrial and aquatic systems and a broad range of spatial, temporal and taxonomic scales. They depend on clear, findable and accessible metadata, and we provide an overview of current data and metadata standards. Several challenges remain to be solved for building global EBV data products: (i) developing tools and models for combining heterogeneous, multi-source data sets and filling data gaps in geographic, temporal and taxonomic coverage, (ii) integrating emerging methods and technologies for data collection such as citizen science, sensor networks, DNA-based techniques and satellite remote sensing, (iii) solving major technical issues related to data product structure, data storage, execution of workflows and the production process/cycle as well as approaching technical interoperability among research infrastructures, (iv) allowing semantic interoperability by developing and adopting standards and tools for capturing consistent data and metadata, and (v) ensuring legal interoperability by endorsing open data or data that are free from restrictions on use, modification and sharing. Addressing these challenges is critical for biodiversity research and for assessing progress towards conservation policy targets and sustainable development goals., (© 2017 The Authors. Biological Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Cambridge Philosophical Society.)

Predicting which species will occur together in the future, and where, remains one of the greatest challenges in ecology, and requires a sound understanding of how the abiotic and biotic environments interact with dispersal processes and history across scales. Biotic interactions and their dynamics influence species' relationships to climate, and this also has important implications for predicting future distributions of species. It is already well accepted that biotic interactions shape species' spatial distributions at local spatial extents, but the role of these interactions beyond local extents (e.g. 10 km(2) to global extents) are usually dismissed as unimportant. In this review we consolidate evidence for how biotic interactions shape species distributions beyond local extents and review methods for integrating biotic interactions into species distribution modelling tools. Drawing upon evidence from contemporary and palaeoecological studies of individual species ranges, functional groups, and species richness patterns, we show that biotic interactions have clearly left their mark on species distributions and realised assemblages of species across all spatial extents. We demonstrate this with examples from within and across trophic groups. A range of species distribution modelling tools is available to quantify species environmental relationships and predict species occurrence, such as: (i) integrating pairwise dependencies, (ii) using integrative predictors, and (iii) hybridising species distribution models (SDMs) with dynamic models. These methods have typically only been applied to interacting pairs of species at a single time, require a priori ecological knowledge about which species interact, and due to data paucity must assume that biotic interactions are constant in space and time. To better inform the future development of these models across spatial scales, we call for accelerated collection of spatially and temporally explicit species data. Ideally, these data should be sampled to reflect variation in the underlying environment across large spatial extents, and at fine spatial resolution. Simplified ecosystems where there are relatively few interacting species and sometimes a wealth of existing ecosystem monitoring data (e.g. arctic, alpine or island habitats) offer settings where the development of modelling tools that account for biotic interactions may be less difficult than elsewhere., (© 2012 The Authors. Biological Reviews © 2012 Cambridge Philosophical Society.)