前段时间 Science Advances 评估了全球的灯光污染,但这种光污染对自然生态系统造成何种影响很少有试验详细评估。前几日,瑞士伯尔尼大学 (University of Bern) 的 Knop 等发现,人工光源能够显著降低访花昆虫授粉的次数、降低座果率和最终果实产量。作者认为,人工光源会显著改变植物的繁殖生长,从而对植被结构、生态系统的功能产生负面影响。 他们的研究论文 “Artificial light at night as a new threat to pollination” 已经发表在 Nature 上。链接: https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature23288.html 说实话,我见过不少国内研究人工光源对植物生长影响的研究。也有昆虫学家研究人工光源对昆虫活动的影响,但偏偏没有像 Knop 等那样设计严格的对照来研究植物 - 昆虫互作的。 Knop 等的研究不仅需要很强的生态学基础,更需要有植物生理生态学背景,以及对昆虫学的深入了解,否则,是无法进行该试验的。从这个角度来看,交叉学科有它自身无法比拟的优势和魅力,如果没能在相关学科都有一点积累的话,显然做不出像这样的 Nature 工作。
生物多样性与生态系统功能实验研究的发展趋势 功能昆虫群进化研究组 博士研究生:王明强( wangmingqiang@ioz.ac.cn ) 导师:朱朝东 摘要: 生物多样性与生态系统的关系是生态学领域的重大科学问题,而生物多样性在全球范围内受人类活动影响而下降。因此,人们开展了大量的研究工作来描述生物多样性—生态系统功能之间的关系,但是争议也一直产生并持续。以往的大多数研究都主要以微宇宙和草地实验为主,近年来,森林生态系统中的生物多样性和生态系统系统功能之间的研究逐步兴起,成为了一个新的发展方向,同时研究工作也逐步拓展到海洋和淡水生态系统中。 关键词: 生物多样性,生态系统功能,森林生态系统, BEF Trends of biodiversity and ecosystem functioningexperiment research Mingqiang Wang Abstract The relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (BEF) is a vital scientific issue at present. Simultaneously, human activities are drastically reducing biodiversity. Therefore, the unpresented biodiversity loss have motivated ecologists to characterize consequences of species loss via BEF experiments. However, the generality about the relationship remains controversial. Many BEF experiments originally started with microcosms in the laboratory or grassland ecosystems. A new frontier in experimental BEF research is manipulating tree diversity in forest ecosystems. More BEF projects have been implemented on marine and freshwater system. Key words biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, forest ecosystems, BEF 1 前言 近年来,由于人类的活动导致生物多样性的下降,负面影响在在物种灭绝之前就已经产生,而这主要体现在对生态系统功能的影响上 ( 马克平 ,2013) 。生物多样性与生态系统功能 (Biodiversityand ecosystem functioning, BEF) 的关系一直以来是生物学、生态学和环境科学研究的一个中心问题。早在达尔文时期就有关于生物多样性和生态系统能能关系的研究 (Hector Hooper, 2002) 。直到 20 世纪 90 年代开始,人们才开始综合运用各种理论及观测和实验手段对该问题展开深入的研究。相关实验表明,物种的丧失可能会对生境 ( Lawton,1994) 和生态系统生产力 (Power et al ., 1996) 等生态系统的结构和功能产生影响。但是这些结果并没有任何一个被生态学家们普遍接受。因此有关生物多样性对生态系统功能产生的影响众说纷纭,也曾在生态学领域中产生了激烈的争论 (Kaiser, 2000; Loreau et al ., 2001) 。 Cameron(2002) 将 2002 年称之为多样性与生态系统功能关系的争论之年。而研究生物多样性与生态系统功能之间的关系,最好的手段就是控制实验,生物多样性与生态系统功能实验是通过比较群落间的物种丰富度(物种丰富度高的群落和物种逐步消亡的群落的丰富度)去评估物种多样性丧失的生态系统层面的影响。本文简要回顾了最近二十年有关 BEF 研究主要实验及相关结果的争论,并以 BEF-China 为例介绍了 BEF 实验发展的新方向—森林生态系统;以此简单说明了设计森林生态系统 BEF 时的主要思路和问题;最后对生物多样性和生态系统功能 关系的研究未来的发展做出了展望。 图 1 有关生物多样性与生态系统功能关系的研究论文每年发表的数量 (1989-2014, 数据来源 :Web of Science) Figure 1 The number of publications about BEF research from1989-2014 (Web of Science) 图 2 有关生物多样性与生态系统功能关系的研究论文引用的次数 (1990-2016 ,数据来源 :Web of Science) Figure2 The number of citations about BEF from 1990-2016 (Web of Science) 2 BEF 研究的代表性实验及有关争论 采用控制实验研究生物多样性与生态系统的关系最早始于 20 世纪末期。到距今近 30 年中,全世界各地出现了各样式的 BEF 实验研究,而每年发表论文的数量逐步增多,年度论文引用的数量也迅速增长 ( 图 1 ,图 2) 。国内期刊从 2000 开始,才有相关生物多样性与生态系统功能的文章,但是几乎均为综述类文章 ( 张全国和张大勇 , 2002, 2003; 李慧荣 , 2014) 。 2.1 Naeem“ 生态箱 ”(Ecotron) 实验 为了验证物种多样性的丧失会对生态系统生物地化功能产生影响, Naeem et al .(1994) 设计了“生态箱”实验予以验证。该实验是第一个采用控制变量的手段对生物多样性 ( 物种多样性 ) 与生态系统功能关系的研究。 Naeem 等人在 14 个小室 ( 小室长宽高均为 2m) 中构建微宇宙。小室中的最初环境条件均为一致,包括温度、相对湿度、气流、土壤条件、物种密度、营养级数目等;人为的对微宇宙中的动物植物的物种数量进行控制,由低到高分为 9 、 15 、 31 三个水平,形成不同物种丰富度的微宇宙,每个高丰富度水平包含所有地丰富度水平的物种,用以模拟自然环境下物种丧失的情况。最终,实验发现高水平的物种丰富度的微宇宙中有更高的生产力,并从植被角度给出了解释。所以 Naeem 认为物种丰富度越高,系统生产力越高,而物种多样性的丧失,则会降低系统生产力。但是,该实验受到了 Huston (1997) 的质疑: 该实验所得出的结论并不可靠,认为造成该结果是“取样效应”,因为 Naeem 仅局限于物种多样性因素而忽略了其他环境变量对生产力提高的影响。 2.2 Cedar Creek 草地实验 Tilman(1982) 在 Cedar Creek4 块草地开展了历时 10 年的研究,草地中不同的营养供给存在着相异的植物多样性群落。该研究的主要目的在于探讨群落植物多样性和稳定性之间的关系。实验结果表明物种多样性对群落的抵抗力、恢复力有显著影响,且支持了多样性 - 稳定性假说 (Tilman Downing, 1994) 。 Givnish(1994) 认为造成物种多样地对群落稳定性的作用可能是由于营养供给有差异,并认为各个相关因素之间的相互关联存在一定的问题,同时建议在控制相同的生境条件下,从大的物种库中随机选取物种进行种植,形成多种组成方式,最后检测群落多样性与稳定性之间的关系。 Tilman et al .(1996) 接受了 Givnish 的相关建议,研究了多样性与生产力和可持续性的关系。结果表明丰富度越高,生产力越高,植物对土壤中的矿质资源利用的越充分。因此, Tilman 等人认为该实验结果验证了生产力和可持续性存在正相关的假说。然而,这个结果仍然遭到了 Huston(1997) 的质疑。 Huston 认为物种越多,可能包含有更高的生产力的物种,正是因为物种的选择概率造成了该原因。 2.3 微宇宙实验 微宇宙实验操作简便,可重复性高。正是由于上述优点,使得以微宇宙实验对物种多样性和生态系统功能关系的研究相对较多,如: Naeem Li (1997)、McGrady-Steed et al . (1997)、Naeem et al . (2000) 。以 Naeem Li 的试验为例,该实验是为了验证物种多样行是否对生态系统功能的维护具有保险效应( insurance effect) 。该实验构建了水生系统的微宇宙。具体操作是将藻类 ( 作为生产者 ) 、原生生物 ( 作为消费者 ) 、细菌 ( 作为分解者 ) 等植入培养皿中,而对不同的微宇宙中接入不同的原生生物以构造不同的功能群 ( 不同等级的消费者 ) ;人为控制一些变量:营养供给、光照、功能群数量;物种数量等并对每个组合进行 4 次重复,最终构建出 318 个微宇宙。系统 57 天后达到平衡,此时检测微宇宙系统中生产者的生产量,分解者的密度。 实验结果表明了物种数量更高的功能群中,生物量与生物体的一致性更高,而与营养供给,光等环境因素没有明显的区别。因此系统的可靠性越高,该实验结果支持了物种多样性对生态系统功能的保险效应。但是, Wardle(1998) 认为该实验中功能群物种数高的系统之间物种的相似性也高,实验并没有考虑到这一点。所以导致产生该实验结果的原因并不一定是物种多样性引起的而有可能和物种相似度有关。还建议在今后的实验中应该避免物种丰富的功能群中物种种类的重叠。 2.4 欧洲草地实验 (BIODEPTH) 该实验由 Hector 发起,设置在欧洲的 8 块大草地上该,主要目的在于进一步探讨物种多样性和生态系统功能与过程之间的关系。人为控制样地中物种丰富度 (1-32 种 ) ,检测其系统功能 ( 如:初级生产力,地面生物量等 ) 。 Hector(1999) 发表了相关研究成果。结果表明:随物种数量的减少,群落生产力呈对数级下降;而在物种数量相同功能群不同的群落中,功能群越少,生产力越低。 Hector 认为,产生这样的结果不仅是“取样效应”,种间正相互作用和生态位互补也是造成该结果的原因。然而,很快 Huston et al. (2000) 认识到该实验存在一些问题。例如,该实验的人为去除和播种并没有很好的模拟自然条件下由于人为和自然因素造成物种的灭绝,所以不能与自然状态相提并论;对数性下降并非存在与每一块草地中;一些群落中的物种没有与最高生产力的物种相比较,所以造成“超产”发生的几率被高估;“超产现象”局限于有豆科植物的群落,并不能代表是有物种多样性引起的。此外 Wardle et al .(2000) 还认为该实验没有区分开“取样效应”和生态位互补。针对 Huston et al. (2000) 的质疑, Hector 等人提出了解释,单种群落与低物种丰富度之间存在激烈的种间竞争,而多样性高的群落中种间竞争明显较弱,后者因此而受益。而这都是潜在的多样性作用机制,因此证明地域不同的群落处于同一多样性作用机制之下。 3 森林生态系统 BEF 实验 之前的大多数 BEF 实验大多都是构建微宇宙或者以草地实验为主,关于森林生态系统的 BEF 实验则少有研究。森林生态系统是全球生态系统中重要的生态系统,其具有广泛的地理分布并蕴含着巨大的生物量,不仅能提供很多独一无二的生态系统物质产品,例如木材、食物、燃料、药用植物等,而且还能为生态系统服务有重要作用,例如全球范围内的碳储量、气候调节、水质保护或侵蚀防治 (Durieux, Machado Laurent, 2003; Bala et al ., 2007; Quijas et al ., 2012) 。因此,理解生物多样性在森林生态系统中扮演的重要角色与 BEF 森林生态系统实验高度相关。全球第一个森林生态系统的 BEF 实验样地于 1999 年建立于芬兰。到目前为止世界上已有 12 个 ( 图 3) 森林实验样地 (http://www.treedivnet.ugent.be/index.html) 。 图 3 全世界的森林生态系统 BEF 实验及 BEF-China 实验的地理位置 (Bruelheide et al ., 2014) Figure 3 Location of theBEF-China sites and of all other established forest experiments worldwide withtree diversity manipulations. (Bruelheide etal ., 2014) 3.1 森林生态系统 BEF 实验的优势与劣势 乔木是构成森林生态系统植物中的优势物种。BEF实验的优势之处在于允许在个体的水平上对生物多样性与生态系统功能之间的关系进行定量的研究。因此,在群落水平上观测到的生物多样性效应可以追溯到每个单一个体的平均增长的提高 (Potvin Gotelli, 2008; Potvin Dutilleul, 2009) 。基于个体水平的研究,通常能确定种内的特征在互补效应中的作用或是阐述个体的地位和群落波动对生态系统稳定的作用。由于各个物种间的生长速率不同,不同的物种之间的种间关系很可能随着年龄的增长而有所改变;例如草地生态系统中生物多样性效会随着时间的推移变得逐渐明显 (Marquard et al ., 2009; Reich et al ., 2012) 。而这一点在乔木中这种效应可能更为突出( Bruelheide et al ., 20140 ,所以可更加充分地观察到物种间及其与环境间的相互作用随时间的变化。然而,乔木的 BEF 实验只有个体的一个世代,而在 BEF 实验中,年龄结构的种群和群落能伴随更小型的生物增长而得到丰富和发展,包括了草地生态系统中的多年生植物。另外,乔木体型较其他植物相对较大,能够方便的控制密度和均匀度,能够允许其在该地形上的更细致的种间关系研究。小气候和土壤环境也潜在的成为了森林生态系统 BEF 实验中的作用因素并对生物多样性效应产生回馈。在 BEF 实验中运用乔木和灌木,比起来那些体型小,生活周期短的生物来说,如微生物和一年生或几年生植物(在 BEF 实验中用来检测生物体是最普遍的)其劣势之处在于需要大面积的实验样地和长期的时间。因此,森林生态系统中开展 BEF 实验也面临诸多挑战。 3.2 BEF-China 的实验设计及思考 BEF-China 主实验基地位于江西德兴新岗山,地处亚热带,是由中国国家自然科学基金委员会和德国科学基金会联合资助的项目。建立于两大自然斜坡上,分为 A 、 B 该实验的目的是评估碳储量和水土流失对乔木和灌木的物种丰富度的影响。因此,实验设立在斜坡上。实验的设计思路如下:( 1 )建立的样地数量多,面积小而非数量少面积大;( 2 )用高密度随机混合植而非低密度规律混合种植;( 3 )在生物多样性效应作用前,建立了初期的“生态景观”图来描述样点的异质性;( 4 )不仅仅采用随机灭绝机制对物种的丰富度进行控制,还运用了特征性灭绝机制。这样大小的样地能够恰当的记录森林生态系统的功能,比如说树体生长 (Bruelheide et al ., 2011) ,降水量特征 (Geißler et al ., 2013) 和植食动物 (Schuldt et al ., 2012) 。 3.2.1 样地大小与种植密度 一般来说,为了避免个样地之间的边缘效应,通常提倡将样地的面积最大化,如 Scherer-Lorenzen et al. (2005) 建议将样地的边长设计为最高大的树木高度的两倍。然而,类似这样大小的相关的森林生态系统 BEF 实验仅有婆罗洲的实验 (Hector et al ., 2011) 和 BIOTREE 实验 (Scherer-Lorenzen et al. , 2007) 。而 BEF-China 中将样地面积尽可能的最小化,可以大大的提升统计力度,也能增强样地的管理。该实验中每块小样地的面积 667m 2 ,共 566 块。 该 实验计算了当地亚热带区域一颗 130 年的大树的平均林冠面积是 36m 2 ,这样即使在 130 年后,在最极端的情况下,一个样地依然能够容纳 16 个物种并且每个物种有 1 个成熟的个体 (Bruelheide et al ., 2014) 。不仅如此,实验还将其中一些小样地构建成 2x2 的大样地,这样设计能够保证每个树种有最大的种群。 考虑到树苗数量的丧失和选择 (Nyland 2002; Scherer-Lorenzen et al. 2005) 和早期的植物与植物之间的种间关系 (Both et al ., 2012; Lang et al ., 2012) 。通常都是使种植的初始密度高于期望密度;同时,更高的初始密度还模拟了自然条件下的次生林的状况;通常高的初始种植密度有更高林冠闭郁度,能够抑制杂草丛生,对生物多样性试验有最大的管理效力 (Marquard et al ., 2009) 。但是,更高的初始种植密度需要更多财力去培育和种植更多的树苗,特别是在幼苗死亡率不规则的情况下,使预期得到的物种的丰富度和均匀度会出现波动。 BEF-China 实验样地中每棵树苗之间的水平距离是 1.29m ,相当于每 1 亩地有 400 株树苗或每公顷有 6000 株树苗。这比一些其它的 BEF 实验更低 (Scherer-Lorenzenet al. 2005) 。实验中的所有样地都有同样的群落密度,每一个物种的种群规模的减小相反会增加物种的丰富度。这种替代设计广泛的运用到 BEF 研究中和规避了附加设计所遇到的问题,后者能比前者引起更高更显著的物种多样性的生态系统功能效应,然而,这可能是混杂了群落密度与多样性引起的 (Balvanera et al ., 2006) 。 3.2.2 混合模型 物种间的空间布局可能会影响其种间关系 (Pacala Deutschman 1995; Stoll Prati 2001; Potvin Gotelli 2008) 。在群落发展的初期,一种是将不同的物种混合种植达到最大化,一种是斑块化种植 (Scherer-Lorenzenet al. 2005) 。这两种截然不同的设计思路是要在检测早期的生物多样效应和长期的生物多样性梯度的保持做出权衡。在 BEF-China 实验中,为了避免设计的复杂性,在规定的种植区域中随机的分配每颗树的种植点 ( 例如: ABBABAAB) 。其目的是避免两种种植方式潜在的缺点。这样随机混合的种植方式的优点在于部分邻近的多样性会有不同等级上的变化,这个方案不仅更接近自然状态,而且相对于其他两种种植方案每棵树对多样性的反应都有更为全面的分析 (Bruelheide et al ., 2014) 。 3.2.3 完全随机化设计与物种库 为了构造大尺度的实验大样地的空间异质性,一般首推将实验样地分为多个区组 (Dutilleul,1993) 。区组设计也通常用以避免可能发生在完全随机设计的样地中偶然产生的集群生长 (Hurlbert 1984) 。而且,区组设计也能被定义为用经验去阐述样地尺度间的空间异质性。 BEF-China 的样地中,其坡度变化十分大,并将物种多样性分为了很多不同的等级,想要建立区组是不可能的。因此,实验采用了完全随机化的设计,去限制物种组成的重复,使其之间的距离至少有 100m 。 物种库是 BEF 实验中的一个关键因素,大的物种库能够与自然状况下的物种组成接近,也使得每个样地种植有更高的物种丰富度和功能多样性。 BEF-China 实验项目中整个物种库包含了 40 种本地阔叶乔木和 18 种灌木,这个数量较其他 BEF 实验要高 (Bruelheide et al ., 2014) 。所选物种能够代表一个科的大多数物种,以增加高丰富度的物种水平反映多样性功能高水平的几率。 BEF-China 的设计并不能将两者区分。不过,能够利用功能的丰富度的测量代替有关物种丰富度的分析,该实验中的设计能够对群落特定物种的功能群的比较,例如群落中落叶乔木或常绿乔木的存在与缺失 (Bruelheide et al ., 2014) 。 3.2.4 模拟物种灭绝机制 BEF 实验的基本问题是物种多样性的随机丧失是否能引起生态系统功能的降低,关键问题之一是以何种方式模拟物种丧失( Lamont, 1995; Allison, 1999; Mikola, Salonen Setala,2002; Scherer-Lorenzen et al ., 2005; Balvanera et al ., 2006; Schmid et al ., 2008) 。在中国的 BEF 的实验中,利用断棍设计,将所有物种等同表示每一个多样性水平。在这种设计中,起始物种的组成随机布局为不重叠的部分 (Bell et al ., 2005, 2009; Salles et al ., 2009) 。在 BEF-China 实验的两块样地中,起始组成由 16 个物种构成的三个部分重叠的样方,每一部分都分为了 8 种不重叠的组成。为了包括每个多样性低和多样性高的群落,继续将这 8 种组成划分,因此,得到唯一的随机灭绝机制最终下至单一种植的每个物种 (Bruelheide et al ., 2014) 。 因为基于不同的环境预测不同的物种的灭绝倾向,有很多都是未知的,所以 大多数 BEF 实验迄今为止都是运用随机灭绝机,( Schmid Hector, 2004) 。然而 灭绝现实中可能会因为不同的特征而在物种中产生偏斜 (Grime, 2002; Lep š , 2004; Schmid Hector 2004; Solan et al ., 2004) ,随机灭绝可能过低 (Zavaleta Hulvey, 2004) 或过高 ( Schläpfer, Pfisterer Schmid, 2005) 估计了在生态系统功能上真实存在的生物多样性丧失的效应 。例如, Grime(2002) 指出,抗压物种的特征就是生长缓慢,寿命长,在人类干扰的增加下可能更灭绝。因此,在 BEF-China 实验中增加了两组非随机的机制,一个基于本地罕见种,一个是基于比叶面积 (Bruelheide et al ., 2014) 。 3.2.5 遗传多样性 树种的遗传多样性能够在很大程度上影响其在不同的环境下的反应 (Whitham et al ., 2003) 。然而,大多数 BEF 实验的焦点都在于物种的丰富度而忽略了物种的种群遗传变异。在 BEF-China 实验中, B 样地所包含的树种知道其母体来源的,因此能够检测不同的物种多样性水平或环境的变化是否能够产生对树的种群遗传组成及物种多样性本身的变化产生影响。在 BEF-China 中加入了遗传多样性这一变量无疑是该实验中的创新点,也能够使得在后期针对物种遗传多样性开展更多的实验研究。 4 BEF 实验的发展及趋势 虽然关于 BEF 实验研究的结果仍然有很多争论。但是不可否认的是,从有关 BEF 的研究诞生起始,生物多样性对生态系统功能的正面效应已经大量的实验中得到观测 (Loreau,Naeem Inchausti 2002; Hooper et al ., 2005; Balvanera et al ., 2006; Worm et al ., 2006; Duffy, 2009). 从第一个生态箱 (Naeem et al ., 1994) 和草地野外样地开始 (Tilman,Wedin Knops, 1996) ,有关 BEF 的实验设计越来越多样化,研究尺度逐步扩大,研究者以不断的改进实验来回应相应的批评 (Grime, 1997; Huston, 1997; Schmid et al ., 2002) 。在最初大多数 BEF 实验设计采用了快速生长型的植物作物初级生产者,尤其是草本植物 (Loreau,Naeem and Inchausti, 2002; Hooper et al .,2005; Scherer-Lorenzen et al ., 2007; Cardinale et al ., 2011) 。之后,关于陆地上的大型多年生的物种也涉入了 BEF 实验的研究,如森林生态系统。更多的是,从最初单一的物种多样性逐步向群落多样性和遗传多样性方向拓展。另一方面,起初有关 BEF 的研究几乎都集中于陆生生态系统,而有关淡水和海洋系统的研究就显得相对较少,曾经一度有关陆生生态系统 BEF 研究的文献比淡水生态系统多近 5 倍 (Balvanera et al .,2006) 。海洋生态系统的情况也是如此,在早期几乎未被涉及 (Emmerson Huxham, 2002, Hooper et al ., 2005) 。但是在过去数年有关海洋生态系统的 BEF 研究取得了重要的进步,相关研究结果也逐渐增多 (Worm et al ., 2006; Stachowicz et al ., 2007; Cardinale et al ., 2011; Solan et al ., 2012; O’ Connor Byrnes, 2013) 。 5 展望 在 BEF 实验中,不同的环境下可能需要不同的实验方法和测量方法。越来越多的学者意识到,当考虑到多重生态系统功能时,生物多样性的效应具有重大意义 (Hector Bagchi 2007; Zavaleta et al ., 2010; Isbell et al .,2011; Pasari et al ., 2013) 。这能解释生态系统功能在不同多样性环境下的权衡在多样性低的生态系统中比多样性高的生态系统中更严峻。 BEF 实验中,非常重要的一点是要达到既定的研究目标并将原来的实验结果运用起来。这就同时要求在设计新实验时要有多方面的设计决策和合适的调查时间和专业的知识。问题的复杂性联系到与生物多样性的诸多方面,因此在实验的设计和管理期间,需要通过不同领域的多个研究团队或专家合作制定详尽的研究计划和明确的决策。 现如今面临的全球变化和生物多样性的一系列问题加之全球一体化的大背景,未来有关 BEF 的研究更应该注重团队合作。这不仅需要跨领域多学科的思维碰撞,更需要各领域研究成果的数据共享。 参考文献: 李慧蓉 . (2004). 生物多样性和生态系统功能研究综述 . 生态学杂志 , 23(3): 109 –114. 马克平 . (2013). 生物多样性与生态系统功能的实验研究 . 生物多样性 , 21(3):247–248. 张全国 , 张大勇 . (2002). 生物多样性与生态系统功能 : 进展与争论 . 生物多样性 ,10(1): 49–60. 张全国 , 张大勇 . (2003). 生物多样性与生态系统功能 : 最新的进展与动向 . 生物多样性 ,11(5): 351 –363. AllisonG.W. (1999). The implications of experimental design for biodiversity manipulations. American Naturalist ,153: 26–45. BalvaneraP., Pfisterer A.B., Buchmann N.,He J.S., Nakashizuka T., Raffaelli D. andSchmid B. (2006). Quantifying the evidence for biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning and services. Ecology Letters , 9: 1146–1156. BellT., Newman J.A., Silverman B.W., Turner S.L. and Lilley A.K. (2005). The contribution of species richness and composition to bacterial services. Nature , 436: 1157–1160. BellT., Lilley A.K., Hector A., Schmid B., King L. and Newman J.A. (2009). A linear model method for biodiversity-ecosystem functioning experiments. American Naturalist , 174: 836–849. BothS., Fang T., Baruffol M., Schmid B., Bruelheide H. and Erfmeier A. (2012).Effects of tree sapling diversity and nutrient addition on herb-layer invasibility in young experimental communities of subtropical species. Open Journal of Ecology , 2: 1–12. Bruelheide H., B ö hnke M., Both S.,Fang T., Assmann T., Baruffol M., Bauhus J., Buscot F., Chen X.Y., Ding B.Y.,Durka W., Erfmeier A., Fischer M., Geissler C., Guo D.L., Guo L.D., Hardtle W.,He J.S., Hector A., Krober W., Kuhn P., Lang A.C., Nadrowski K., Pei K.Q., Scherer-LorenzenM., Shi X.Z., Scholten T., Schuldt A., Trogisch S., von Oheimb G., Welk E.,Wirth C., Wu Y.T., Yang X.F., Zeng X.Q., Zhang S.R., Zhou H.Z., Ma K.P. andSchmid B. (2011). Community assembly during secondary forest succession in a Chinese subtropical forest. Ecological Monographs , 81:25–41. Bruelheide H., Nadrowski K., Assmann T., Bauhus J., Both S., Buscot F., Chen X.Y., DingB.Y., Durka W., Erfmeier A., Gutknecht J.L.M., Guo D.L., Guo L.D., Hardtle W.,He J.S., Klein A.M., Kuhn P., Liang Y., Liu X.J., Michalski S., Niklaus P.A.,Pei K.Q., Scherer-Lorenzen M., Scholten T., Schuldt A., Seidler G., TrogischS., von Oheimb G., Welk E., Wirth C., Wubet T., Yang X.F., Yu M.J., Zhang S.R.,Zhou H.Z., Fischer M., Ma K.P. and Schmid B. (2014). Designing forest biodiversity experiments: general considerations illustrated by a new largeexperiment in subtropical China. Methodsin Ecology and Evolution , 5: 74–89. Cameron T. (2002). 2002: the year of the ‘diversity–ecosystem function’ debate. Trends in Ecology and Evolution , 17(11):495–496. Cardinale B.J., Matulich K.L., Hooper D.U., Byrnes J.E., Duffy E., Gamfeldt L., BalvaneraP., O’Connor M.I. and Gonzalez, A. (2011). The functional role of producer diversity in ecosystems. American Journalof Botany , 98,572–592. Duffy J.E. (2009). Why biodiversity is important to the functioning of real-world ecosystems. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment , 7: 437–444. Dutilleul P. (1993). Spatial heterogeneity and the design of ecological field experi-ments. Ecology , 74:1646–1658. Emmerson M. and Huxham M. (2002). How can marine ecology contribute to the biodiversity–ecosystem functioning debate? – In: (Loreau, M., Naeem S.andInchausti P. eds), Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning synthesis andperspectives. Oxford University Press, pp. 139–146. Geißler C., Nadrowski K., Kühn P., Baruffol M., Bruelheide H., Schmid B.and Scholten T. (2013). Kinetic energy of through fall in subtropical forestsof SE China – effects of tree canopy structure, functional traits, and biodiversity. PLoS One , 8: e49618. Givnish T.J. (1994). Does diversity beget stability? Nature , 371: 113–114. GrimeJ.P. (1997). Biodiversity and ecosystem function: the debate deepens. Science , 277: 1260–1261. GrimeJ.P. (2002). Declining plant diversity: empty niches or functional shifts? Journal of Vegetation Science , 13:457–460. Hector A., Schmid B., Beierkuhnlein C., Caldeira M.C., Diemer M., DimitrakopoulosP.G., Finn J.A., Freitas H., Giller P.S., Good J., Harris R., H ö gberg P., Huss-Danell K., JoshiJ., Jumpponen A., K ö rnerC., Leadley P.W., Loreau M., Minns A., Mulder, C.P.H., O’Donovan G., OtwayS.J., Pereira J.S., Prinz A., Read D.J., Scherer-Lorenzen M., Schulze E.D.,Siamantziouras A.-S.D., Spehn E.M., Terry A.C., Troumbis A.Y., Woodward F.I., Yachi S. and Lawton J.H. (1999). Plant diversity and productivity experiments in European grassland. Science , 286:1123–1127. HectorA. and Hooper R. (2002). Darwin and the first ecological experiment. Science , 295: 639–640. Hector A.,Philipson C., Saner P., Chamagne J., Dzulkifli D., O’Brien M. Snaddon J.L.,Ulok P., Weilenmann M., Reynolds G. and Godfray H.C.J. (2011). The Sabah Biodiversity Experiment: a long-term test of the role of tree diversity inrestoring tropical forest structure and functioning. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society: Biological Science ,366: 3303–3315. Hooper D.U.,Chapin F.S. III, Ewel J.J., Hector A., Inchausti P., Lavorel S., Lawton J.H.,Lodge D.M., Loreau M., Naeem S., Schmid B., Setälä H., Symstad A.J., VandermeerJ. and Wardle D.A. (2005). Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: aconsensus of current knowledge. EcologicalMonographs , 75: 3–35. Hurlbert S.H.(1984). Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecological Monographs , 54: 187–211. Huston M.A.(1997). Hidden treatments in ecological experiments: re-evaluating the ecosystem function of biodiversity. Oecologia ,110: 449 –460. Huston M.A.,Aarssen L.W., Austin M.P., Cade B.S., Friday J.D., Garnier E., Grime J.P.,Hodgson J., Lauenroth W.K., Thompson K., Vandemeer J.H. and Wardle D.A. (2000).No consistent effect of plant diversity on productivity. Science , 289: 1255. KaiserJ. (2000). Rift over biodiversity divides ecologists. Science , 289: 1282–1283. Lamont B.B. (1995). Testing the effect of ecosystem composition structure on itsfunctioning. Oikos , 74: 283–295. LangA.C., H ä rdtle W., Baruffol M.,B ö hnke M., BruelheideH., Schmid B., von Wehrden H. and von Oheimb G. (2012). Mechanisms promotingtree species coexistence: experimental evidence with saplings of subtropical forest ecosystems of China. Journal of Vegetation Science , 23: 837–846. LawtonJ. H. (1994). What do species do in ecosystems? Oikos , 71(3): 367–374. Lepš J.(2004). What do the biodiversity experiments tell us about consequences ofplant species loss in the real world? Basicand Applied Ecology , 5: 529–534. Loreau M, NaeemS, Inchausti P, Bengtsson J, Grime J.P , A Hector, Hooper D.U, Huston M.A,Raffaelli D, Schmid B, Tilman D. and Wardle D.A. (2001). Biodiversity and ecosy stem functioning: current knowledge and future challenges. Science , 294: 804 –808. Loreau M.,Naeem S. and Inchausti P. (2002). Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning.Oxford University Press, NewYork. Marquard E.,Weigelt A., Temperton V.M., Roscher C., Schumacher J., Buchmann N., Fischer,M.,Weisser, W.W. and Schmid B. (2009). Plant species richness and functional compositiondrive over yielding in a 6-year grassland experiment. Ecology , 90: 3290–3302. McGrady-SteedJ, Harris P.M. and Morin P. (1997). Biodiversity regulates ecosystem predictability. Nature , 390: 162–165. MikolaJ., Salonen V. and Setala H. (2002). Studying the effects of plant speciesrichness on ecosystem functioning: does the choice of experimental designmatter? Oecologia , 133:594–598. NaeemS., Thompson L.J., Lawler S.P., Lawton J.H. and Woodfin R.M. (1994). Declining biodiversity can alter the performance of ecosystems. Nature , 368, 734–737. NaeemS. and Li S. (1997). Biodiversity enhances ecosystem reliability. Nature , 390: 507 –509. NaeemS, Hahn D.R. and Schuurman G. (2000). Producer-decomposer co-dependency influences biodiversity effects. Nature ,403:762–764. Nyland R.D.(2002). Silviculture: Concepts and Applications, 2nd edn. McGraw--Hill, Boston. O’Connor M.Iand Byrnes J.E.K. (2013). Biodiversity and ecosystem function in marine ecosystems. In: Bertness, Bertness M.D, Bruno J.F, Silliman B.R, (StachowiczJ.J. eds), Marine community ecology and conservation. Sinauer. Pacala S.W. and Deutschman D.H. (1995). Details that matter – the spatial distribution of individual trees maintains forest ecosystem function. Oikos , 74: 357–365. PotvinC. and Gotelli N. (2008). Biodiversity enhances individual performance but does not affect survivorship in tropical trees. EcologyLetters , 11: 217–223. PotvinC. and Dutilleul P. (2009). Neighborhood effects and size-asymmetriccom-petition in a tree plantation varying in diversity. Ecology , 90: 321–327. PowerM.E, Tilman D, Estes J.A., Menge B.A., Bond W.J., Mills L.S., Daily G.,Castilla, J.C., Lubchenco J. and Paine R.T. (1996). Challenges in the quest forkeystones. BioScience , 46: 609–620. ReichP.B., Tilman D., Isbell F., Mueller K., Hobbie S.E., Flynn D.F.B. and Eisenhauer N. (2012). Impacts of biodiversity loss escalate through time asredundancy fades. Science , 336:589–592. SallesJ.F., Poly F., Schmid B. and LeRoux X. (2009). Community niche predicts the functioning of denitrifying bacterial assemblages. Ecology , 90: 3324–3332. Scherer-LorenzenM., Potvin C.,Koricheva J., Schmid B., Hector A., Bornik Z., Reynolds G. andSchulze, E.-D. (2005). The design of experimental tree plantations forfunctional biodiversity research. Forest Diversity and Function: Temperate and Boreal Systems (Scherer-Lorenzen M. and KöSchulz e C. eds),pp. 347–376. Ecological Studies, 176. Springer, Berlin. Scherer-LorenzenM., Schulze E.D., Don A., Schumacher A. and Weller E. (2007). Exploring the functional significance of forest diversity: a new long-term experiment with temperate tree species (BIOTREE). Perspectivesin Plant Ecol-ogy Evolution and Systematics , 9: 53–70. Schl ä pfer F.,Pfisterer B.A. and Schmid B. (2005). Non-random species extinction and plant production: implications for ecosystem functioning. Journal of Applied Ecology , 42: 13–24. Schmid B., Hector A., Huston M.A., Inchausti P.,Nijs I., Leadley P.W. and Tilman D.(2002). The design and analysis of biodiversity experiments. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning: Synthesis and Perspectives (Loreau M., Naeem S. andInchausti P. eds), pp. 61–75.Oxford University Press,Oxford. Schmid B. and Hector A. (2004). The value of biodiversity experiments. Basic and Applied Ecology , 5: 535–542. Schmid B., Hector A., Saha P. and Loreau M. (2008). Biodiversity effects and transgressive over yielding. Journal ofPlant Ecology , 1: 95–102. Schuldt A., Bruelheide H., Durka W., Eichenberg D., Fischer M., KröberW., Härdtle W., Ma K., Michalski SG., PalmWU., Schmid B., Welk E., Zhou H. and AssmannT. (2012). Plant traits affecting herbivory on tree recruits in highly diverse subtropicalforests. Ecology Letters , 15: 732–739. Solan M., Cardinale B.J., Downing A.L., Engelhardt K.A.M., Ruesink J.L. andSrivastava D.S. (2004). Extinction and ecosystem function in the marine benthos. Science , 306: 1177–1180. SolanM., Aspden R.J., and Paterson, D.M. (2012). Marine biodiversity and ecosystemfunctioning. Oxford University Press, 2012:88 4-892. StachowiczJ.J., Bruno J.F. and Duffy J.E. (2007). Understanding the effects of marine biodiversity on communities and ecosystems. AnnualReview of Ecology Evolution and Systematics , 38(38): 739-766. TilmanD. and Downing J.A. (1994). Biodiversity and stability in grassland. Nature , 367: 363–367. TilmanD., Wedin, D. and Knops J. (1996). Productivity and sustainability influencedby biodiversity in grassland ecosystems. Nature ,379, 718–720. WardleD.A. (1998). A more reliable design for biodiversity study? Nature , 394: 30. WardleD.A., Huston M.A., Grime J.P., Berendse F., Garnier E., Lauenroth W.K., SetäläH. and Wilson S.D. (2000). Biodiversity and ecosystem function: an issue inecology. Bulletin of the EcologicalSociety of America , 81: 235–239. WhithamT.G., Young W.P., Martinsen G.D., Gehring C.A., Schweitzer J.A., Shuster S.M.,Wimp G.M., Fischer D.G., Bailey J.K., Lindroth R.L., Woolbright S. and KuskeC.R. (2003). Community and ecosystem genetics: a consequence of the extended phenotype. Ecology , 84: 559–573. WormB., Barbier E.B., Beaumont N., Duffy J.E., Folke C., Halpern B.S., JacksonJ.B., Lotze H.K., Micheli F., PalumbiS.R., Sala E., Selkoe K.A., StachowiczJ.J. and Watson R. (2006). Impacts of biodiversity loss on ocean ecosystem services. Science , 314: 787–790. Zavaleta E.S. and Hulvey K.B. (2004). Realistic species losses disproportionately reduce grassland resistance to biological invaders. Science , 306: 1175–1177.
Protecting an ecosystem service: approaches to understanding and mitigating threats to wild insect pollinators Back in April 2015 I attended a two day meeting at Imperial College’s Silwood Park campus to discuss initial project ideas to address evidence gaps in the recent National Pollinator Strategy . I mentioned the meeting in passing in a post at the time concerned with whether biodiversity scientists should also be campaigners , but didn’t say a lot about what conclusions we came to and what the next steps would be because at the time I was unclear on both of those counts: it was a very wide ranging meeting with a lot of participants coming at the question of pollinator conservation from different perspectives. As well as academics there were representatives from the agrochemical industry, government research organisations, and the National Farmers Union. During summer 2015 one of the conveners of the meeting, Dr Richard Gill , herded cats organised colleagues, pulled together all of the text and ideas that were generated, and took on the task of seeing a summary of the meeting through from initial draft to publication. It was a monumental effort, involving 27 authors and 86 manuscript pages, and Richard did a sterling job. Entitled “ Protecting an ecosystem service: approaches to understanding and mitigating threats to wild insect pollinators ” it will appear as a chapter in the next volume of Advances in Ecological Research , which should be published later this month. The abstract and contents for the chapter are below; if anyone wants a copy of the full chapter, please let me know. Abstract Insect pollination constitutes an ecosystem service of global importance, providing significant economic and aesthetic benefits as well as cultural value to human society, alongside vital ecological processes in terrestrial ecosystems. It is therefore important to understand how insect pollinator populations and communities respond to rapidly changing environments if we are to maintain healthy and effective pollinator services. This paper considers the importance of conserving pollinator diversity to maintain a suite of functional traits to provide a diverse set of pollinator services. We explore how we can better understand and mitigate the factors that threaten insect pollinator richness, placing our discussion within the context of populations in predominantly agricultural landscapes in addition to urban environments. We highlight a selection of important evidence gaps, with a number of complementary research steps that can be taken to better understand: i) the stability of pollinator communities in different landscapes in order to provide diverse pollinator services; ii) how we can study the drivers of population change to mitigate the effects and support stable sources of pollinator services; and, iii) how we can manage habitats in complex landscapes to support insect pollinators and provide sustainable pollinator services for the future. We advocate a collaborative effort to gain higher quality abundance data to understand the stability of pollinator populations and predict future trends. In addition, for effective mitigation strategies to be adopted, researchers need to conduct rigorous field- testing of outcomes under different landscape settings, acknowledge the needs of end-users when developing research proposals and consider effective methods of knowledge transfer to ensure effective uptake of actions. Contents 1. Importance of Insect Pollination 1.1 Providing an Ecosystem Service 1.2 Brief Introduction to Pollination Ecology and the Importance of Wild Pollinators 2. Major Threats to the Pollination Service Provided by Insects 3. Steps in the Right Direction to Protect Insect Pollinator Services: Policy Actions 4. Understanding and Mitigating Specific Threats to Wild Insect Pollinators to Protect Pollinator Services 4.1 Understanding the Stability of Insect Pollinator Communities 4.2 Using Molecular Approaches to Monitor Insect Pollinators 4.3 How Do Parasites Shape Wild Insect Pollinator Populations? 4.4 Understanding Insect Pollinator Population Responses to Resource Availability 4.5 Engineering Flowering Field Margins as Habitats to Attract Insect Pollinators 4.6 How Might We Improve the Wider Countryside to Support Insect Pollinators 4.7 Insect Pollinators in Urban Areas 5. Considerations When Developing Future Research and Mitigation Strategies Acknowledgements Appendix References
Ecosystem services survey – share your thoughts Researchers at the University of the West of England (UWE) are carrying out a public survey on attitudes to the concept of ecosystem services, a subject that I’ve referred to many times on this blog, most recently last week . The UWE researchers write: “……give us your views on the term ‘ecosystem services’! Do you feel it is a valuable concept? How should it be used and communicated? Regardless of whether you work with the concept or not, we would like to hear your views. The survey closes 5th February 2016……survey takes 10 minutes or less!” I’ve done is and they’re right, it’s very short, but well worth completing as it should generate some interesting data into how far the concept has penetrated into the public consciousness. The link to the survey is: https://uwe.onlinesurveys.ac.uk/ecosystem-services-sfep
看到这样的题目,估计你会认为这是老生常谈,但对于现在愈发受到人为干扰的生态系统而言,知道它们的相互关系可以指导生态系统的管理工作。近期,阿根廷的研究人员Gaitán等人在对干旱区地上部初级净生产力(ANPP)和降雨利用率等表征生态系统功能指标的影响变量进行了量化,他们发现植被类型(灌木、草地和物种多样性)与气候因子(降雨和气温)对ANPP的影响差不多。特别是草地覆盖度对ANPP的影响在植被类型中最显著,而降雨在气候因素中对ANPP的影响最显著。为什么是这样呢?对于没有什么植被的干旱区而言,灌木的影响可能不大,因为它们数量太少了;而降雨在全球尺度对NPP的影响是有目共睹的。所以,他们再次验证了人们直觉上的或经验上的判断。 相关研究论文“Vegetation structure is as important as climate for explaining ecosystem function across Patagonian”已经发表在Journal of Ecology上。有意思的是,作者最后建议维持植被面积,特别是草地的,有利于生态系统应对气候变化的负面效应。 生态系统功能与服务好像一直是生态学领域的热门话题。生态系统想发挥它的服务功能,必须要有功能,而大家普遍把生物量(Biomass)作为功能的替代指标了。这样简化了问题研究的难度,但有可能过于关注它的利用价值,而不是它本身的健康状况。如,biomass大了,应对极端气候的能力强了吗?就像对一个成年人而言,他是挣钱养家了,他会说话唱歌弹吉他,但又有多少人关注他的喜怒哀乐或健康啊?对于一个年富力强的40岁男人,他的能力或社会功能大于一个12岁小男孩,但他的抗压能力或从灾难中恢复的能力未必要强吧! 生态系统也应该如此! --------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------- 附:目前我国对森林生态系统服务功能的量化主要包括5个方面,它们是涵养水源、保育土壤、固碳释氧、积累营养物质以及净化大气环境。具体到生态系统产品则包括:吸收二氧化碳、制造氧气、涵养水源、保持水土、净化水质、防风固沙、调节气候、清洁空气、减少噪音、吸附粉尘、保护生物多样性等 。 张永利等. 2010. 中国森林生态系统服务功能研究. 北京: 科学出版社.
2014“整合中德两国——森林生物多样性与生态系统功能实验研究研讨会”圆满结束 (自中德中心网站 - 中科院植物研究所刘晓娟供稿 ) 5月4-10日,由国家自然科学基金委员会中德科学中心资助,中国科学院植物研究所马克平研究员,德国马丁路德大学(Martin Luther University Halle Wittenberg)Helge Bruelheide教授以及瑞士苏黎世大学(University of Zurich)Bernhard Schmid教授联合发起组织的“整合中德两国——森林生物多样性与生态系统功能实验研究研讨会”在德国哈雷马丁路德大学(Martin Luther University Halle Wittenberg)和图宾根大学(Eberhards Karl University Tübingen)顺利举行。研讨会的主旨为将中德两国基于森林/草地生物多样性与生态系统功能研究平台工作的多学科研究人员召集在一起,互相交流讨论,以聚焦研究生物多样性与生态系统功能的关系,并且将两国各实验平台已经取得的结果进行深度整合。 研讨会全体参会人员合影,地点:德国哈雷马丁路德大学(Martin Luther University Halle Wittenberg)生物学/地植物学研究所植物园 此次研讨会共有43名来自多家科研院所及大学的研究人员参加,大部分来自BEF-China(中国亚热带森林生物多样性与生态系统功能实验研究)项目。其中有15名来自中国,25名来自德国以及其他来自瑞士和美国的合作者。另有来自BEF-China项目的十多名德方学生也参加了会议。中德科学中心德方常务副主任赵妙根教授出席会议并给予参会者工作以肯定和鼓励。 为期一周的研讨会不仅给多学科科研工作者以面对面深入交流基于不同研究平台研究心得的机会,而且还邀请了在德国其它生物多样性与生态系统功能研究平台开展类似工作的负责人参加,并在他们的带领下对各自的实验样地进行野外考察。所去的样地包括:Jena草原生物多样性实验样地、BIOTREE森林生物多样性与生态系统功能实验样地(图林根州)以及Schwäbische Alb德国生物多样性研究平台。这些样地已成功建立并运行数十年,有着丰硕的研究成果,对样地的实地考察给予目前在BEF-China项目工作的中德两方科研人员以很大的启迪和鼓舞,不仅可以就地和其它平台的负责人热烈讨论了BEF-China未来可能得到的科研成果,也就实验设计对结果的影响及下一步工作方向进行了深入交流。此外,与会人员还参观访问了由亥姆霍兹环境研究中心(Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research UFZ)设立的全球变化实验基地和Kreinitz森林多样性实验样地以及位于莱比锡的德国生物多样性研究中心(iDiv, German Centre of integrative biodiversity research)。 Jena草原生物多样性实验样地的Nico Eisenhauer教授正在展示样地内基于植物功能性状多样性的控制实验设计。 Schwäbische Alb德国生物多样性研究平台的工作人员给与会者演示如何取土样。 研讨会的另一核心议题还包括讨论森林生物多样性实验未来全新的研究思路以及BEF-China项目运行机制。此外,中德两方的与会人员还就两国各实验平台已有的研究成果和数据未来的整合方法和思路进行了热烈讨论,并达成一些初步的整合计划。会议达到了预期目的并取得了圆满成功,带给双方研究人员的益处将是多方面且相互的。
图书名称 Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning, and Human Wellbeing -An Ecological and Economic Perspective 编者 Shahid Naeem, Daniel E. Bunker, Andy Hector, Michel Loreau and Charles Perrings 出版信息 Paperback , 384 pages Hardback Aug 2009, In Stock 介绍 Description How will biodiversity loss affect ecosystem functioning, ecosystem services, and human well-being? In an age of accelerating biodiversity loss, this timely and critical volume summarizes recent advances in biodiversity-ecosystem functioning research and explores the economics of biodiversity and ecosystem services. The book starts by summarizing the development of the basic science and provides a meta-analysis that quantitatively tests several biodiversity and ecosystem functioning hypotheses. It then describes the natural science foundations of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning research including: quantifying functional diversity, the development of the field into a predictive science, the effects of stability and complexity, methods to quantify mechanisms by which diversity affects functioning, the importance of trophic structure, microbial ecology, and spatial dynamics. Finally, the book takes research on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning further than it has ever gone into the human dimension, describing the most pressing environmental challenges that face humanity and the effects of diversity on: climate change mitigation, restoration of degraded habitats, managed ecosystems, pollination, disease, and biological invasions. However, what makes this volume truly unique are the chapters that consider the economic perspective. These include a synthesis of the economics of ecosystem services and biodiversity, and the options open to policy-makers to address the failure of markets to account for the loss of ecosystem services; an examination of the challenges of valuing ecosystem services and, hence, to understanding the human consequences of decisions that neglect these services; and an examination of the ways in which economists are currently incorporating biodiversity and ecosystem functioning research into decision models for the conservation and management of biodiversity. A final section describes new advances in ecoinformatics that will help transform this field into a globally predictive science, and summarizes the advancements and future directions of the field. The ultimate conclusion is that biodiversity is an essential element of any strategy for sustainable development. Features A graduate level text which incorporates the latest developments in the field of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning, one of the most controversial and high profile areas of ecological research The first volume to explore the economics of biodiversity and ecosystem services Summarizes the eagerly anticipated findings of two large and highly respected scientific networks, BioMERGE and DIVERSITAS Builds on the success and influence of the highly cited Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning (OUP, 2002) The first volume advancing the scientific foundation of the United Nation's global environmental assessment, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment , that links human well-being with the conservation of biodiversity Product Details 384 pages; 65 b/w illus. a 4 page color plate section ; 7 1/2 x 9 3/4 ; ISBN13: 978-0-19-954796-8 ISBN10: 0-19-954796-3 About the Author(s) Shahid Naeem is Professor of Ecology and Chair, Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University. Dr. Naeem pioneered experimental tests of the effects of biodiversity on ecosystem function and co-chaired the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Biodiversity Synthesis Report (Duraiappah and Naeem 2005). Daniel Bunker is an Assistant Professor at the New Jersey Institute of Technology (Newark, New Jersey, USA). Dr. Bunker is also co-director of the BioMERGE project and the TraitNet project. He focuses on understanding the effects of global climate change on species diversity and composition, and the concomitant effects of ecosystem functioning and services. Andy Hector is a community ecologist interested in the links between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. In 2003, he was appointed Assistant Professor within the Institute of Environmental Sciences at the University of Zurich where he is currently undergoing tenure review for a full Professorship. Michel Loreau is Full Professor and Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in theoretical ecology at McGill University (Montreal, Canada). He has won several scientific prizes, including the International Ecology Institute Prize and the Silver Medal of the National Centre for Scientific Research (France), and has been a member of numerous national and international scientific committees such as chairing the Scientific Committee of DIVERSITAS and the Steering Committee of the European Science Foundation programme (LINKECOL). Charles Perrings is Professor of Environmental Economics in the School of Life Sciences at Arizona State University. He has served as President of the International Society for Ecological Economics and as Vice Chair of the Scientific Committee of Diversitas. He is also the 2008 winner of the Kenneth E. Boulding Prize for ecological economics 内容 Table of Contents Preface Introduction, Background, and Meta-analyses 1. Introduction: The Ecological and Social Implications of Changing Biodiversity: An overview of a decade of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning research , Shahid Naeem, Daniel E. Bunker, Andy Hector, Michel Loreau, Charles Perrings 2. Consequences of Species Loss for Ecosystem Functioning: Meta-analyses of data from biodiversity experiments , Bernhard Schmid, Patricia Balvanera, Bradley J. Cardinale, Jasmin Godbold, Andrea B. Pfisterer, David Raffaelli, Martin Solan, Diane S. Srivastava 3. Biodiversity-ecosystem Function Research and Biodiversity Futures: Early bird catches the worm or a day late and a dollar short? , Martin Solan, Jasmin A. Godbold, Amy Symstad, Dan F.B. Flynn, Daniel E. Bunker Natural Science Foundations 4. A Functional Guide to Functional Diversity Measures , Owen L Petchey, Eoin O'Gorman, Dan F.B. Flynn 5. Forecasting Decline in Ecosystem Services Under Realistic Scenarios of Extinction , J. Emmett Duffy, Diane S. Srivastava, Jennie McLaren, Mahesh Sankaran, Martin Solan, John Griffin, Mark Emmerson, Kate E. Jones 6. Biodiversity and the Stability of Ecosystem Functioning , John Griffin, Eoin O'Gorman, Mark Emmerson, Stuart Jenkins, Alexandra-Maria Klein, Michel Loreau, Amy Symstad 7. The Analysis of Biodiversity Experiments: From pattern toward mechanism , Andy Hector, Thomas Bell, John Connolly, John Finn, Jeremy Fox, Laura Kirwan, Michel Loreau, Jennie McLaren, Bernhard Schmid, Alexandra Weigelt 8. Towards a Food-web Perspective on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning , Bradley J. Cardinale, J. Emmett Duffy, Diane S. Srivastava, Michel Loreau, Matthew Thomas, Mark Emmerson 9. Microbial Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning Under Controlled Conditions and in the Wild , Thomas Bell, Mark O. Gessner, Robert I. Griffiths, Jennie McLaren, Peter J. Morin, Marcel van der Heijden, Wim van der Putten 10. Biodiversity as Spatial Insurance: The effects of habitat fragmentation and dispersal on ecosystem functioning , Andrew Gonzalez, Nicolas Mouquet, Michel Loreau Ecosystem Services and Human Wellbeing 11. Incorporating Biodiversity in Climate Change Mitigation Initiatives , Sandra Daz, David A. Wardle, Andy Hector 12. Restoring Biodiversity and Ecosystem Function: Will an integrated approach improve results? , Justin Wright, Amy Symstad, James M. Bullock, Katharina Engelhardt, Louise Jackson, Emily Bernhardt 13. Managed Ecosystems: Biodiversity and ecosystem functions in landscapes modified by human use , Louise Jackson, Todd Rosenstock, Matthew Thomas, Justin Wright, Amy Symstad 14. Understanding the Role of Species Richness for Crop Pollination Services , Alexandra-Maria Klein, Christine Mller, Patrick Hoehn, Claire Kremen 15. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Function: Perspectives on disease , Richard S. Ostfeld, Matthew Thomas, Felicia Keesing 16. Opening Communities to Colonization: The impacts of invaders on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning , Katharina Engelhardt, Amy Symstad, Anne-Helene Prieur-Richard, Matthew Thomas, Daniel E. Bunker 17. The Economics of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services , C. Perrings, S. Baumgrtner, W.A. Brock, K. Chopra, M. Conte, C. Costello, A. Duraiappah, A.P. Kinzig, U. Pascual, S. Polasky, J. Tschirhart, A. Xepapadeas 18. The Valuation of Ecosystem Services , E.B. Barbier, S. Baumgrtner, K. Chopra, C. Costello, A. Duraiappah, R. Hassan, A. Kinzig, M. Lehman, U. Pascual, S. Polasky, C. Perrings 19. Modeling Biodiversity And Ecosystem Services in Coupled Ecological-Economic Systems , W.A. Brock, D. Finnoff, A.P. Kinzig, U. Pascual, C. Perrings, J. Tschirhart, A. Xepapadeas Summary and Synthesis 20. TraitNet: Furthering biodiversity research through the curation, discovery, and sharing of species trait data , Shahid Naeem and Daniel E. Bunker 21. Can We Predict the Effects of Global Change on Biodiversity Loss and Ecosystem Functioning? , Shahid Naeem, Daniel E. Bunker, Andy Hector, Michel Loreau, Charles Perrings References Index