Search

Biotic homogenization is a process whereby species assemblages become more similar through time. The standard way of identifying the process of biotic homogenization is to look for decreases in spatial beta-diversity. However, using a single assemblage-level metric to assess homogenization can mask important changes in the occupancy patterns of individual species. Here, we analysed changes in the spatial beta-diversity patterns (i.e. biotic heterogenization or homogenization) of British bird assemblages within 30 km × 30 km regions between two periods (1988-1991 and 2008-2011). We partitioned the change in spatial beta-diversity into extirpation and colonization-resultant change (i.e. change in spatial beta-diversity within each region resulting from both extirpation and colonization). We used measures of abiotic change in combination with Bayesian modelling to disentangle the drivers of biotic heterogenization and homogenization. We detected both heterogenization and homogenization across the two time periods and three measures of diversity (taxonomic, phylogenetic, and functional). In addition, both extirpation and colonization contributed to the observed changes, with heterogenization mainly driven by extirpation and homogenization by colonization. These assemblage-level changes were primarily due to shifting occupancy patterns of generalist species. Compared to habitat generalists, habitat specialists had significantly (i) higher average contributions to colonization-resultant change (indicating heterogenization within a region due to colonization) and (ii) lower average contributions to extirpation-resultant change (indicating homogenization from extirpation). Generalists showed the opposite pattern. Increased extirpation-resultant homogenization within regions was associated with increased urban land cover and decreased habitat diversity, precipitation, and temperature. Changes in extirpation-resultant heterogenization and colonization-resultant heterogenization were associated with differences in elevation between regions and changes in temperature and land cover. Many of the 'winners' (i.e. species that increased in occupancy) were species that had benefitted from conservation action (e.g. buzzard (Buteo buteo)). The 'losers' (i.e. those that decreased in occupancy) consisted primarily of previously common species, such as cuckoo (Cuculus canorus). Our results show that focusing purely on changes in spatial beta-diversity over time may obscure important information about how changes in the occupancy patterns of individual species contribute to homogenization and heterogenization., (© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Animal Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society.)

Biodiversity-stability relationships have frequently been studied in ecology, with the recent integration of traits to explain community stability over time. Classical theory underlying the biodiversity-stability relationship posits that different species' responses to the environment should stabilise community-level properties (e.g. biomass or abundance) through compensatory dynamics. However, functional response traits, which aim to predict how species respond to environmental change, are still rarely integrated into studies of ecological stability. Such traits should mechanistically drive community stability, both in terms of community abundance (functional variability) and composition (compositional variability). In turn, whether and how functional or compositional stability scales to affect temporal variation in functional effect traits (a proxy for ecosystem functioning) remains largely unknown, but is key to consistent ecosystem functioning under environmental change. Here, we explore the diversity-stability relationship in bird communities using annual survey data across 98 sites in central Romania, in combination with global trait databases and structural equation models. We show that higher response trait diversity promotes compositional variability directly, and functional variability indirectly via species asynchrony. In turn, functional variability impacts the temporal stability of effect trait diversity. Multiple facets of diversity and community stability differ between natural forests and agricultural or human-dominated survey sites, and the relationship between response diversity and functional variability is mediated by land cover. Further integration of response-and-effect trait frameworks into studies of community stability will enhance understanding of the drivers of biodiversity change, allowing targeted conservation decision-making with a focus on stable ecosystem functioning in the face of global environmental change., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Animal Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society.)

Our planet is facing a variety of serious threats from climate change that are unfolding unevenly across the globe. Uncovering the spatial patterns of ecosystem stability is important for predicting the responses of ecological processes and biodiversity patterns to climate change. However, the understanding of the latitudinal pattern of ecosystem stability across scales and of the underlying ecological drivers is still very limited. Accordingly, this study examines the latitudinal patterns of ecosystem stability at the local and regional spatial scale using a natural assembly of forest metacommunities that are distributed over a large temperate forest region, considering a range of potential environmental drivers. We found that the stability of regional communities (regional stability) and asynchronous dynamics among local communities (spatial asynchrony) both decreased with increasing latitude, whereas the stability of local communities (local stability) did not. We tested a series of hypotheses that potentially drive the spatial patterns of ecosystem stability, and found that although the ecological drivers of biodiversity, climatic history, resource conditions, climatic stability, and environmental heterogeneity varied with latitude, latitudinal patterns of ecosystem stability at multiple scales were affected by biodiversity and environmental heterogeneity. In particular, α diversity is positively associated with local stability, while β diversity is positively associated with spatial asynchrony, although both relationships are weak. Our study provides the first evidence that latitudinal patterns of the temporal stability of naturally assembled forest metacommunities across scales are driven by biodiversity and environmental heterogeneity. Our findings suggest that the preservation of plant biodiversity within and between forest communities and the maintenance of heterogeneous landscapes can be crucial to buffer forest ecosystems at higher latitudes from the faster and more intense negative impacts of climate change in the future., (© 2023 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Human activities, especially conversion and degradation of habitats, are causing global biodiversity declines. How local ecological assemblages are responding is less clear--a concern given their importance for many ecosystem functions and services. We analysed a terrestrial assemblage database of unprecedented geographic and taxonomic coverage to quantify local biodiversity responses to land use and related changes. Here we show that in the worst-affected habitats, these pressures reduce within-sample species richness by an average of 76.5%, total abundance by 39.5% and rarefaction-based richness by 40.3%. We estimate that, globally, these pressures have already slightly reduced average within-sample richness (by 13.6%), total abundance (10.7%) and rarefaction-based richness (8.1%), with changes showing marked spatial variation. Rapid further losses are predicted under a business-as-usual land-use scenario; within-sample richness is projected to fall by a further 3.4% globally by 2100, with losses concentrated in biodiverse but economically poor countries. Strong mitigation can deliver much more positive biodiversity changes (up to a 1.9% average increase) that are less strongly related to countries' socioeconomic status.

Biological records provide biodiversity information over large spatial and temporal scales.  Our systematic scoping review of biological records from the well-recorded region of the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland revealed that over half of all studies using biological records were studying species distributions (134 of 253 studies) and/or temporal trends (139 of 253 studies).  A minority of studies (61 of 253) focused on methodological questions, while most studies used biological records with existing methods as tools for answering biological and ecological questions.  However, only 31 of 253 studies tested models using independent data.  Most studies (154 of 253) integrated multiple biological records datasets, showing that biological records hold a largely untapped potential for independently testing conclusions by withholding some of those datasets for use as independent test data.  Our results provide guidance for data providers and researchers interested in more effectively collecting and using biological records.

Motivation and aim: Mapping the spatial distribution of biodiversity is critical for understanding its fundamental drivers (e.g. speciation, environmental filtering) as well as for conservation assessment. An important dimension of this topic is how the distributions of subsets of species contribute to the overall distribution of biodiversity. Although studies have previously investigated the role of geographically common and rare species in determining these patterns, their respective contributions appear to vary between studies. Knowing which species contribute disproportionately to the spatial distribution of biodiversity enables the identification of key indicator species for biodiversity assessments across large areas and is important for prioritising areas for conservation actions. An extensive review of the literature was carried out to synthesise research on how geographic rarity contributes to spatial patterns of biodiversity. We identify potential explanations for the discrepancies in findings between studies and identify opportunities for further research. Results: Many studies on the contribution of geographic commonness and rarity to the spatial distribution of biodiversity focus on species richness. A prevalent view is that common (widespread) species contribute disproportionately, although this is not ubiquitous across studies due to factors such as the geographic extent from which relative rarity is quantified. We identify research pathways that will further improve our knowledge of how geographically common and rare species shape the spatial distribution of biodiversity including the impact of spatial scale on species contributions and the incorporation of biodiversity components beyond taxonomic alpha diversity, that is functional and phylogenetic diversity. Main conclusions: Future research should incorporate multiple biodiversity components and model scale dependency. This will further our knowledge on the underlying processes that shape the spatial variation of biodiversity across the planet and help inform biological surveys and conservation activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Spatial patterns of functional diversity are important in understanding community assembly as well as spatial variation in ecosystem functioning, yet the contribution of different species to these patterns remains unclear, making it difficult to generalise. Several studies have previously used a sequential addition approach to determine the subsets of species that contribute to the spatial distribution of species richness, frequently showing the importance of common species to richness patterns. This approach, however, has not been applied to functional diversity despite the central role of species traits in community ecology.Here we use a multiscale survey of plants from the Machair grassland system of the Western Isles of Scotland to ask the following questions: (i) Do functional diversity patterns correlate better with geographically common or geographically rare species?; (ii) Do their relative contributions vary with spatial scale?; and (iii) Do these patterns vary between functional diversity measures?We show that while species richness patterns correlate with geographically common species, common species contribute less than expected to spatial patterns of functional diversity at frequently used spatial monitoring scales. The relative contribution of species to overall biodiversity patterns, however, can vary with spatial scale.Synthesis. Surveying only common species may be inadequate for estimating spatial patterns of functional diversity, especially if using occurrence as opposed to percentage cover or abundance data, and spatial scale needs to be considered when designing surveys. Our approach highlights the species that may be adequate indicators of different dimensions of biodiversity and contributes to our understanding of the distribution of functional diversity in space. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is an increasing interest in landscape‐scale perspectives of ecosystem functioning to inform policy and conservation decisions. However, we need a better understanding of the stability of ecosystem functioning (e.g. plant productivity) at the landscape scale to inform policy around topics such as global food security.We investigate the role of the ecological and environmental context on landscape‐scale stability of plant productivity in agricultural pasture using remotely sensed enhanced vegetation index data. We determine whether four measures of stability (variability, magnitude of extreme anomalies, recovery time and recovery rate) are predicted by (a) species richness of vascular plants, (b) regional land cover heterogeneity and (c) climatic history.Stability of plant productivity was primarily associated with climatic history, particularly a history of extreme events. These effects outweighed any positive effects of species richness in the agricultural landscape.A history of variable and extreme climates both increased and decreased contemporary ecosystem stability, suggesting both cumulative and legacy effects, whereas land cover heterogeneity had no effect on stability.The landscape scale is a relevant spatial scale for the management of an ecosystem's stability. At this scale, we find that past climate is a stronger driver of stability in plant productivity than species richness, differing from results at finer field scales. Management should take an integrated approach by incorporating the environmental context of the landscape, such as its climatic history, and consider multiple components of stability to maintain functioning in landscapes that are particularly vulnerable to environmental change. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Motivation and aim: Soil biodiversity is central to ecosystem function and services. It represents most of terrestrial biodiversity and at least a quarter of all biodiversity on Earth. Yet, research into broad, generalizable spatial and temporal patterns of soil biota has been limited compared to aboveground systems due to complexities of the soil system. We review the literature and identify key considerations necessary to expand soil macroecology beyond the recent surge of global maps of soil taxa, so that we can gain greater insight into the mechanisms and processes shaping soil biodiversity. We focus primarily on three groups of soil taxa (earthworms, mycorrhizal fungi and soil bacteria) that represent a range of body sizes and ecologies, and, therefore, interact with their environment at different spatial scales. Results: The complexities of soil, including fine‐scale heterogeneity, 3‐D habitat structure, difficulties with taxonomic delimitation, and the wide‐ranging ecologies of its inhabitants, require the classical macroecological toolbox to be expanded to consider novel sampling, molecular identification, functional approaches, environmental variables, and modelling techniques. Main conclusions: Soil provides a complex system within which to apply macroecological research, yet, it is this property that itself makes soil macroecology a field ripe for innovative methodologies and approaches. To achieve this, soil‐specific data, spatio‐temporal, biotic, and abiotic considerations are necessary at all stages of research, from sampling design to statistical analyses. Insights into whole ecosystems and new approaches to link genes, functions and diversity across spatial and temporal scales, alongside methodologies already applied in aboveground macroecology, invasion ecology and aquatic ecology, will facilitate the investigation of macroecological processes in soil biota, which is key to understanding the link between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning in terrestrial ecosystems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]