Search for: All records

Arctic biodiversity is under threat from both climate-induced environmental change and anthropogenic activity. However, the rapid rate of change and the challenging conditions for studying Arctic environments mean that many research questions must be answered before we can strategically allocate resources for management. Addressing threats to biodiversity in the Arctic is further complicated by the region's complex geopolitics, as eight countries claim jurisdiction over the area, with multiple local considerations such as Indigenous sovereignty and resource rights. Here, we identify research priorities to serve as a starting point for addressing the most pressing threats to Arctic biodiversity. We began by collecting pressing research questions about Arctic biodiversity, thematizing them as either threats or actions, and then categorizing them further into 18 groups. Then, drawing on cross-disciplinary and global expertise of professionals in Arctic science, management, and policy, we considered the barriers to answering these questions and proposed potential solutions that could be implemented if barriers were overcome. Overall, our horizon scan provides an expert assessment of threats (e.g., species’ responses to climate change) and actions (e.g., a lack of fundamental information regarding Arctic biodiversity) needing attention and is intended to guide future conservation action within the Arctic. 

Abstract A major question in ecology is how often competing species evolve to reduce competitive interactions and facilitate coexistence. One untested route for a reduction in competitive interactions is through ontogenetic changes in the trophic niche of one or more of the interacting species. In such cases, theory predicts that two species can coexist if the weaker competitor changes its resource niche to a greater degree with increased body size than the superior competitor.We tested this prediction using stable isotopes that yield information about the trophic position (δ¹⁵N) and carbon source (δ¹³C) of two coexisting fish species: Trinidadian guppiesPoecilia reticulataand killifishRivulus hartii.We examined fish from locations representing three natural community types: (1) where killifish and guppies live with predators, (2) where killifish and guppies live without predators and (3) where killifish are the only fish species. We also examined killifish from communities in which we had introduced guppies, providing a temporal sequence of the community changes following the transition from a killifish only to a killifish–guppy community.We found that killifish, which are the weaker competitor, had a much larger ontogenetic niche shift in trophic position than guppies in the community where competition is most intense (killifish–guppy only). This result is consistent with theory for size‐structured populations, which predicts that these results should lead to stable coexistence of the two species. Comparisons with other communities containing guppies, killifish and predators and ones where killifish live by themselves revealed that these results are caused primarily by a loss of ontogenetic niche changes in guppies, even though they are the stronger competitor. Comparisons of these natural communities with communities in which guppies were translocated into sites containing only killifish showed that the experimental communities were intermediate between the natural killifish–guppy community and the killifish–guppy–predator community, suggesting contemporary evolution in these ontogenetic trophic differences.These results provide comparative evidence for ontogenetic niche shifts in contributing to species coexistence and comparative and experimental evidence for evolutionary or plastic changes in ontogenetic niche shifts following the formation of new communities.