More Like this

1. Using a social‐ecological macrosystems framework to understand how human activities alter ecological synchrony

   https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.70289  

   Song, Yiluan; Barnes, Mallory; Bybee‐Finley, K Ann; Dahlin, Kyla M; McDevitt‐Galles, Travis; Munch, Stephan B; Ponce‐Campos, Guillermo E; Youngflesh, Casey; Zuckerberg, Benjamin; Zhu, Kai (March 2026, People and Nature)

   Abstract Different aspects of ecological systems, biotic or abiotic, often fluctuate in coordinated patterns over space and time. Such high concordance between ecological processes is often referred to as ecological synchrony.Human activities, including and beyond climate change, have the potential to alter ecological synchrony by disrupting or enhancing existing synchrony. However, most studies have focused on single scales, limiting our understanding of how human activities alter ecological synchrony across spatial, temporal and organizational scales.With a social‐ecological macrosystems framework, we review how human activities, particularly beyond climate change, alter ecological synchrony from the ecosystem level to the population level. For each level, we present a case study that characterizes the roles of human agents in synchrony using data from large‐scale observations.We found that human activities alter ecological synchrony through interactions among drivers on multiple scales, often disrupting synchrony, but that adaptive management can maintain or restore synchrony. Human activities potentially modify cascades of synchrony through cross‐scale interactions and cross‐scale emergence.Finally, we recommend a set of questions to facilitate the explicit consideration of ecological synchrony as a target in sustainable management. Read the freePlain Language Summaryfor this article on the Journal blog. 

   more » « less
2. How vulnerable are amphibians to climate change? A mechanistic perspective

   https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.70303  

   Riddell, Eric A; Adams, David R; Womack, Molly C (June 2026, Functional Ecology)

   Abstract Amphibians are frequently identified as highly vulnerable to climate change, yet the mechanisms driving this sensitivity remain uncertain. Approaches that explicitly link physiological mechanisms to environmental variation provide powerful tools for forecasting climate vulnerability. However, their reliability depends on assumptions that accurately reflect the conditions amphibians experience in nature.Here, we evaluate the physiological mechanisms most often invoked to explain amphibian climate vulnerability, including overheating, desiccation, energetic constraints and seasonal dormancy and assess the ecological realism of current modelling frameworks.We show that broad‐scale assessments often overlook widespread behavioural buffering, such as nocturnal activity, subterranean refuge use and close association with saturated microhabitats, which substantially reduce exposure to extreme temperatures and water loss. We also identify opportunities to improve mechanistic models by incorporating microclimatic heterogeneity, behavioural avoidance of stressful conditions and hydric landscape dynamics.Doing so will clarify when and where climate change poses a true physiological threat and provide greater insight into the processes shaping amphibian extinction risk. Grounding mechanistic forecasts in ecological reality is essential for avoiding mischaracterization of risk and for directing limited resources towards amphibian research, species and regions most in need. Read the freePlain Language Summaryfor this article on the Journal blog. 

   more » « less
3. Temporal community change in stream ecosystems varies by assemblage across US climates

   https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.70243  

   Malish, Megan C; Cook, Stephen C; Perez_Rocha, Mariana; Ruhí, Albert; Bogan, Michael T; Neeson, Thomas M; Allen, Daniel C (December 2025, Functional Ecology)

   Abstract Ecosystem properties are temporally dynamic. Temporal variability has been shown to decrease with increasing levels of biological organization (i.e. from population to community and ecosystem levels). However, patterns of temporal variability in community properties across assemblages are poorly understood.To address this gap, we used biotic sampling data for three distinct groups—algae, macroinvertebrate and fish—from the National Ecological Observatory Network wadeable stream sites, which span a broad hydroclimatic gradient across the conterminous United States, Alaska and Puerto Rico. We examined whether total temporal beta‐diversity differed among assemblages and quantified the relative contributions of two mechanisms generating community dissimilarity: balanced variation (i.e. species replacing each other) and abundance gradient (i.e. species fluctuating in abundance synchronously). We also investigated whether the temporal scale of variation (seasonal vs. interannual) differed among assemblages and assessed patterns across a broad hydroclimatic gradient.We found that total beta‐diversity was lower for fish assemblages, with average algae and macroinvertebrate temporal beta‐diversity values 30% greater than average fish values. Algae and macroinvertebrates were more characterized by the balanced variation component, while fish were more characterized by abundance gradients. The temporal scale of variation did not vary among assemblages, with all three assemblages tending to vary mostly at the interannual time scale. Finally, we found that fish were more responsive to precipitation and discharge variability than algae and macroinvertebrates, but temperature variability and climate class did not drive beta‐diversity patterns.Our work highlights that beta‐diversity patterns and the processes behind them differ across assemblages, with systematic variation in body size and generation times likely explaining observed differences between algae, macroinvertebrates and fishes. Understanding how and why different groups show different levels of temporal stability is critical to anticipating ecological responses of aquatic communities to increasingly altered environmental regimes. Read the freePlain Language Summaryfor this article on the Journal blog. 

   more » « less
4. Field experiments have enhanced our understanding of drought impacts on terrestrial ecosystems—But where do we go from here?

   https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.14460  

   Knapp, Alan K.; Condon, Kathleen V.; Folks, Christine C.; Sturchio, Matthew A.; Griffin‐Nolan, Robert J.; Kannenberg, Steven A.; Gill, Amy S.; Hajek, Olivia L.; Siggers, J. Alexander; Smith, Melinda D. (October 2023, Functional Ecology)

   Abstract We review results from field experiments that simulate drought, an ecologically impactful global change threat that is predicted to increase in magnitude, extent, duration and frequency. Our goal is to address, from primarily an ecosystem perspective, the questions ‘What have we learned from drought experiments?’ and ‘Where do we go from here?’.Drought experiments are among the most numerous climate change manipulations and have been deployed across a wide range of biomes, although most are conducted in short‐statured, water‐limited ecosystems. Collectively, these experiments have enabled ecologists to quantify the negative responses to drought that occur for most aspects of ecosystem structure and function. Multiple meta‐analyses of responses have also enabled comparisons of relative effect sizes of drought across hundreds of sites, particularly for carbon cycle metrics. Overall, drought experiments have provided strong evidence that ecosystem sensitivity to drought increases with aridity, but that plant traits associated with aridity are not necessarily predictive of drought resistance. There is also intriguing evidence that as drought magnitude or duration increases to extreme levels, plant strategies may shift from drought tolerance to drought escape/avoidance.We highlight three areas where more drought experiments are needed to advance our understanding. First, because drought is intensifying in multiple ways, experiments are needed that address alterations in drought magnitude versus duration, timing and/or frequency (individually and interactively). Second, drivers of drought may be shifting—from precipitation deficits to rising atmospheric demand for water—and disentangling how ecosystems respond to changes in hydrological ‘supply versus demand’ is critical for understanding drought impacts in the future. Finally, more attention should be focussed on post‐drought recovery periods since legacies of drought can affect ecosystem functioning much longer than the drought itself.We conclude with a call for a fundamental shift in the focus of drought experiments from those designed primarily as ‘response experiments’, quantifying the magnitude of change in ecosystem structure and function, to more ‘mechanistic experiments’—those that explicitly manipulate ecological processes or attributes thought to underpin drought responses. Read the freePlain Language Summaryfor this article on the Journal blog. 

   more » « less
5. Plant functional trait uncertainty can outweigh climate scenario uncertainty in tundra ecosystem productivity

   https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.70740  

   Jay, Katya R; Wieder, William R; Elmendorf, Sarah C; Spasojevic, Marko J; Suding, Katharine N (November 2025, New Phytologist)

   Summary Predicting shifts in species composition with global change remains challenging, but plant functional traits provide a key link to scale from plant to community and ecosystem levels. The extent to which functional trait shifts may mediate ecosystem response to climate change remains a critical question.We ran point‐scale Community Land Model (CLM) simulations with site‐specific functional trait and phenology observations to represent alpine tundra growth strategies. We validated our results with site observations and compared parameterized results to those using the default parameterization. We then quantified the relative contribution of plant functional trait shifts vs climate change scenarios (and the resulting phenological shifts) to uncertainty in future tundra ecosystem productivity outcomes.We found that using community‐specific functional traits and phenology observations significantly improved productivity estimates compared with overestimates in a default simulation. Uncertainty in potential plant trait shifts often had a larger effect on ecosystem productivity responses than uncertainty in the forced response from different climate change scenarios.These findings highlight the key role of functional traits in shaping vegetation responses to climate change and the value of incorporating site‐level measurements into land models to more accurately forecast climate change impacts on ecosystem function. 

   more » « less