An official website of the United States government
Abstract AimWe may be able to buffer biodiversity against the effects of ongoing climate change by prioritizing the protection of habitat with diverse physical features (high geodiversity) associated with ecological and evolutionary mechanisms that maintain high biodiversity. Nonetheless, the relationships between biodiversity and habitat vary with spatial and biological context. In this study, we compare how well habitat geodiversity (spatial variation in abiotic processes and features) and climate explain biodiversity patterns of birds and trees. We also evaluate the consistency of biodiversity–geodiversity relationships across ecoregions. LocationContiguous USA. Time period2007–2016. Taxa studiedBirds and trees. MethodsWe quantified geodiversity with remotely sensed data and generated biodiversity maps from the Forest Inventory and Analysis and Breeding Bird Survey datasets. We fitted multivariate regressions to alpha, beta and gamma diversity, accounting for spatial autocorrelation among Nature Conservancy ecoregions and relationships among taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional biodiversity. We fitted models including climate alone (temperature and precipitation), geodiversity alone (topography, soil and geology) and climate plus geodiversity. ResultsA combination of geodiversity and climate predictor variables fitted most forms of bird and tree biodiversity with < 10% relative error. Models using geodiversity and climate performed better for local (alpha) and regional (gamma) diversity than for turnover‐based (beta) diversity. Among geodiversity predictors, variability of elevation fitted biodiversity best; interestingly, topographically diverse places tended to have higher tree diversity but lower bird diversity. Main conclusionsAlthough climatic predictors tended to have larger individual effects than geodiversity, adding geodiversity improved climate‐only models of biodiversity. Geodiversity was correlated with biodiversity more consistently than with climate across ecoregions, but models tended to have a poor fit in ecoregions held out of the training dataset. Patterns of geodiversity could help to prioritize conservation efforts within ecoregions. However, we need to understand the underlying mechanisms more fully before we can build models transferable across ecoregions.
more »
« less
Towards connecting biodiversity and geodiversity across scales with satellite remote sensing
Abstract IssueGeodiversity (i.e., the variation in Earth's abiotic processes and features) has strong effects on biodiversity patterns. However, major gaps remain in our understanding of how relationships between biodiversity and geodiversity vary over space and time. Biodiversity data are globally sparse and concentrated in particular regions. In contrast, many forms of geodiversity can be measured continuously across the globe with satellite remote sensing. Satellite remote sensing directly measures environmental variables with grain sizes as small as tens of metres and can therefore elucidate biodiversity–geodiversity relationships across scales. EvidenceWe show how one important geodiversity variable, elevation, relates to alpha, beta and gamma taxonomic diversity of trees across spatial scales. We use elevation from NASA's Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) andc. 16,000 Forest Inventory and Analysis plots to quantify spatial scaling relationships between biodiversity and geodiversity with generalized linear models (for alpha and gamma diversity) and beta regression (for beta diversity) across five spatial grains ranging from 5 to 100 km. We illustrate different relationships depending on the form of diversity; beta and gamma diversity show the strongest relationship with variation in elevation. ConclusionWith the onset of climate change, it is more important than ever to examine geodiversity for its potential to foster biodiversity. Widely available satellite remotely sensed geodiversity data offer an important and expanding suite of measurements for understanding and predicting changes in different forms of biodiversity across scales. Interdisciplinary research teams spanning biodiversity, geoscience and remote sensing are well poised to advance understanding of biodiversity–geodiversity relationships across scales and guide the conservation of nature.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10374521
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Global Ecology and Biogeography
- Volume:
- 28
- Issue:
- 5
- ISSN:
- 1466-822X
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- p. 548-556
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract AimRapid global change is impacting the diversity of tree species and essential ecosystem functions and services of forests. It is therefore critical to understand and predict how the diversity of tree species is spatially distributed within and among forest biomes. Satellite remote sensing platforms have been used for decades to map forest structure and function but are limited in their capacity to monitor change by their relatively coarse spatial resolution and the complexity of scales at which different dimensions of biodiversity are observed in the field. Recently, airborne remote sensing platforms making use of passive high spectral resolution (i.e., hyperspectral) and active lidar data have been operationalized, providing an opportunity to disentangle how biodiversity patterns vary across space and time from field observations to larger scales. Most studies to date have focused on single sites and/or one sensor type; here we ask how multiple sensor types from the National Ecological Observatory Network’s Airborne Observation Platform (NEON AOP) perform across multiple sites in a single biome at the NEON field plot scale (i.e., 40 m × 40 m). LocationEastern USA. Time period2017–2018. Taxa studiedTrees. MethodsWith a fusion of hyperspectral and lidar data from the NEON AOP, we assess the ability of high resolution remotely sensed metrics to measure biodiversity variation across eastern US temperate forests. We examine how taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic measures of alpha diversity vary spatially and assess to what degree remotely sensed metrics correlate with in situ biodiversity metrics. ResultsModels using estimates of forest function, canopy structure, and topographic diversity performed better than models containing each category alone. Our results show that canopy structural diversity, and not just spectral reflectance, is critical to predicting biodiversity. Main conclusionsWe found that an approach that jointly leverages spectral properties related to leaf and canopy functional traits and forest health, lidar derived estimates of forest structure, fine‐resolution topographic diversity, and careful consideration of biogeographical differences within and among biomes is needed to accurately map biodiversity variation from above.more » « less
-
Abstract AimWe examined tree beta diversity in four biogeographical regions with contrasting environmental conditions, latitude, and diversity. We tested: (a) the influence of the species pool on beta diversity; (b) the relative contribution of niche‐based and dispersal‐based assembly to beta diversity; and (c) differences in the importance of these two assembly mechanisms in regions with differing productivity and species richness. LocationLowland and montane tropical forests in the Madidi region (Bolivia), lowland temperate forests in the Ozarks (USA), and montane temperate forests in the Cantabrian Mountains (Spain). MethodsWe surveyed woody plants with a diameter ≥2.5 cm following a standardized protocol in 236 0.1‐ha forest plots in four different biogeographical regions. We estimated the species pool at each region and used it to recreate null communities determined entirely by the species pool. Observed patterns of beta diversity smaller or greater than the null‐expected patterns of beta diversity implies the presence of local assembly mechanisms beyond the influence of the species pool. We used variation‐partitioning analyses to compare the contribution of niche‐based and dispersal‐based assembly to patterns of observed beta diversity and their deviations from null models among the four regions. Results(a) Differences in species pools alone did not explain observed differences in beta diversity among biogeographic regions. (b) In 3/4 regions, the environment explained more of the variation in beta diversity than spatial variables. (c) Spatial variables explained more of the beta diversity in more diverse and more productive regions with more rare species (tropical and lower‐elevation regions) compared to less diverse and less productive regions (temperate and higher‐elevation regions). (d) Greater alpha or gamma diversity did not result in higher beta diversity or stronger correlations with the environment. ConclusionOverall, the observed differences in beta diversity are better explained by differences in community assembly mechanism than by biogeographical processes that shaped the species pool.more » « less
-
Dainton, John (Ed.)Improving models of species' distributions is essential for conservation, especially in light of global change. Species distribution models (SDMs) often rely on mean environmental conditions, yet species distributions are also a function of environmental heterogeneity and filtering acting at multiple spatial scales. Geodiversity, which we define as the variation of abiotic features and processes of Earth's entire geosphere (inclusive of climate), has potential to improve SDMs and conservation assessments, as they capture multiple abiotic dimensions of species niches, however they have not been sufficiently tested in SDMs. We tested a range of geodiversity variables computed at varying scales using climate and elevation data. We compared predictive performance of MaxEnt SDMs generated using CHELSA bioclimatic variables to those also including geodiversity variables for 31 mammalian species in Colombia. Results show the spatial grain of geodiversity variables affects SDM performance. Some variables consistently exhibited an increasing or decreasing trend in variable importance with spatial grain, showing slight scale-dependence and indicating that some geodiversity variables are more relevant at particular scales for some species. Incorporating geodiversity variables into SDMs, and doing so at the appropriate spatial scales, enhances the ability to model species-environment relationships, thereby contributing to the conservation and management of biodiversity. This article is part of the Theo Murphy meeting issue ‘Geodiversity for science and society’.more » « less
-
General destabilizing effects of eutrophication on grassland productivity at multiple spatial scalesnull (Ed.)Abstract Eutrophication is a widespread environmental change that usually reduces the stabilizing effect of plant diversity on productivity in local communities. Whether this effect is scale dependent remains to be elucidated. Here, we determine the relationship between plant diversity and temporal stability of productivity for 243 plant communities from 42 grasslands across the globe and quantify the effect of chronic fertilization on these relationships. Unfertilized local communities with more plant species exhibit greater asynchronous dynamics among species in response to natural environmental fluctuations, resulting in greater local stability (alpha stability). Moreover, neighborhood communities that have greater spatial variation in plant species composition within sites (higher beta diversity) have greater spatial asynchrony of productivity among communities, resulting in greater stability at the larger scale (gamma stability). Importantly, fertilization consistently weakens the contribution of plant diversity to both of these stabilizing mechanisms, thus diminishing the positive effect of biodiversity on stability at differing spatial scales. Our findings suggest that preserving grassland functional stability requires conservation of plant diversity within and among ecological communities.more » « less
