Habitat filtering determines spatial variation of macroinvertebrate community traits in northern headwater streams

Although our knowledge of the spatial distribution of stream organisms has been increasing rapidly in the last decades, there is still little consensus about trait-based variability of macroinvertebrate communities within and between catchments in near-pristine systems. Our aim was to examine the taxonomic and trait based stability vs. variability of stream macroinvertebrates in three high-latitude catchments in Finland. The collected taxa were assigned to unique trait combinations (UTCs) using biological traits. We found that only a single or a highly limited number of taxa formed a single UTC, suggesting a low degree of redundancy. Our analyses revealed significant differences in the environmental conditions of the streams among the three catchments. Linear models, rarefaction curves and beta-diversity measures showed that the catchments differed in both alpha and beta diversity. Taxon- and trait-based multivariate analyses also indicated that the three catchments were significantly different in terms of macroinvertebrate communities. All these findings suggest that habitat filtering, i.e., environmental differences among catchments, determines the variability of macroinvertebrate communities, thereby contributing to the significant biological differences among the catchments. The main implications of our study is that the sensitivity of trait-based analyses to natural environmental variation should be carefully incorporated in the assessment of environmental degradation, and that further studies are needed for a deeper understanding of trait-based community patterns across near-pristine streams

Metabolic flexibility as a major predictor of spatial distribution in microbial communities

A better understand the ecology of microbes and their role in the global ecosystem could be achieved if traditional ecological theories can be applied to microbes. In ecology organisms are defined as specialists or generalists according to the breadth of their niche. Spatial distribution is often used as a proxy measure of niche breadth; generalists have broad niches and a wide spatial distribution and specialists a narrow niche and spatial distribution. Previous studies suggest that microbial distribution patterns are contrary to this idea; a microbial generalist genus (Desulfobulbus) has a limited spatial distribution while a specialist genus (Methanosaeta) has a cosmopolitan distribution. Therefore, we hypothesise that this counter-intuitive distribution within generalist and specialist microbial genera is a common microbial characteristic. Using molecular fingerprinting the distribution of four microbial genera, two generalists, Desulfobulbus and the methanogenic archaea Methanosarcina, and two specialists, Methanosaeta and the sulfate-reducing bacteria Desulfobacter were analysed in sediment samples from along a UK estuary. Detected genotypes of both generalist genera showed a distinct spatial distribution, significantly correlated with geographic distance between sites. Genotypes of both specialist genera showed no significant differential spatial distribution. These data support the hypothesis that the spatial distribution of specialist and generalist microbes does not match that seen with specialist and generalist large organisms. It may be that generalist microbes, while having a wider potential niche, are constrained, possibly by intrageneric competition, to exploit only a small part of that potential niche while specialists, with far fewer constraints to their niche, are more capable of filling their potential niche more effectively, perhaps by avoiding intrageneric competition. We suggest that these counter-intuitive distribution patterns may be a common feature of microbes in general and represent a distinct microbial principle in ecology, which is a real challenge if we are to develop a truly inclusive ecology

The implications of the United Nations Paris Agreement on climate change for globally significant biodiversity areas

Climate change is already affecting species and their distributions. Distributional range changes have occurred and are projected to intensify for many widespread plants and animals, creating associated risks to many ecosystems. Here, we estimate the climate change-related risks to the species in globally significant biodiversity conservation areas over a range of climate scenarios, assessing their value as climate refugia. In particular, we quantify the aggregated benefit of countries’ emission reduction pledges (Intended Nationally Determined Contributions and Nationally Determined Contributions under the Paris Agreement), and also of further constraining global warming to 2 °C above pre-industrial levels, against an unmitigated scenario of 4.5 °C warming. We also quantify the contribution that can be made by using smart spatial conservation planning to facilitate some levels of autonomous (i.e. natural) adaptation to climate change by dispersal. We find that without mitigation, on average 33% of each conservation area can act as climate refugium (or 18% if species are unable to disperse), whereas if warming is constrained to 2 °C, the average area of climate refuges doubles to 67% of each conservation area (or, without dispersal, more than doubles to 56% of each area). If the country pledges are fulfilled, an intermediate estimate of 47–52% (or 31–38%, without dispersal) is obtained. We conclude that the Nationally Determined Contributions alone have important but limited benefits for biodiversity conservation, with larger benefits accruing if warming is constrained to 2 °C. Greater benefits would result if warming was constrained to well below 2 °C as set out in the Paris Agreement

A Holistic Landscape Description Reveals That Landscape Configuration Changes More over Time than Composition: Implications for Landscape Ecology Studies

International audienceBackground: Space-for-time substitution—that is, the assumption that spatial variations of a system can explain and predict the effect of temporal variations—is widely used in ecology. However, it is questionable whether it can validly be used to explain changes in biodiversity over time in response to land-cover changes.Hypothesis: ere, we hypothesize that different temporal vs spatial trajectories of landscape composition and configuration may limit space-for-time substitution in landscape ecology. Land-cover conversion changes not just the surface areas given over to particular types of land cover, but also affects isolation, patch size and heterogeneity. This means that a small change in land cover over time may have only minor repercussions on landscape composition but potentially major consequences for landscape configuration.Methods: sing land-cover maps of the Paris region for 1982 and 2003, we made a holistic description of the landscape disentangling landscape composition from configuration. After controlling for spatial variations, we analyzed and compared the amplitudes of changes in landscape composition and configuration over time.Results: For comparable spatial variations, landscape configuration varied more than twice as much as composition over time. Temporal changes in composition and configuration were not always spatially matched.Significance: The fact that landscape composition and configuration do not vary equally in space and time calls into question the use of space-for-time substitution in landscape ecology studies. The instability of landscapes over time appears to be attributable to configurational changes in the main. This may go some way to explaining why the landscape variables that account for changes over time in biodiversity are not the same ones that account for the spatial distribution of biodiversity

Are Killer Bees Good for Coffee? The Contribution of a Paper\u27s Title and Other Factors to Its Future Citations

How can the title of a paper affect its subsequent number of citations? We compared the citation rate of 5941 papers published in the journal Biological Conservation from 1968 to 2012 in relation to: paper length; title length; number of authors; paper age; presence of punctuation (colons, commas or question marks); geographic and taxonomic breadth; the word ‘method’; and the type of manuscript (article, review). The total number of citations increased in more recently published papers and thus we corrected citation rate (average number of citations per year since publication) by publication age. As expected, review papers had, on average, twice the number of citations compared to other types of articles. Papers with the greatest geographic or taxonomic breadth were cited up to twice as frequently as narrowly focused papers. Titles phrased as questions, shorter titles, and papers with more authors had slightly higher numbers of citations. However, overall, we found that the included parameters explained only 12% of the variability in citation rate. This suggests that finding a good title is necessary, but that other factors are more important to construct a well-cited paper. We suggest that to become highly cited, a primary requirement is that papers need to advance the science significantly and be useful to readers

The conservation value of human-modified landscapes for the world's primates

Land-use change pushes biodiversity into human-modified landscapes, where native ecosystems are surrounded by anthropic land covers (ALCs). Yet, the ability of species to use these emerging covers remains poorly understood. We quantified the use of ALCs by primates worldwide, and analyzed species' attributes that predict such use. Most species use secondary forests and tree plantations, while only few use human settlements. ALCs are used for foraging by at least 86 species with an important conservation outcome: those that tolerate heavily modified ALCs are 26% more likely to have stable or increasing populations than the global average for all primates. There is no phylogenetic signal in ALCs use. Compared to all primates on Earth, species using ALCs are less often threatened with extinction, but more often diurnal, medium or large-bodied, not strictly arboreal, and habitat generalists. These findings provide valuable quantitative information for improving management practices for primate conservation worldwide

A national-scale assessment of climate change impacts on species: assessing the balance of risks and opportunities for multiple taxa

It is important for conservationists to be able to assess the risks that climate change poses to species, in order to inform decision making. Using standardised and repeatable methods, we present a national-scale assessment of the risks of range loss and opportunities for range expansion, that climate change could pose for over 3,000 plants and animals that occur in England. A basic risk assessment that compared projected future changes in potential range with recently observed changes classified 21% of species as being at high risk and 6% at medium risk of range loss under a B1 climate change scenario. A greater number of species were classified as having a medium (16%) or high (38%) opportunity to potentially expand their distribution. A more comprehensive assessment, incorporating additional ecological information, including potentially confounding and exacerbating factors, was applied to 402 species, of which 35 % were at risk of range loss and 42 % may expand their range extent. This study covers a temperate region with a significant proportion of species at their poleward range limit. The balance of risks and opportunities from climate change may be different elsewhere. The outcome of both risk assessments varied between taxonomic groups, with bryophytes and vascular plants containing the greatest proportion of species at risk from climate change. Upland habitats contained more species at risk than other habitats. Whilst the overall pattern was clear, confidence was generally low for individual assessments, with the exception of well-studied taxa such as birds. In response to climate change, nature conservation needs to plan for changing species distributions and increasing uncertainty of the future

The Biological Records Centre: a pioneer of citizen science

People have been recording wildlife for centuries and the resulting datasets lead to important scientific research. The Biological Records Centre (BRC), established in 1964, is a national focus for terrestrial and freshwater species recording in the United Kingdom (UK). BRC works with the voluntary recording community (i.e. a mutualistic symbiosis) through support of national recording schemes (i.e. ‘citizen science’, but unlike most citizen science it is volunteer led) and adds value to the data through analysis and reporting. Biological recording represents a diverse range of activities, involving an estimated 70 000 people annually in the UK, from expert volunteers undertaking systematic monitoring to mass participation recording. It is an invaluable monitoring tool because the datasets are long term, have large geographic extent and are taxonomically diverse (85 taxonomic groups). It supports a diverse range of outputs, e.g. atlases showing national distributions (12 127 species from over 40 taxonomic groups) and quantified trends (1636 species). BRC pioneers the use of technology for data capture (online portals and smartphone apps) and verification (including automated verification) through customisable, inter-operable database systems to facilitate efficient data flow. We are confident that biological recording has a bright future with benefits for people, science, and nature

Land-use effects on local biodiversity in tropical forests vary between continents

The file attached is the Published/publisher’s pdf version of the article