Refine
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4) (remove)
Keywords
- concepts (2)
- ecosystem services provisioning (2)
- ecosystems (2)
- management (2)
- resilience (2)
- PhenObs phenological network (1)
- botanical gardens (1)
- first flowering day (1)
- growing season length (1)
- leaf (1)
- phylogeny (1)
- traits (1)
Phenology has emerged as key indicator of the biological impacts of climate change, yet the role of functional traits constraining variation in herbaceous species' phenology has received little attention. Botanical gardens are ideal places in which to investigate large numbers of species growing under common climate conditions. We ask whether interspecific variation in plant phenology is influenced by differences in functional traits. We recorded onset, end, duration and intensity of initial growth, leafing out, leaf senescence, flowering and fruiting for 212 species across five botanical gardens in Germany. We measured functional traits, including plant height, absolute and specific leaf area, leaf dry matter content, leaf carbon and nitrogen content and seed mass and accounted for species' relatedness. Closely related species showed greater similarities in timing of phenological events than expected by chance, but species' traits had a high degree of explanatory power, pointing to paramount importance of species' life-history strategies. Taller plants showed later timing of initial growth, and flowered, fruited and underwent leaf senescence later. Large-leaved species had shorter flowering and fruiting durations. Taller, large-leaved species differ in their phenology and are more competitive than smaller, small-leaved species. We assume climate warming will change plant communities' competitive hierarchies with consequences for biodiversity.
Resilience trinity
(2020)
Ensuring ecosystem resilience is an intuitive approach to safeguard the functioning of ecosystems and hence the future provisioning of ecosystem services (ES). However, resilience is a multi-faceted concept that is difficult to operationalize. Focusing on resilience mechanisms, such as diversity, network architectures or adaptive capacity, has recently been suggested as means to operationalize resilience. Still, the focus on mechanisms is not specific enough. We suggest a conceptual framework, resilience trinity, to facilitate management based on resilience mechanisms in three distinctive decision contexts and time-horizons: 1) reactive, when there is an imminent threat to ES resilience and a high pressure to act, 2) adjustive, when the threat is known in general but there is still time to adapt management and 3) provident, when time horizons are very long and the nature of the threats is uncertain, leading to a low willingness to act. Resilience has different interpretations and implications at these different time horizons, which also prevail in different disciplines. Social ecology, ecology and engineering are often implicitly focussing on provident, adjustive or reactive resilience, respectively, but these different notions of resilience and their corresponding social, ecological and economic tradeoffs need to be reconciled. Otherwise, we keep risking unintended consequences of reactive actions, or shying away from provident action because of uncertainties that cannot be reduced. The suggested trinity of time horizons and their decision contexts could help ensuring that longer-term management actions are not missed while urgent threats to ES are given priority.
Resilience trinity
(2020)
Ensuring ecosystem resilience is an intuitive approach to safeguard the functioning of ecosystems and hence the future provisioning of ecosystem services (ES). However, resilience is a multi-faceted concept that is difficult to operationalize. Focusing on resilience mechanisms, such as diversity, network architectures or adaptive capacity, has recently been suggested as means to operationalize resilience. Still, the focus on mechanisms is not specific enough. We suggest a conceptual framework, resilience trinity, to facilitate management based on resilience mechanisms in three distinctive decision contexts and time-horizons: 1) reactive, when there is an imminent threat to ES resilience and a high pressure to act, 2) adjustive, when the threat is known in general but there is still time to adapt management and 3) provident, when time horizons are very long and the nature of the threats is uncertain, leading to a low willingness to act. Resilience has different interpretations and implications at these different time horizons, which also prevail in different disciplines. Social ecology, ecology and engineering are often implicitly focussing on provident, adjustive or reactive resilience, respectively, but these different notions of resilience and their corresponding social, ecological and economic tradeoffs need to be reconciled. Otherwise, we keep risking unintended consequences of reactive actions, or shying away from provident action because of uncertainties that cannot be reduced. The suggested trinity of time horizons and their decision contexts could help ensuring that longer-term management actions are not missed while urgent threats to ES are given priority.