Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (3)
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (3)
Keywords
- anthropogenic interferences (1)
- aquatic-terrestrial interfaces (1)
- biocontrol of eutrophication (1)
- drift and dispersal (1)
- ecological stoichiometry (1)
- functioning (1)
- inducible defense (1)
- landscape connectivity (1)
- modeling (1)
- multiple stressors (1)
- organic matter mineralization (1)
- phenotypic plasticity (1)
- predator-prey dynamics (1)
- priming effects (1)
- riverine ecosystems (1)
- stability (1)
- synchronization (1)
Institute
- Institut für Biochemie und Biologie (3) (remove)
Riverine ecosystems provide various ecosystem services. One of these services is the biological control of eutrophication by grazing macroinvertebrates.
However, riverine ecosystems are subject to numerous stressors that affect community structure, functions, and stability properties. To manage rivers in response to these stressors, a better understanding of the ecological functions underlying services is needed.
This requires consideration of local and regional processes, which requires a metacommunity approach that links local food webs through drift and dispersal. This takes into account long-distance interactions that can compensate for local effects of stressors.
Our modular model MASTIFF (Multiple Aquatic STressors In Flowing Food webs) is stage-structured, spatially explicit, and includes coupled food webs consisting of benthic resource-consumer interactions between biofilm and three competing macroinvertebrate functional types. River segments are unidirectionally connected through organismal drift and bidirectionally connected through dispersal. Climate and land use stressors along the river can be accounted for. Biocontrol of biofilm eutrophication is used as an exemplary functional indicator.
We present the model and the underlying considerations, and show in an exemplary application that explicit consideration of drift and dispersal is essential for understanding the spatiotemporal biocontrol of eutrophication.
The combination of drift and dispersal reduced eutrophication events. While dispersal events were linked to specific periods in the species life cycles and therefore had limited potential to control, drift was ubiquitous and thus responded more readily to changing habitat conditions.
This indicates that drift is an important factor for coping with stress situations.
Finally, we outline and discuss the potential and possibilities of MASTIFF as a tool for mechanistic, cross-scale analyses of multiple stressors to advance knowledge of riverine ecosystem functioning.
Across a landscape, aquatic-terrestrial interfaces within and between ecosystems are hotspots of organic matter (OM) mineralization. These interfaces are characterized by sharp spatio-temporal changes in environmental conditions, which affect OM properties and thus control OM mineralization and other transformation processes. Consequently, the extent of OM movement at and across aquatic-terrestrial interfaces is crucial in determining OM turnover and carbon (C) cycling at the landscape scale. Here, we propose expanding current concepts in aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem sciences to comprehensively evaluate OM turnover at the landscape scale. We focus on three main concepts toward explaining OM turnover at the landscape scale: the landscape spatiotemporal context, OM turnover described by priming and ecological stoichiometry, and anthropogenic effects as a disruptor of natural OM transfer magnitudes and pathways. A conceptual framework is introduced that allows for discussing the disparities in spatial and temporal scales of OM transfer, changes in environmental conditions, ecosystem connectivity, and microbial-substrate interactions. The potential relevance of priming effects in both terrestrial and aquatic systems is addressed. For terrestrial systems, we hypothesize that the interplay between the influx of OM, its corresponding elemental composition, and the elemental demand of the microbial communities may alleviate spatial and metabolic thresholds. In comparison, substrate level OM dynamics may be substantially different in aquatic systems due to matrix effects that accentuate the role of abiotic conditions, substrate quality, and microbial community dynamics. We highlight the disproportionate impact anthropogenic activities can have on OM cycling across the landscape. This includes reversing natural OM flows through the landscape, disrupting ecosystem connectivity, and nutrient additions that cascade across the landscape. This knowledge is crucial for a better understanding of OM cycling in a landscape context, in particular since terrestrial and aquatic compartments may respond differently to the ongoing changes in climate, land use, and other anthropogenic interferences.
Phenotypic plasticity in prey can have a dramatic impact on predator-prey dynamics, e.g. by inducible defense against temporally varying levels of predation. Previous work has overwhelmingly shown that this effect is stabilizing: inducible defenses dampen the amplitudes of population oscillations or eliminate them altogether. However, such studies have neglected scenarios where being protected against one predator increases vulnerability to another (incompatible defense). Here we develop a model for such a scenario, using two distinct prey phenotypes and two predator species. Each prey phenotype is defended against one of the predators, and vulnerable to the other. In strong contrast with previous studies on the dynamic effects of plasticity involving a single predator, we find that increasing the level of plasticity consistently destabilizes the system, as measured by the amplitude of oscillations and the coefficients of variation of both total prey and total predator biomasses. We explain this unexpected and seemingly counterintuitive result by showing that plasticity causes synchronization between the two prey phenotypes (and, through this, between the predators), thus increasing the temporal variability in biomass dynamics. These results challenge the common view that plasticity should always have a stabilizing effect on biomass dynamics: adding a single predator-prey interaction to an established model structure gives rise to a system where different mechanisms may be at play, leading to dramatically different outcomes.