Search for: All records

Abstract BackgroundDisturbances alter the diversity and composition of microbial communities. Yet a generalized empirical assessment of microbiome responses to disturbance across different environments is needed to understand the factors driving microbiome recovery, and the role of the environment in driving these patterns. ResultsTo this end, we combined null models with Bayesian generalized linear models to examine 86 time series of disturbed mammalian, aquatic, and soil microbiomes up to 50 days following disturbance. Overall, disturbances had the strongest effect on mammalian microbiomes, which lost taxa and later recovered their richness, but not their composition. In contrast, following disturbance, aquatic microbiomes tended away from their pre-disturbance composition over time. Surprisingly, across all environments, we found no evidence of increased compositional dispersion (i.e., variance) following disturbance, in contrast to the expectations of the Anna Karenina Principle. ConclusionsThis is the first study to systematically compare secondary successional dynamics across disturbed microbiomes, using a consistent temporal scale and modeling approach. Our findings show that the recovery of microbiomes is environment-specific, and helps to reconcile existing, environment-specific research into a unified perspective. 

Abstract While human activities are known to elicit rapid turnover in species composition through time, the properties of the species that increase or decrease their spatial occupancy underlying this turnover are less clear. Here, we used an extensive dataset of 238 metacommunity time series of multiple taxa spread across the globe to evaluate whether species that are more widespread (large-ranged species) differed in how they changed their site occupancy over the 10–90 years the metacommunities were monitored relative to species that are more narrowly distributed (small-ranged species). We found that on average, large-ranged species tended to increase in occupancy through time, whereas small-ranged species tended to decrease. These relationships were stronger in marine than in terrestrial and freshwater realms. However, in terrestrial regions, the directional changes in occupancy were less extreme in protected areas. Our findings provide evidence for systematic decreases in occupancy of small-ranged species, and that habitat protection could mitigate these losses in the face of environmental change. 

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’. 

Abstract Nutrient enrichment typically causes local plant diversity declines. A common but untested expectation is that nutrient enrichment also reduces variation in nutrient conditions among localities and selects for a smaller pool of species, causing greater diversity declines at larger than local scales and thus biotic homogenization. Here we apply a framework that links changes in species richness across scales to changes in the numbers of spatially restricted and widespread species for a standardized nutrient addition experiment across 72 grasslands on six continents. Overall, we find proportionally similar species loss at local and larger scales, suggesting similar declines of spatially restricted and widespread species, and no biotic homogenization after 4 years and up to 14 years of treatment. These patterns of diversity changes are generally consistent across species groups. Thus, nutrient enrichment poses threats to plant diversity, including for widespread species that are often critical for ecosystem functions. 

Abstract There is considerable interest in understanding patterns of β‐diversity that measure the amount of change in species composition through space or time. Most hypotheses for β‐diversity evoke nonrandom processes that generate spatial and temporal within‐species aggregation; however, β‐diversity can also be driven by random sampling processes. Here, we describe a framework based on rarefaction curves that quantifies the nonrandom contribution of species compositional differences across samples to β‐diversity. We isolate the effect of within‐species spatial or temporal aggregation on beta‐diversity using a coverage standardized metric of β‐diversity (β_C). We demonstrate the utility of our framework using simulations and an empirical case study examining variation in avian species composition through space and time in engineered versus natural riparian areas. The primary strengths of our approach are that it provides an intuitive visual null model for expected patterns of biodiversity under random sampling that allows integrating analyses across α‐, γ‐, and β‐scales. Importantly, the method can accommodate comparisons between communities with different species pool sizes, and it can be used to examine species turnover both within and between meta‐communities. 

Abstract Biodiversity metrics often integrate data on the presence and abundance of multiple species. Yet our understanding of covariation between changes to the numbers of individuals, the evenness of species relative abundances, and the total number of species remains limited. Using individual‐based rarefaction curves, we show how expected positive relationships among changes in abundance, evenness and richness arise, and how they can break down. We then examined interdependencies between changes in abundance, evenness and richness in more than 1100 assemblages sampled either through time or across space. As predicted, richness changes were greatest when abundance and evenness changed in the same direction, and countervailing changes in abundance and evenness acted to constrain the magnitude of changes in species richness. Site‐to‐site differences in abundance, evenness, and richness were often decoupled, and pairwise relationships between these components across assemblages were weak. In contrast, changes in species richness and relative abundance were strongly correlated for assemblages varying through time. Temporal changes in local biodiversity showed greater inertia and stronger relationships between the component changes when compared to site‐to‐site variation. Overall, local variation in assemblage diversity was rarely due to repeated passive samples from an approximately static species abundance distribution. Instead, changing species relative abundances often dominated local variation in diversity. Moreover, how changing relative abundances combined with changes to total abundance frequently determined the magnitude of richness changes. Embracing the interdependencies between changing abundance, evenness and richness can provide new information to better understand biodiversity change in the Anthropocene.