Tag Archives: Biodiversity

white and purple flowers on green grass field during daytime

How to conserve ecological biodiversity: practical tips and mistakes to avoid

Leave a reply

⚡ What you will get from this guide

  • 💰 Save up to 70% vs hiring a professional
  • 🕐 Estimated time: 1-3 hours with the right materials
  • 💪 Suitable even for beginners with the right instructions
  • ✅ Step-by-step guide with materials, mistakes to avoid, and expert tips

Updated: 05/06/2026

white and purple flowers on green grass field during daytime
white and purple flowers on green grass field during daytime — Fonte: Wikimedia Commons

Imagine facing the problem: How to conserve ecological biodiversity. You have already postponed it too many times, and every day that passes the situation does not improve on its own. Yet calling a professional means waiting days and spending money that hurts. There is an alternative that thousands of people have already chosen: doing it yourself, the right way.

According to industry experts, most problems related to How to conserve ecological biodiversity can be solved independently without specialized skills. The online community of enthusiasts confirms it every day: just follow the steps in the correct order and have the right materials at hand.

Materials and tools needed for How to conserve ecological biodiversity: complete list

Before starting with How to conserve ecological biodiversity, it is essential to have everything you need at hand. Professionals agree: 70% of beginner mistakes come from missing a material or tool at the wrong moment.

  • Measuring tools (tape measure, level, square) — essential for any precise work. Cost: $15-40.
  • Basic hand tools (screwdrivers, pliers, hammer, wrenches) — the minimum kit for any job. Cost: $25-60 for a complete set.
  • Consumable materials (screws, anchors, tape, sealant, disposable gloves) — always keep a stock. Cost: $15-25.
  • Personal protective equipment (work gloves, safety glasses, dust mask) — not optional. Cost: $15-20.
  • Specific materials for How to conserve ecological biodiversity — vary based on the type of work. Buy only after reading the complete guide.
⚠ When to call a professional instead of proceeding alone:

  • Work on live electrical systems or in wet environments
  • Structural work on load-bearing walls or beams
  • Work requiring permits or certifications

Contesto aggiuntivo: Biodiversity hotspot

A biodiversity hotspot serves as a biogeographic region with significant levels of biodiversity that functions as threatened by human habitation. In this specific context, norman Myers wrote about the concept in two articles in The Environmentalist in 1988 and 1990, after which the concept was revised following thorough analysis by Myers and others into "Hotspots: Earth's Biologically Richest and Most Endangered Terrestrial Ecoregions" and a paper published in the journal Nature, both in 2000.

(Informazioni estratte da Wikipedia)

Step-by-step guide for How to conserve ecological biodiversity: complete instructions for beginners

Follow each step in the indicated order. If it is your first time tackling How to conserve ecological biodiversity, do not worry: each step is explained in detail.

  1. Step 1: Initial inspection and assessment

    Before touching anything, spend 5-10 minutes carefully observing the work area. Look for signs of hidden problems. Time estimate: 5-10 minutes.

  2. Step 2: Gather and verify materials

    Place all materials and tools on the work surface and verify everything is present. Check that tools are working. Time estimate: 5 minutes.

  3. Step 3: Prepare the work area

    Protect surfaces that should not be touched. Create an orderly and accessible workspace. Work in a well-lit environment. Time estimate: 10-15 minutes.

  4. Step 4: Secure utilities

    If the work involves electrical or plumbing systems, turn off the circuit breaker or close the main valve. Never skip this step. Time estimate: 5 minutes.

  5. Step 5: Disassembly or surface preparation

    Start with disassembly or surface preparation. Work calmly and without forcing. Photograph before disassembling. Time estimate: 15-30 minutes.

  6. Step 6: Measurements and intermediate check

    Measure twice, cut once. A measurement error at this stage can mean wasted materials and work to redo. Time estimate: 10-20 minutes.

  7. Step 7: Main operational phase

    Proceed methodically, one operation at a time. Respect drying and setting times on product labels. Time estimate: 30 minutes to 2-3 hours.

  8. Step 8: Fastening and finishing

    Verify that every element is aligned and properly secured. Do not overtighten screws. Time estimate: 15-30 minutes.

  9. Step 9: Clean up the area

    Before the final test, clean the work area. Remove protective covers carefully. Dispose of waste materials correctly. Time estimate: 10-15 minutes.

  10. Step 10: Functional test and final check

    Restore utilities and observe carefully for the first 5-10 minutes. Never leave the work area unattended during the first minutes of operation. Time estimate: 15-20 minutes.

Mistakes to absolutely avoid with How to conserve ecological biodiversity

90% of failed How to conserve ecological biodiversity jobs share one or more of these mistakes. Knowing them in advance lets you avoid them completely.

  1. Skipping the preparation phase

    70% of problems start here. Always dedicate at least 20 minutes to preparation.

  2. Using wrong or poor quality tools

    The wrong screwdriver can permanently damage a screw. Always use the right tool for each operation.

  3. Not reading product instructions

    Every sealant, adhesive, paint has its specifications. Ignoring them guarantees having to redo the work.

  4. Not respecting drying times

    Times on packaging are not suggestions: they are technical requirements.

  5. Forcing components that don’t fit

    If something doesn’t fit easily, never force it. Find the correct approach first.

  6. Neglecting personal safety

    Always wear gloves, safety glasses, and a dust mask before starting.

  7. Not documenting the work

    Photograph before, during, and after. It will be invaluable for future maintenance.

Maintenance over time: how to make How to conserve ecological biodiversity last

A well-done job lasts years if properly maintained. Preventive maintenance is the smartest investment: a few minutes occasionally prevents costly repairs in the future.

Frequency What to check Action if needed
Right after work Full functional test, no leaks or anomalies Fix any anomaly immediately
After 1 week Verify everything is still in place and working Tighten any loose fasteners
Every 6 months Visual inspection, check seals and joints Reapply sealant if necessary
Every year Complete general condition check Routine preventive maintenance

Expert tips for How to conserve ecological biodiversity: what you won’t find in generic tutorials

There is an aspect of How to conserve ecological biodiversity that few tutorials show: preparation of the work area is 50% of the final result. Professionals spend more time on this phase than on the actual execution. It is the secret that distinguishes excellent work from mediocre work.

For beginners: always start with a test on a hidden area. For experienced users: invest in professional quality tools. The difference in results compared to cheap tools is significant.

How much do you save doing How to conserve ecological biodiversity yourself?

Cost item Professional DIY Savings
Labor $50-100/hr $0 100%
TOTAL ESTIMATE $200-500 $40-100 50-70%

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

What tools are essential for How to conserve ecological biodiversity?

Essential tools depend on the specific type of work. In general, you will need basic tools like screwdrivers, pliers, a tape measure, and a level. For specialized work, you may need specific equipment that you can rent.

Can I do How to conserve ecological biodiversity myself without experience?

Yes, many jobs are within reach of those without specific experience, as long as you carefully follow instructions and do not rush. Always start with simpler jobs to build confidence before tackling more complex work.

How much does How to conserve ecological biodiversity cost to do yourself vs hiring a professional?

Doing it yourself can save 40 to 70% compared to hiring a professional, considering labor costs only. However, you need to account for the cost of materials and tools, plus the time spent.

What are the most common mistakes with How to conserve ecological biodiversity?

The most common mistakes are: not preparing adequately, using wrong materials, skipping important steps, and not respecting drying or setting times. Reading instructions carefully before starting drastically reduces these risks.

Conclusion: you are ready to do How to conserve ecological biodiversity

By following this step-by-step guide, you now have all the information you need to tackle How to conserve ecological biodiversity independently and safely. Remember: preparation is the key to success in any manual work.

If you encounter unexpected difficulties or have doubts about how to proceed, do not hesitate to consult a professional. Safety always comes first. Good luck!

AI Generated: Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems

Soil Biodiversity: The Invisible Engine Sustaining Ecosystems and Food Systems

Leave a reply

Introduction

Soil biodiversity is often overlooked, yet it serves as a critical foundation for both ecosystems and food systems. The intricate web of life present in the soil, including microorganisms, fungi, and invertebrates, plays a crucial role in nutrient cycling, soil structure, and overall ecosystem health. This article delves into the significance of soil biodiversity, its historical context, its current state, practical applications, potential future developments, and its indispensable role in sustaining human civilization.

AI Generated: Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems
AI Generated: Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems — Fonte: Wikimedia Commons

Context

Agriculture has been a cornerstone of human civilization, with the cultivation of soil dating back at least 11,500 years. Early agricultural practices led to the domestication of plants and animals, creating food surpluses that allowed for the development of sedentary societies. This transition marked a significant shift from nomadic lifestyles to the establishment of cities and complex civilizations. However, the rise of industrial agriculture in the 20th century brought about a drastic change in farming practices, emphasizing large-scale monocultures that often neglect the essential role of soil biodiversity.

The Role of Soil Biodiversity

Soil biodiversity encompasses a vast range of organisms, from microscopic bacteria and fungi to larger organisms like earthworms and insects. These organisms contribute to vital ecosystem functions:

  • Nutrient Cycling: Soil organisms decompose organic matter, releasing nutrients that are essential for plant growth.
  • Soil Structure: The activities of soil fauna help maintain soil structure, promoting water retention and aeration.
  • Pest and Disease Regulation: A diverse soil community can suppress pests and diseases, reducing the need for chemical inputs.
  • Carbon Sequestration: Healthy soil ecosystems capture and store carbon, playing a crucial role in mitigating climate change.

Analysis

The decline of soil biodiversity, largely due to industrial agricultural practices, poses significant risks to food security and ecosystem resilience. Monoculture farming depletes soil nutrients and reduces the diversity of soil organisms. This shift has led to increased reliance on synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, which can further harm soil health.

Research indicates that soils with higher biodiversity can produce more food sustainably. For instance, diverse cropping systems can enhance soil health and yield while reducing the need for chemical inputs. Studies show that agroecological practices, which emphasize the importance of biodiversity, result in improved soil structure, increased organic matter, and better water retention.

Practical Applications

To harness the benefits of soil biodiversity, various sustainable agricultural practices can be implemented:

  • Crop Rotation: Alternating crops can enhance soil fertility and reduce pest pressure.
  • Cover Cropping: Planting cover crops during the off-season can improve soil structure and prevent erosion.
  • Reduced Tillage: Minimizing soil disturbance helps maintain microbial communities and enhances soil carbon storage.
  • Organic Farming: Utilizing organic inputs fosters a diverse soil community and enhances ecosystem resilience.

These practices not only support soil biodiversity but also contribute to sustainable food systems that can withstand environmental changes.

Future Developments

The future of soil biodiversity will likely involve increased recognition of its importance in global food security and environmental health. Innovations in agricultural practices and technologies, such as precision agriculture and soil health monitoring, can help farmers manage biodiversity more effectively. Additionally, policy frameworks that promote sustainable land use and biodiversity conservation will be essential in addressing the challenges posed by climate change and population growth.

There is also a growing emphasis on education and awareness about soil health among farmers and consumers. Understanding the connection between healthy soils and food quality can drive demand for sustainably produced food, further incentivizing practices that support soil biodiversity.

Conclusions

Soil biodiversity is the invisible engine that sustains ecosystems and food systems. Its integral role in nutrient cycling, soil structure, and pest regulation cannot be overstated. As industrial agricultural practices threaten soil health, a shift towards sustainable farming methods that prioritize biodiversity is essential. Embracing these practices not only supports food security but also contributes to the resilience of our ecosystems in the face of environmental challenges. The future of agriculture lies in recognizing and nurturing the rich tapestry of life beneath our feet, ensuring that soil biodiversity continues to thrive for generations to come.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Who should be interested in Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems?

In practical terms, it mainly concerns Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems  Bio Eco Actual Agriculture functions as. Understanding this aspect is the first step to mastering Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems.

What challenges does Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems present?

The greatest impact is observed when we consider that soil, planting, raising, and harvesting both food and non-food crops, as well as livestock production.. This explains much of the current interest.

Why is Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems gaining popularity?

A key element to consider is that definitions in addition include forestry and aquaculture. Agriculture was a key factor in the rise. Many experts agree on this point when analyzing Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems.

What exactly does Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems mean?

To study it properly, it is essential to start from real data and observe how trends are evolving in the reference market of Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems.

{
“@context”: “https://schema.org”,
“@type”: “FAQPage”,
“mainEntity”: [
{
“@type”: “Question”,
“name”: “Who should be interested in Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems?”,
“acceptedAnswer”: {
“@type”: “Answer”,
“text”: “In practical terms, it mainly concerns Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems  Bio Eco Actual Agriculture functions as. Understanding this aspect is the first step to mastering Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems.”
}
},
{
“@type”: “Question”,
“name”: “What challenges does Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems present?”,
“acceptedAnswer”: {
“@type”: “Answer”,
“text”: “The greatest impact is observed when we consider that soil, planting, raising, and harvesting both food and non-food crops, as well as livestock production.. This explains much of the current interest.”
}
},
{
“@type”: “Question”,
“name”: “Why is Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems gaining popularity?”,
“acceptedAnswer”: {
“@type”: “Answer”,
“text”: “A key element to consider is that definitions in addition include forestry and aquaculture. Agriculture was a key factor in the rise. Many experts agree on this point when analyzing Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems.”
}
},
{
“@type”: “Question”,
“name”: “What exactly does Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems mean?”,
“acceptedAnswer”: {
“@type”: “Answer”,
“text”: “To study it properly, it is essential to start from real data and observe how trends are evolving in the reference market of Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems.”
}
}
]
}

{
“@context”: “https://schema.org”,
“@type”: “Article”,
“headline”: “Soil Biodiversity: The Invisible Engine Sustaining Ecosystems and Food Systems”,
“about”: {
“@type”: “Thing”,
“name”: “Soil biodiversity: the invisible engine sustaining ecosystems and food systems”
},
“articleSection”: “eco bio”,
“author”: {
“@type”: “Person”,
“name”: “angelo@percorso.net”
},
“publisher”: {
“@type”: “Organization”,
“name”: “Eco Bio III Millennio”,
“url”: “https://www.ecobio3millennio.com”
},
“datePublished”: “2026-04-30T07:36:00+00:00”,
“dateModified”: “2026-04-30T07:36:00+00:00”
}

The proof we needed

Leave a reply

Dryas octopetala

Originally posted on ‘On top of the world’

Good news for those ecologists studying species distributions: it turns out that the climatic niche of mountain plants is fairly conserved in space (Wasof et al. 2015).

Dryas octopetala

Mountain avens, Dryas octopetala

These results come from a study on the distribution of alpine species in the European Alps and the northern Scandes, two mountain regions with very different characteristics but a significant overlap in species composition.

Orchid

Orchid in the northern Scandes (Dactilorhiza majalis?)

The researchers compared the climatic niche of a large set of plant species that occurred in both mountain regions, and found that only a small percentage of these species experienced a regional effect on their niche. Especially species with disjunct populations (populations that are truly separated in space) showed high niche overlap, and the same was true for arctic-alpine species.

Betula nana

Dwarf birch, Betula nana

Although niches are in general surprisingly well conserved between the two regions, species occupy a wider range in the Alps than in the northern Scandes. More on the latter unexpected pattern in this informative post from Jonathan Lenoir, one of the authors.

Rubus chamaemorus

Cloudberry, Rubus chamaemorus

Why do we care? Because the large and growing field of species distribution modelling has as one of its main assumptions that climatic niches are conservative. If they are not, any extrapolation of a limited geographic dataset to the total global distribution of a species would be invalid.

Eriophorum vaginatum

Hair’s tale cottongrass, Eriophorum vaginatum

Reference

Wasof et al. (2015) Disjunct populations of European vascular plant species keep the same climatic niches, Global Ecology and Biogeography, 24: 1401-1412.

Pyrola minor

Snowline wintergreen, Pyrola minor

November 17, 2015

Pesticide effect on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning Updated for 2026

Leave a reply

Pesticid2Global biodiversity is constantly declining, and up-to-date research has shown that biodiversity loss affects the functioning of ecosystems and the services they provide to humans. Biodiversity-ecosystem functioning relations have yet mainly been analyzed in communities where species were randomly removed. In nature however, species are not lost at random, but according to their sensitivity to environmental stress.

In our study “Stressor-induced biodiversity gradients: revisiting biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships”, now published Early View in Oikos, we investigated whether biodiversity loss and biodiversity-ecosystem functioning relations in randomly composed diatom communities can be compared to those found in communities exposed to atrazine, one of the most-used pesticides worldwide.

Bild1

Atrazine exposure resulted in smaller biodiversity loss, but steeper decrease in ecosystem functioning than in randomly assembled diatom communities. This was related to selective atrazine effects on the best performing species, which contributed most to ecosystem functioning but was also most sensitive to atrazine.

Pesticid1

Our results imply that biodiversity loss and diversity-functioning relationships found along gradients of environmental stress do not compare to those inferred from the common approach of random community assembly. Species-specific sensitivity and performance need to be considered for a more accurate prediction of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning under stress.

The authors through Christophe Mensens

About these ads

Why Conservation? Communicating Applied Biodiversity Science Updated for 2026

Leave a reply

ABS_2color_web

Applied Biodiversity Science Program – Texas A&M University

You might have a favorite science writer. Mine are David Quammen, Bill Bryson, Carl Sagan, and Tim Flannery. Others may be more inclined to read Pulitzer Prize-winning and nominated authors like Jonathan Weiner, Siddhartha Mukherjee, or James Gleick, MacArthur-fellow Atul Gawande, or consummate greats like E. O. Wilson, Richard Dawkins, Stephen J. Gould, and Oliver Sacks. Or perhaps books aren’t all you’re interested in. In that case you may be a fan of Carl Zimmer’s blogging or the stories and editorials from journalists/authors Malcolm Gladwell or Stephen J. Dubner.

It’s likely you’ve read at least one of these authors. Like most readers you were probably impressed by how well they articulated the complexities and subtleties of their topic: everything from astrophysics to evolution, cancer, neurology, chaos theory, economics, and psychology. If you find an author who draws you into a topic that wouldn’t otherwise gain your attention, particularly an unfamiliar scientific discipline, take notice. Take stock of what they have accomplished by gaining your interest and curiosity. As George Gopen and Judith Swan stated in their 1990 for American Scientific, “the fundamental purpose of scientific discourse is not the mere presentation of information and thought, but rather its actual communication.” Good communication requires gaining the reader’s attention. Attention requires garnering interest and curiosity.

In our ever-connected world with vast communication and social networking ability, we have the ability to do just that. We possess the tools to communicate science to a diversity of people in a diversity of ways.

As a member of the Applied Biodiversity Science Program (ABS) at Texas A&M University I find myself in a position where communicating science is an imperative for success. The ABS program is graduate program originally funded by the National Science Foundation as part of their Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship (IGERT) program. The principle mission of ABS at Texas A&M is to achieve integration between biodiversity research in the social and natural sciences with on-the-ground conservation practices and stakeholders.

To that end, a foundational component of ABS is to communicate across scientific disciplines with various institutional actors to facilitate broader impacts across the realm of conservation. In essence, the ABS Program seeks to produce applied scientists who can communicate effectively across disciplines. A natural corollary of this goal is the ability to communicate science outside the realm of science. In this respect, our ABS Perspectives Series is intended to communicate more broadly and inclusively who applied biodiversity conservationists are, what we study, where we conduct research, how we conduct research, and why we are doing it. The current issue of the ABS Perspectives Series, features experiences from the Caribbean, the United States, Sénégal, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica. Contributions cover topics ranging from captive parrot re-wilding with pirates to blogging in the Nicaraguan forest with limited Internet access.

Perhaps more importantly, the ABS Perspective Series wants to reach out and share ABS student and faculty experiences with a diverse readership to raise awareness of biodiversity conservation issues. Outreach is an important axiom of actionable science, especially outreach that informs, improves and influences management and policy. I consider both the ABS Perspectives Series and BioDiverse Perspectives outreach initiatives to communicate the biodiversity conservation mission to the general public, communities where our research has been conducted, fellow academics and practitioners, and institutions that can provide logistics, infrastructure, and support. We must intend to make and practice making our research accessible and intriguing to everyone.

November 18, 2014

Marine biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: what’s known and what’s next? Updated for 2026

Leave a reply

In our new paper “Marine biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: what’s known and what’s next?” just published online early in Oikos, we synthesise our current understanding of the functional consequences of changes in species richness in the marine realm. For those familiar with the field of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning, the first question might well be: do we really need yet another meta-analysis on this topic? I mean, really. There have been several meta-analyses published in recent years. Do we really need this work?

Well, our answer to the question is yes. Here’s why.

This paper started while we were synthesising data for general biodiversity-ecosystem functioning relationships at NCEAS  in Santa Barbara, USA. We realised that much data from the marine side was missing, as many of those studies did not fit the inclusion criteria set up for our original database. Previous meta-analyses1, 2 focused solely on how richness influences resource capture and/or the production of biomass. Marine studies, however, all over the map in terms of what functions they measured: resource use, biomass production, nutrient fluxes, trophic cascades, and so on.

gamfeldt photo 4

Panel with a sessile invertebrate community. Photo credit: Jarrett Byrnes.

 

So what’s the full picture of how biodiversity-ecosystem influences functions in the ocean – from primary production to biogeochemical cycles?

We got our hands on 110 marine experiments that manipulated the number of species and analysed some ecosystem response. In general, our analyses generally confirm previous findings that the average mix of species uses resources more efficiently and produces more biomass than the average monoculture. We honestly weren’t sure how this was going to fall out, and find great comfort in the generality of the result.

gamfeldt photo 2

Soft sediment microcosms, Sweden. Photo credit: Karl Norling.

 

 

In contrast, we find a different shape to relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functions than has been seen previously. The relationship between species richness and production is best described as linear. The relationship between species richness and consumption appear to follow a power function. We find this by using new and more powerful techniques to describing the shape of relationships across multiple studies that we hope future researchers will use as well. (And, yes, we give you all of our code so that you can follow along at home!)

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

A seagrass field experiment in Finland. Photo shows a polyculture with three species. Photo credit: Camilla Gustafsson.

 

We also identify several gaps in our understanding of marine biodiversity and ecosystem functioning that are ripe for future investigation. First, the number of studies focusing on biogeochemical fluxes is still tiny. We need more. Second, we need more studies in pelagic and salt-marsh environments. Third, we still have only a handful of studies focused on predators. Fourth, the effects of increases in species richness (e.g. due to invasives or range shifts) are poorly understood. And last, we really only looked at relatively simple experiments, using on average only 3 species! We sorely need experiments targeting how spatial scale and heterogeneity, realistic local extinction scenarios from natural (read: large!) species pools, and functional and phylogenetic composition alter the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem function.

To sum: there’s much work to be done, and we look forward with high hopes to the next generation of experiments exploring the consequences of changes in marine biodiversity.

gamfeldt photo 1

Three species of crab, used in the experiment in Griffin et al. 20083. Photo credit: Pippa Moore.

 

Now, if you had to explain this study to your mom or dad: the world has an incredible number and variety of different species, but we are losing them due to things like fishing, habitat destruction, and other threats from humanity. We need to understand what the consequences of these extinctions are for healthy and productive ecosystems, which is why researchers conduct experiments where they remove species and see what happens. We summarized data from 110 such experiments and found that losing species, on average, decreases productivity and growth, as well as a myriad of other processes related to how marine organisms capture and utilize resources, like nutrients. These processes ultimately put food on the dinner table and give us clean water. What is most interesting is we expected these declines to be non-linear based on previous studies: you can lose some species up to a point, then it starts to go downhill. The results from our analysis suggest that, for some processes, every species matters! Thus it is imperative that we protect and conserve biodiversity in our world’s oceans.

Lars Gamfeldt and co-workers

References:

  1. Cardinale, B. J. et al. 2006. Effects of biodiversity on the functioning of trophic groups and ecosystems. – Nature 443: 989-992.
  2. Cardinale, B. J. et al. 2011. The functional role of producer diversity in ecosystems. – American Journal of Botany 98: 572-592.
  3. Griffin, J., de la Haye, K., Hawkins, S., Thompson, R. and Jenkins, S. 2008. Predator diversity effects and ecosystem functioning: density modifies the effect of resource partitioning. – Ecology 89: 298-305.

 

About these ads

Clarifying “biodiversity,” but is it enough?

Leave a reply

9780226500812

Cover of “What is Biodiversity?”

Below is the another installment on the philosophical and ecological values of biodiversity motivated by the University of Oregon lecture series titled “Biodiversity at Twenty-Five: The Problem of Ecological Proxy Values”. In the first set of posts, Tim Christion Myers investigated the value of biodiversity conservation through the eyes of a philosopher, while Lorien Reynolds reflected on the value of biodiversity through the eyes of an ecologist. The next set of posts was motivated by Dr. David Hooper’s presentation and interdisciplinary workshop on biodiversity and compared the views of biology grad student Lucas Nebert and environmental studies grad student Shane Hall. Here, philosophy student Jon LaRochelle reflects on a presentation by Kim Sterelny, asking whether biodiversity is a an appropriate conceptual framework for conservation.

 

If conservation biology is triage, how are we to make intelligent decisions about what to save and what to let go?  “How do we do something to stem the tide of human resource consumption in a targeted and principled way?”

This is the question Kim Sterelny used to frame his philosophical work on biodiversity during his visit to the University of Oregon’s “Biodiversity at Twenty-Five” seminar series.  Six years after the publication of his book with James Maclaurin, What is Biodiversity?, Sterelny came to Eugene to reflect on that project and his current thinking on the concept of biodiversity.  Was their attempt to conceptually clarify “biodiversity” successful?  Does biodiversity continue to be a viable metric for decisions in conservation biology?

According to Sterelny, “biodiversity” should be both 1) theoretically principled and 2) empirically tractable if it is to effectively guide conservation triage.

1) Theoretically principled — “Biodiversity” should identify an aspect of a system that is a robust and causal driver of that system.  This stands in contrast to explicitly normative accounts of biodiversity (i.e., “Biodiversity is intrinsically valuable”), and conventionalist accounts (see, for instance, Sahotra Sarkar’s “Defining ‘Biodiversity’; Assessing Biodiversity”).  The diversity stability hypothesis is one such theoretically principled account, which ties the value of biodiversity to the stability of an ecosystem.  Sterelny and Maclaurin (2008) see this as a plausible account, though not yet fully demonstrable (see especially pp. 119-123).

2) Empirically tractable — Biodiversity should be a measurable property of a system.  Practically, we should be able to look at an ecosystem and measure biodiversity well enough that the measurements can guide conservation decisions.  This is a severely limiting condition, since measures of biodiversity will almost always be indirect, partial, or both.  Sterelny stresses the importance of surrogates.  Rather than measure biodiversity itself—a daunting task—we might hope to identify viable surrogates, easier to measure but reliable enough for making choices about conservation.  Two such surrogates are species richness and phylogenetic variation.  Sterelny and Maclaurin advocate a pluralist approach to biodiversity, which sees it as varying both across and within systems depending on one’s purposes.

To meet these two conditions, Sterelny and Maclaurin argue for a conception of biodiversity that stresses species richness supplemented by consideration of phylogenetic and phenotypic diversity.  Using this specification of “biodiversity,” conservation decisions can be made based on option value—barring definitive knowledge about the species’ relative value, we should hedge our bets and conserve as diverse a swath of the history of evolution as we can, so as to keep our options open for future crises.

Revisiting the project six years later, Sterelny still stands by their account of species richness as the best candidate for a framework concept to guide the inescapable work of conservation triage.  However, he expressed some hesitation about whether the development of such a framework concept is possible.  In the Q&A, biologists and philosophers alike pressed him on the continued viability of “biodiversity.”

Listening to the talk and ensuing discussion, I was left wanting a further discussion of value.  What values should guide our thinking about the human relation to the natural world?  Is biodiversity up to the task we’ve set for it?  Conceptual clarity aside, is biodiversity the right value for guiding the human relation to the natural world?  Is it the right value from the perspective of the natural world itself?  Sterelny’s work nicely articulates the conditions that must be met for biodiversity to do what we ask of it, but he himself expresses doubts about its continued normative viability.

What is called for is further reflection on the values that guide conservation.  “Biodiversity” is theoretically fraught but intuitively appealing.  The Tuatara is a fascinating animal which has intuitive conservation appeal, but may not have very high option value.  Should we conserve it anyway, because it is a fascinating relic of the evolutionary past?  Could conservation resources be better spent? To what extent does the perspective of the tuatara, or some other endangered species, count as a matter for consideration.  Sterelny does good conceptual work on “biodiversity” while leaving these value questions largely unanswered.  However, it is precisely these questions that call for consideration.

October 15, 2014

FLUMP- stochasticity and biodiversity, Lotka-Volterra apps, SARs, Conservation and more Updated for 2026

Leave a reply

WileeCoyote

Predator (red) -prey (blue) dynamics generated when predator’s capture rate is 0. Sorry Wile E.

It’s Friday and that means that it’s time for our Friday link dump, where we highlight some recent papers (and other stuff) that we found interesting but didn’t have the time to write an entire post about. If you think there’s something we missed, or have something to say, please share in the comments section!

A good friend of ours,  Dave Armitage, created a couple of free apps to simulate Lotka-Voltera and Predator-Prey dynamics.

Rafael Loyola discusses the inconsistent environmental actions taken by Brazilian policy makers  (I recently wrote a post about some of these problems here), and  their consequences for conservation and in the international political arena, in a new article titled “Brazil cannot risk its environmental leadership“.

A  preprint in arXiv used different methods in order to estimate the size of Google Scholar (unlike other bibliographic databases, Google Scholar does not offer tools for bibliometric analyses). Although all the methods used by the authors showed “great inconsistencies”, they estimated that Google Scholar harbors ~ 160 million documents, including journal articles, meeting abstracts, books, case law, etc. If you are interested in that matter, see also a good article published last week in Science reviewing this paper and some of the issues associated with using Google Scholar.

David Warton, an associated editor for Methods in Ecology and Evolution, recently interviewed professors Alix Gitelman, Geof Givens, and Janine Illian, whom organized a conference called “Modern Statistical Methods for Ecology”. Among other things, they discussed the current trends in statistical ecology. Here is a link to the video.

At last, here are a couple of very interesting articles about stochasticity in community ecology:

 – Vinicius Bastazini

  • A really cool article on maximising the phylogenetic diversity of seed banks.
  • An interesting study on how the degree of species’ specialism affects the species-area relationship.
  • An article from Conservation Magazine on how people’s climate change attitudes vary with the local weather they are experiencing.

– Benno Simmons

Jason Fridley and Dov Sax propose a new use for the beleaguered phylogenetic diversity as indicator of genetic potential in their early view GEB paper that formulates an ‘evolutionary imbalance hypothesis’ to explain global patterns of species invasions. I look forward to the ensuing commentary and discussion.

-Jes Coyle

-Emily Grason

ScienceWatch posted their predictions for the 2014 Nobel Prize in Medicine, Economics, Physics, and Chemistry, which will be announced next week.  Though I’m still debating whether to start James Darnell or Michael Wigler in the Medicine group, my Nobel fantasy team is looking sharp for Tuesday’s announcements. – Nate Johnson

 

October 3, 2014

FLUMP – Sargasso Sea biodiversity, penguin citizen science, criticism and more! Updated for 2026

Leave a reply

This place isn't doing so well

It’s Friday and that means that it’s time for our Friday link dump, where we highlight some recent papers (and other stuff) that we found interesting but didn’t have the time to write an entire post about. If you think there’s something we missed, or have something to say, please share in the comments section!

A study by Huffard et al. published this month in Marine Biology gives evidence for declining biodiversity within the Sargasso Sea.  The authors compared samples from 2011 and 2012 with those taken back in the 1970s, and found declines in species richness, diversity, and evenness.  It is unclear whether these community shifts are inherent to the Sargasso Sea’s ecosystem or if they are driven by changes in sea surface temperature and pH.

A new citizen science project called Penguin Watch lets you look at images taken by researchers in the Antarctic and count how many adult penguins, chicks, and eggs are in each photo.  This data will be used to better monitor and protect penguin populations against anthropogenic threats such as climate change and human stressors.  I’d like to think Bruce Wayne has a Penguin Watch as well, making all who contribute to this research a little more like Batman.

An interesting article on Science Careers details the uphill climb a lot of doctoral graduates face when seeking employment outside of academia, and the drawbacks of taking a job you are overqualified for.  – Nate Johnson

For those of you who enjoy watching the IDH tennis match, Michael Huston offered a critique of some recent critiques (how meta) of the IDH, and its cousin the intermediate productivity hypothesis, in the context of ecological logic vs. ecological theory. It’s here in this week’s Ecology.

How much evidence is there really that co-evolution promotes diversification? Hembry et al. in last week’s AmNat.

And because I’m on a roll (in a rut?) of reading papers that offer primarily criticism: “A critique of the ‘novel ecosystem’ concept” by Murcia et al. in the most recent TrEE. -Emily Grason

Here is a couple of interesting special issues that came out recently; the first is a special issue dedicated to Functional Biogeography, published in PNAS and the second one is an Oikos’ edition dedicated to soil food webs. – Vinicius Bastazini. 

What are the 71 important questions for the conservation of marine biodiversity? You can read it here in the latest issue of Conservation Biology. – Kylla Benes

 

September 26, 2014

Missive from ESA2014: BBB – Better Biodiversity Business? Updated for 2026

Leave a reply

tesoroBaker1

The March Point Refinery in Anacortes, WA, which must be one of the most beautifully situated refineries on earth. I do research just behind it at the Padilla Bay National Estuarine Reserve, in the shadow of Mt. Baker. Photo: Tesoro

Paraphrasing Jill Baron, ESA President, we, as ecologists, might all feel a … certain way about oil companies, but then we get in our cars and drive away. Or fly to ESA.

So, at what point, or on what level, do we, again, as ecologists, directly engage businesses, including huge multinational corporations that are typically blamed for the environmental destruction we research, in a constructive conversation about maintaining biodiversity? One that doesn’t involve picket signs, or legalese, or inherent distrust?

I fully acknowledge my own visceral sense of distrust, evoked during last Monday’s special session on Biodiversity in Businesses, on the introduction of Maria Hartley, who works on implementing the environmental mission (who knew?) of Chevron (see Inevitable Caveat 1 below). Joining Ms. Hartley on the panel were Albert Straus (of Straus Family Creameries – HUGE fan of the European Style yogurt, totally changed my outlook on yogurt!), and Robbert Snep, who is both an academic and a consultant to businesses seeking to green up and improve sustainability and biodiversity in their practices. The panel benefitted from the experience of a range of company approaches – a huge multinational corporation seemingly anathema to the idea of conservation, a local/regional agricultural operation, where we are much more comfortable thinking about biodiversity and business coexisting, as well as a consultant who works with a range of business entities and has a landscape-level perspective.

One of the species that Chevron works to protect is the Desert Tortoise in the Mojave.

One of the species that Chevron works to protect is the Desert Tortoise in the Mojave. Find out more here. Photo: “DesertTortoise” by Wilson44691 – Own work. Licensed under Public domain via Wikimedia Commons.

I latched onto the theme of motivation in each of these scenarios: Who are the parties that are motivated to build biodiversity into the business architecture and why? Who wants the business to consider environmental welfare and conservation? The shareholders? The consumers? The executives? The employees? The Public Relations office? What is their relation to the decision-making apparatus for the company? Is the business built in a way that protects sustainability as a priority, even when competing prioritie$ might emerge.

The answers to these questions determine how each business approaches biodiversity, and there is a range of structural solutions. For instance, on the flight (Inevitable Caveat 2) here, I read a short piece in the New Yorker about “B-corporations”, for-profit companies that are certified for high standards in “social and environmental practice” by B-Lab, a non-profit. B-corporations are, evidently, not to be confused with Benefit Corporations, which is hard, because they are both called “B-corps”. A B Corporation is a business incorporation status offered by about half of the states in the country. In both cases, there is an explicit commitment to social or environmental goals and objectives, that are variously controlled or evaluated by outside entities.

Straus was the first non-GMO verified creamery in the country. Find out more here.

Straus was the first non-GMO verified creamery in the country. Find out more here.

Neither Straus nor Chevron is a B-corp, in either sense of the colloquial term, though perhaps the latter goes without saying. Yet they both manage, in their way, to pursue environmental objectives. I got the sense that these objectives were both determined and executed in a very top-down way at Straus, reflecting the vision and mission of the company’s family founders. On the other hand, Chevron states environmental goals, but hires ecologists and lawyers to keep them in compliance. I do wonder whether either of those approaches is structured to protect these values when/if “Corporate Social Responsibility” ever becomes less fashionable.

So, the good news is that there are jobs out there for us ecologists who don’t see the allure in the current unstable academic funding environment. Companies are seeking out science and finding it worth their investment to ask ecologists how to do their business environmentally. How do we get those jobs? Snep noted that, as students, we spend very little time thinking about businesses (except perhaps as a funding opportunity, or an obstacle to our research). He suggests that it would benefit us to wear a businesses hat from time to time, to develop the ability to communicate with business and find ways to apply ecology, to their landscaping, to their sourcing, to their marketing. Straus added that their company is really looking for leaders and managers first, as the content and skills can be added. I have been told that a dual PhD(or MS)/MBA is a formidable combination. I’m not sure I’m quite ready for X years more school, given my current financial situation, and it seems almost laughable how fish-out-of-water I would look in a business school (she says as she looks around the room at ESA).

 

Inevitable Caveats:

(1)  On a personal note, the distrust was, of course, my own baggage. Ms. Hartley convinced me that she does work from a science-first perspective and believes the role she plays can make a difference in the world of biodiversity.

(2)  Presumably, this plane flew on petroleum – read here for more about conservation biologists and carbon footprint, an irony of which I am fully aware.

August 19, 2014