Ecosystem engineers and geomorphological signatures in landscapes

被引:77
|
作者
Jones, Clive G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Cary Inst Ecosyst Studies, Millbrook, NY 12545 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Formation; Decay; Patch dynamics; Engineer attributes; Ecological factors; ATTA-VOLLENWEIDERI FOREL; BOAR SUS-SCROFA; POPULATION-DENSITY; INTERNAL STRUCTURE; SPECIES RICHNESS; GRIZZLY BEAR; 1893; HYM; DYNAMICS; ORGANISMS; PREDATORS;
D O I
10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.04.039
中图分类号
P9 [自然地理学];
学科分类号
0705 ; 070501 ;
摘要
Biogeomorphologists study the roles of biota in landscape formation and decay. Ecologists interested in ecosystem engineering study environmental change caused by biota and the consequences for the engineer, other organisms, and ecological processes. The interface is geomorphological change, an interface both are aware of but study somewhat independently and differently. Interaction and integration among the two fields is the goal of this special issue. Here I take an ecological perspective of geomorphological change caused by ecosystem engineers in patches within landscapes that I hope can help facilitate this goal. I ask the following general questions: When will an ecosystem engineering species create a geomorphological signature in a landscape? What, in qualitative terms, is such a signature? How can the signature be estimated and how long will it last? What engineer attributes and ecological factors will determine signature change? What creates complications? How do the answers inform whether or not life leaves a geomorphological signature? To attempt answers, I develop a provisional, general theory of ecosystem engineering signatures that draws on and integrates a geomorphological foundation of balance between formation and decay; landscape patch dynamics; a general framework for ecosystem engineering; and empirical studies. I treat a landscape engineering signature as the balance of rates of formation (F) and rates of decay (D) across patches whose ratio value (F/D) can be transformed (>1), intermediate (1) or untransformed (<1). I suggest amenable systems for study. I describe how the signature can be estimated and evaluated for potential persistence, and how to identify when decay or engineer density and per capita engineering activity control the signature. I examine the influences on shifts from transformed to untransformed signatures, and vice versa, at constant and changing rates of decay. I show how the likelihood of signature shifts depends on: 1. engineer density in the landscape and per patch; 2. per capita engineering activity as structure per patch and patches per engineer, or its contribution for engineers occurring in groups; 3. the degree of patch maintenance, abandonment, and re-engineering of abandoned patches; and in some situations, 4. the direction of the signature shift that is considered. I use this to illustrate how different ecological factors affecting engineer species (e.g., abiotic resources and conditions, natural enemies) and engineer feedbacks can drive signature transitions. I address complications and how they might be dealt with for situations where an engineer species causes formation and decay; when multiple engineering species co-occur; and when patches are materially interconnected. I end by considering whether life leaves a geomorphological signature, using this to contrast my approach with biogeomorphology, and asking what a hypothetical analysis of signature patterns across many engineer species/landscape combinations might imply for the interface of ecology and biogeomorphology. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:75 / 87
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Scotland's Mountain Landscapes. A Geomorphological Perspective
    Mitchell, Wishart A.
    QUATERNARY SCIENCE REVIEWS, 2020, 245
  • [32] Using ecosystem engineers to enhance multiple ecosystem processes
    Byers, James E.
    FUNCTIONAL ECOLOGY, 2024, 38 (01) : 22 - 36
  • [33] Parasites and Dung Beetles as Ecosystem Engineers in a Forest Ecosystem
    Boze, Broox G. V.
    Hernandez, Alexander D.
    Huffman, Michael A.
    Moore, Janice
    JOURNAL OF INSECT BEHAVIOR, 2012, 25 (04) : 352 - 361
  • [34] Geomorphological properties and woody biodiversity of the forest ecosystem
    不详
    REPORTS OF FORESTRY RESEARCH-ZPRAVY LESNICKEHO VYZKUMU, 2005, 50 (02): : 128 - 128
  • [35] Geomorphological landscapes: framework for soil surveys in Tabasco, Mexico
    Zavala-Cruz, Joel
    Jimenez Ramirez, Raquel
    Jesus Palma-Lopez, David
    Bautista Zuniga, Francisco
    Gavi Reyes, Francisco
    ECOSISTEMAS Y RECURSOS AGROPECUARIOS, 2016, 3 (08): : 161 - 171
  • [36] Geomorphological roulette for engineers and planners: some insights into an old game
    Brunsden, D
    QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY, 2002, 35 : 101 - 142
  • [37] Ecosystem function in heterogeneous landscapes
    Lovett, GM
    Jones, CG
    Turner, MG
    Weathers, KC
    Ecosystem Function in Heterogeneous Landscapes, 2005, : 1 - 4
  • [38] Cover crops and soil ecosystem engineers
    Blanco-Canqui, Humberto
    AGRONOMY JOURNAL, 2022, 114 (06) : 3096 - 3117
  • [39] Macroinvertebrates as engineers for bioturbation in freshwater ecosystem
    Chakraborty, Anupam
    Saha, Goutam K.
    Aditya, Gautam
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, 2022, 29 (43) : 64447 - 64468
  • [40] Macroinvertebrates as engineers for bioturbation in freshwater ecosystem
    Anupam Chakraborty
    Goutam K. Saha
    Gautam Aditya
    Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2022, 29 : 64447 - 64468