An official website of the United States government
Estimating biodiversity change across the planet in the context of widespread human modification is a critical challenge. Here, we review how biodiversity has changed in recent decades across scales and taxonomic groups, focusing on four diversity metrics: species richness, temporal turnover, spatial beta-diversity and abundance. At local scales, change across all metrics includes many examples of both increases and declines and tends to be centred around zero, but with higher prevalence of declining trends in beta-diversity (increasing similarity in composition across space or biotic homogenization) and abundance. The exception to this pattern is temporal turnover, with changes in species composition through time observed in most local assemblages. Less is known about change at regional scales, although several studies suggest that increases in richness are more prevalent than declines. Change at the global scale is the hardest to estimate accurately, but most studies suggest extinction rates are probably outpacing speciation rates, although both are elevated. Recognizing this variability is essential to accurately portray how biodiversity change is unfolding, and highlights how much remains unknown about the magnitude and direction of multiple biodiversity metrics at different scales. Reducing these blind spots is essential to allow appropriate management actions to be deployed. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Detecting and attributing the causes of biodiversity change: needs, gaps and solutions’.
more »
« less
Environmental DNA reveals the fine-grained and hierarchical spatial structure of kelp forest fish communities
Abstract Biodiversity is changing at an accelerating rate at both local and regional scales. Beta diversity, which quantifies species turnover between these two scales, is emerging as a key driver of ecosystem function that can inform spatial conservation. Yet measuring biodiversity remains a major challenge, especially in aquatic ecosystems. Decoding environmental DNA (eDNA) left behind by organisms offers the possibility of detecting species sans direct observation, a Rosetta Stone for biodiversity. While eDNA has proven useful to illuminate diversity in aquatic ecosystems, its utility for measuring beta diversity over spatial scales small enough to be relevant to conservation purposes is poorly known. Here we tested how eDNA performs relative to underwater visual census (UVC) to evaluate beta diversity of marine communities. We paired UVC with 12S eDNA metabarcoding and used a spatially structured hierarchical sampling design to assess key spatial metrics of fish communities on temperate rocky reefs in southern California. eDNA provided a more-detailed picture of the main sources of spatial variation in both taxonomic richness and community turnover, which primarily arose due to strong species filtering within and among rocky reefs. As expected, eDNA detected more taxa at the regional scale (69 vs. 38) which accumulated quickly with space and plateaued at only ~ 11 samples. Conversely, the discovery rate of new taxa was slower with no sign of saturation for UVC. Based on historical records in the region (2000–2018) we found that 6.9 times more UVC samples would be required to detect 50 taxa compared to eDNA. Our results show that eDNA metabarcoding can outperform diver counts to capture the spatial patterns in biodiversity at fine scales with less field effort and more power than traditional methods, supporting the notion that eDNA is a critical scientific tool for detecting biodiversity changes in aquatic ecosystems.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1831937
- PAR ID:
- 10275239
- Publisher / Repository:
- Nature Publishing Group
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Scientific Reports
- Volume:
- 11
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 2045-2322
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Ecosystems globally are under threat from ongoing anthropogenic environmental change. Effective conservation management requires more thorough biodiversity surveys that can reveal system‐level patterns and that can be applied rapidly across space and time. Using modern ecological models and community science, we integrate environmental DNA and Earth observations to produce a time snapshot of regional biodiversity patterns and provide multi‐scalar community‐level characterization. We collected 278 samples in spring 2017 from coastal, shrub, and lowland forest sites in California, a complex ecosystem and biodiversity hotspot. We recovered 16,118 taxonomic entries from eDNA analyses and compiled associated traditional observations and environmental data to assess how well they predicted alpha, beta, and zeta diversity. We found that local habitat classification was diagnostic of community composition and distinct communities and organisms in different kingdoms are predicted by different environmental variables. Nonetheless, gradient forest models of 915 families recovered by eDNA analysis and using BIOCLIM variables, Sentinel‐2 satellite data, human impact, and topographical features as predictors, explained 35% of the variance in community turnover. Elevation, sand percentage, and photosynthetic activities (NDVI32) were the top predictors. In addition to this signal of environmental filtering, we found a positive relationship between environmentally predicted families and their numbers of biotic interactions, suggesting environmental change could have a disproportionate effect on community networks. Together, these analyses show that coupling eDNA with environmental predictors including remote sensing data has capacity to test proposed Essential Biodiversity Variables and create new landscape biodiversity baselines that span the tree of life.more » « less
-
Abstract DNA‐based aquatic biomonitoring methods show promise to provide rapid, standardized, and efficient biodiversity assessment to supplement and in some cases replace current morphology‐based approaches that are often less efficient and can produce inconsistent results. Despite this potential, broad‐scale adoption of DNA‐based approaches by end‐users remains limited, and studies on how these two approaches differ in detecting aquatic biodiversity across large spatial scales are lacking. Here, we present a comparison of DNA metabarcoding and morphological identification, leveraging national‐scale, open‐source, ecological datasets from the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON). Across 24 wadeable streams in North America with 179 paired sample comparisons, we found that DNA metabarcoding detected twice as many unique taxa than morphological identification overall. The two approaches showed poor congruence in detecting the same taxa, averaging 59%, 35%, and 23% of shared taxa detected at the order, family, and genus levels, respectively. Importantly, the two approaches detected different proportions of indicator taxa like %EPT and %Chironomidae. DNA metabarcoding detected far fewer Chironomid and Trichopteran taxa than morphological identification, but more Ephemeropteran and Plecopteran taxa, a result likely due to primer choice. Overall, our results showed that DNA metabarcoding and morphological identification detected different benthic macroinvertebrate communities. Despite these differences, we found that the same environmental variables were correlated with invertebrate community structure, suggesting that both approaches can accurately detect biodiversity patterns across environmental gradients. Further refinement of DNA metabarcoding protocols, primers, and reference libraries–as well as more standardized, large‐scale comparative studies–may improve our understanding of the taxonomic agreement and data linkages between DNA metabarcoding and morphological approaches.more » « less
-
Abstract Urbanization can influence local richness (alpha diversity) and community composition (beta diversity) in numerous ways. For instance, reduced connectivity and land cover change may lead to the loss of native specialist taxa, decreasing alpha diversity. Alternatively, if urbanization facilitates nonnative species introductions and generalist taxa, alpha diversity may remain unchanged or increase, while beta diversity could decline due to the homogenization of community structure. Wetlands and ponds provide critical ecosystem services and support diverse communities, making them important systems in which to understand the consequences of urbanization. To determine how urban development shapes pond community structure, we surveyed 68 ponds around Madison, Wisconsin, USA, which were classified as urban, greenspace, or rural based on surrounding land use. We evaluated how landscape and local pond factors were correlated with the alpha diversity of aquatic plants, macroinvertebrates, and aquatic vertebrates. We also analyzed whether surrounding land use was associated with changes in community composition and the presence of specific taxa. We found a 23% decrease in mean richness (alpha diversity) from rural to urban pond sites and a 15% decrease from rural to greenspace pond sites. Among landscape factors, adjacent developed land, mowed lawn cover, and greater distances to other waterbodies were negatively correlated with observed pond richness. Among pond level factors, habitat complexity was associated with increased richness, while nonnative fishes were associated with decreased richness. Beta diversity was relatively high for all ponds due to turnover in composition between sites. Urban ponds supported more nonnative species, lacked a subset of native species found in rural ponds, and had slightly higher beta diversity than greenspace and rural ponds. Our results suggest that integrating ponds into connected greenspaces, maintaining riparian vegetation, preventing nonnative fish introductions, and promoting habitat complexity may mitigate the negative effects of urbanization on aquatic richness. While ponds are small in size and rarely incorporated into urban conservation planning, the high beta diversity of distinct pond communities emphasizes their importance for supporting urban biodiversity.more » « less
-
Abstract Land‐use transformation is one of the most important and pervasive ecological changes occurring across the Earth, but its long‐term effects are poorly understood. Here, we analyze the effects of urban and agriculture development on bird biodiversity and community structure over a 16‐yr study period. We found that long‐term effects of land‐use change are dependent on spatial scale and land‐use type. At the regional scale, we found that gamma diversity (total number of species observed) declined by ~10% over time. At the landscape spatial scale, we found that beta diversity (uniqueness of bird communities) increased by ~16% over time. Additionally, the average contributions of urban riparian bird communities to beta diversity were generally the highest but declined by ~26% over the study period. Contributions of urban communities to beta diversity were generally the lowest but increased by ~10% over time. At the local scale, we observed different responses for different measures of alpha diversity. For bird species richness, temporal changes varied by land use. Species richness declined 16% at sites in desert riparian areas but increased by 21% and 12% at sites in urban and agricultural areas, respectively. Species evenness declined across all land uses, with some land uses experiencing more rapid declines than others. Our analysis of species groups that shared certain traits suggests that these community‐level changes were driven by species that are small, breed onsite, and feed on insects, grains, and nectar. Collectively, our results suggest that biodiversity declines associated with land‐use change predominate at the regional and local spatial scale, and that these effects can strengthen or weaken over time. However, these changes counterintuitively led to increases in biodiversity at the landscape scale, as bird communities became more unique. This has implications for conservation and management as it shows that the effects of land‐use modification on biodiversity may be positive or negative depending on the spatial scale considered.more » « less
