Is a reduction in the individual vigilance of mothers a key evolutionary driver of group formation in white rhinos?

A key benefit and evolutionary driver of group living is reduced predation risk. In white rhinos, groups comprise adult females, their calves and one to six unrelated subadults. Subadults benefit from group living through exposure to novel areas, and protection from territorial males (i.e. ‘buddy system’). In contrast, it is unclear whether mothers benefit from group living. To determine if they benefit, or if there is simply no cost, we recorded the vigilance of white rhino mothers in different-sized groups. We predicted that as group size increased, calves would have lower predation risk and mothers would reduce their vigilance. In contrast, we found that vigilance did not decrease as group size increased. Our findings thus indicate that decreased vigilance is not a benefit that white rhino mothers gain from living in groups. Also, costs of group formation are minimal for mothers as their large body size and ability to feed on a wide range of grasses reduces competition with other group members. As a result, we suggest that the benefits obtained by subadults, coupled with the lack of costs to adult females, are the main drivers of group formation in white rhinos.We thank Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife and the staff of the Hluhluwe-iMfolozi Park for permission to undertake the study. We acknowledge funds made available by the University of Pretoria (P.W.B), and the National Research Foundation (NRF) (A.M.S.). Any opinion, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed are those of the authors and therefore the NRF does not accept any liability in regard thereto. The experimental procedure was purely observational and noninvasive, and consistent with the University of Pretoria and South African animal ethic protocols. Finally, we thank Graham Kerley and an anonymous reviewer for their valuable comments.http://africanzoology.journals.ac.za/am2013ab201

Nutrient Availability Controls the Impact of Mammalian Herbivores on Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Pools in Grasslands

Grasslands are subject to considerable alteration due to human activities globally, including widespread changes in populations and composition of large mammalian herbivores and elevated supply of nutrients. Grassland soils remain important reservoirs of carbon (C) and nitrogen (N). Herbivores may affect both C and N pools and these changes likely interact with increases in soil nutrient availability. Given the scale of grassland soil fluxes, such changes can have striking consequences for atmospheric C concentrations and the climate. Here, we use the Nutrient Network experiment to examine the responses of soil C and N pools to mammalian herbivore exclusion across 22 grasslands, under ambient and elevated nutrient availabilities (fertilized with NPK + micronutrients). We show that the impact of herbivore exclusion on soil C and N pools depends on fertilization. Under ambient nutrient conditions, we observed no effect of herbivore exclusion, but under elevated nutrient supply, pools are smaller upon herbivore exclusion. The highest mean soil C and N pools were found in grazed and fertilized plots. The decrease in soil C and N upon herbivore exclusion in combination with fertilization correlated with a decrease in aboveground plant biomass and microbial activity, indicating a reduced storage of organic matter and microbial residues as soil C and N. The response of soil C and N pools to herbivore exclusion was contingent on temperature – herbivores likely cause losses of C and N in colder sites and increases in warmer sites. Additionally, grasslands that contain mammalian herbivores have the potential to sequester more N under increased temperature variability and nutrient enrichment than ungrazed grasslands. Our study highlights the importance of conserving mammalian herbivore populations in grasslands worldwide. We need to incorporate local‐scale herbivory, and its interaction with nutrient enrichment and climate, within global‐scale models to better predict land–atmosphere interactions under future climate change

Comment on “Worldwide evidence of a unimodal relationship between productivity and plant species richness”

Fraser et al. (Reports, 17 July 2015, p. 302) report a unimodal relationship between productivity and species richness at regional and global scales, which they contrast with the results of Adler et al. (Reports, 23 September 2011, p. 1750). However, both data sets, when analyzed correctly, show clearly and consistently that productivity is a poor predictor of local species richness

Sensitivity of global soil carbon stocks to combined nutrient enrichment

Soil stores approximately twice as much carbon as the atmosphere and fluctuations in the size of the soil carbon pool directly influence climate conditions. We used the Nutrient Network global change experiment to examine how anthropogenic nutrient enrichment might influence grassland soil carbon storage at a global scale. In isolation, enrichment of nitrogen and phosphorous had minimal impacts on soil carbon storage. However, when these nutrients were added in combination with potassium and micronutrients, soil carbon stocks changed considerably, with an average increase of 0.04 KgCm−2 year−1 (standard deviation 0.18 KgCm−2 year−1). These effects did not correlate with changes in primary productivity, suggesting that soil carbon decomposition may have been restricted. Although nutrient enrichment caused soil carbon gains most dry, sandy regions, considerable absolute losses of soil carbon may occur in high‐latitude regions that store the majority of the world's soil carbon. These mechanistic insights into the sensitivity of grassland carbon stocks to nutrient enrichment can facilitate biochemical modelling efforts to project carbon cycling under future climate scenarios

Opposing community assembly patterns for dominant and nondominant plant species in herbaceous ecosystems globally

Biotic and abiotic factors interact with dominant plants—the locally most frequent or with the largest coverage—and nondominant plants differently, partially because dominant plants modify the environment where nondominant plants grow. For instance, if dominant plants compete strongly, they will deplete most resources, forcing nondominant plants into a narrower niche space. Conversely, if dominant plants are constrained by the environment, they might not exhaust available resources but instead may ameliorate environmental stressors that usually limit nondominants. Hence, the nature of interactions among nondominant species could be modified by dominant species. Furthermore, these differences could translate into a disparity in the phylogenetic relatedness among dominants compared to the relatedness among nondominants. By estimating phylogenetic dispersion in 78 grasslands across five continents, we found that dominant species were clustered (e.g., co-dominant grasses), suggesting dominant species are likely organized by environmental filtering, and that nondominant species were either randomly assembled or overdispersed. Traits showed similar trends for those sites (\u3c50%) with sufficient trait data. Furthermore, several lineages scattered in the phylogeny had more nondominant species than expected at random, suggesting that traits common in nondominants are phylogenetically conserved and have evolved multiple times. We also explored environmental drivers of the dominant/nondominant disparity. We found different assembly patterns for dominants and nondominants, consistent with asymmetries in assembly mechanisms. Among the different postulated mechanisms, our results suggest two complementary hypotheses seldom explored: (1) Nondominant species include lineages adapted to thrive in the environment generated by dominant species. (2) Even when dominant species reduce resources to nondominant ones, dominant species could have a stronger positive effect on some nondominants by ameliorating environmental stressors affecting them, than by depleting resources and increasing the environmental stress to those nondominants. These results show that the dominant/nondominant asymmetry has ecological and evolutionary consequences fundamental to understand plant communities

Grassland productivity limited by multiple nutrients

Terrestrial ecosystem productivity is widely accepted to be nutrient limited1. Although nitrogen (N) is deemed a key determinant of aboveground net primary production (ANPP)2,3, the prevalence of co-limitation by N and phosphorus (P) is increasingly recognized4,​5,​6,​7,​8. However, the extent to which terrestrial productivity is co-limited by nutrients other than N and P has remained unclear. Here, we report results from a standardized factorial nutrient addition experiment, in which we added N, P and potassium (K) combined with a selection of micronutrients (K+μ), alone or in concert, to 42 grassland sites spanning five continents, and monitored ANPP. Nutrient availability limited productivity at 31 of the 42 grassland sites. And pairwise combinations of N, P, and K+μ co-limited ANPP at 29 of the sites. Nitrogen limitation peaked in cool, high latitude sites. Our findings highlight the importance of less studied nutrients, such as K and micronutrients, for grassland productivity, and point to significant variations in the type and degree of nutrient limitation. We suggest that multiple-nutrient constraints must be considered when assessing the ecosystem-scale consequences of nutrient enrichment

Linking changes in species composition and biomass in a globally distributed grassland experiment

Global change drivers, such as anthropogenic nutrient inputs, are increasing globally. Nutrient deposition simultaneously alters plant biodiversity, species composition and ecosystem processes like aboveground biomass production. These changes are underpinned by species extinction, colonisation and shifting relative abundance. Here, we use the Price equation to quantify and link the contributions of species that are lost, gained or that persist to change in aboveground biomass in 59 experimental grassland sites. Under ambient (control) conditions, compositional and biomass turnover was high, and losses (i.e. local extinctions) were balanced by gains (i.e. colonisation). Under fertilisation, the decline in species richness resulted from increased species loss and decreases in species gained. Biomass increase under fertilisation resulted mostly from species that persist and to a lesser extent from species gained. Drivers of ecological change can interact relatively independently with diversity, composition and ecosystem processes and functions such as aboveground biomass due to the individual contributions of species lost, gained or persisting.Fil: Ladouceur, Emma. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; Alemania. Universitat Leipzig; Alemania. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; AlemaniaFil: Blowes, Shane A.. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; Alemania. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; AlemaniaFil: Chase, Jonathan M.. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; Alemania. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; AlemaniaFil: Clark, Adam T.. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; Alemania. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; Alemania. University of Graz; AustriaFil: Garbowski, Magda. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; Alemania. Universitat Leipzig; AlemaniaFil: Alberti, Juan. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras; ArgentinaFil: Arnillas, Carlos Alberto. University of Toronto; CanadáFil: Bakker, Jonathan. University of Washington; Estados UnidosFil: Barrio, Isabel C.. Agricultural University of Iceland; IslandiaFil: Bharath, Siddharth. Atria University; IndiaFil: Borer, Elizabeth. University of Minnesota; Estados UnidosFil: Brudvig, Lars A.. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Cadotte, Marc W.. University of Toronto; CanadáFil: Chen, Qingqing. Peking University; ChinaFil: Collins, Scott L.. University of New Mexico; Estados UnidosFil: Dickman, Christopher R.. The University Of Sydney; AustraliaFil: Donohue, Ian. Trinity College Dublin; IrlandaFil: Du, Guozhen. Lanzhou University; ChinaFil: Ebeling, Anne. Universitat Jena; AlemaniaFil: Eisenhauer, Nico. Martin Luther University Halle—Wittenberg; Alemania. German Centre For Integrative Biodiversity Research (idiv) Halle-jena-leipzig; AlemaniaFil: Fay, Philip A.. USDA-ARS Grassland Soil and Water Research Lab; Estados UnidosFil: Hagenah, Nicole. University Of Pretoria; SudáfricaFil: Hautier, Yann. University of Utrecht; Países BajosFil: Jentsch, Anke. University of Bayreuth; AlemaniaFil: Jónsdóttir, Ingibjörg S.. University of Iceland; IslandiaFil: Komatsu, Kimberly J.. Smithsonian Environmental Research Center; Estados UnidosFil: MacDougall, Andrew. University of Guelph; CanadáFil: Martina, Jason P.. Texas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Moore, Joslin L.. Arthur Rylah Institute For Environmental Research; Australia. Monash University; AustraliaFil: Morgan, John W.. La Trobe University; AustraliaFil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentin

Opposing community assembly patterns for dominant and jonnondominant plant species in herbaceous ecosystems globally

Biotic and abiotic factors interact with dominant plants—the locally most frequent or with the largest coverage—and nondominant plants differently, partially because dominant plants modify the environment where nondominant plants grow. For instance, if dominant plants compete strongly, they will deplete most resources, forcing nondominant plants into a narrower niche space. Conversely, if dominant plants are constrained by the environment, they might not exhaust available resources but instead may ameliorate environmental stressors that usually limit nondominants. Hence, the nature of interactions among nondominant species could be modified by dominant species. Furthermore, these differences could translate into a disparity in the phylogenetic relatedness among dominants compared to the relatedness among nondominants. By estimating phylogenetic dispersion in 78 grasslands across five continents, we found that dominant species were clustered (e.g., co-dominant grasses), suggesting dominant species are likely organized by environmental filtering, and that nondominant species were either randomly assembled or overdispersed. Traits showed similar trends for those sites (<50%) with sufficient trait data. Furthermore, several lineages scattered in the phylogeny had more nondominant species than expected at random, suggesting that traits common in nondominants are phylogenetically conserved and have evolved multiple times. We also explored environmental drivers of the dominant/nondominant disparity. We found different assembly patterns for dominants and nondominants, consistent with asymmetries in assembly mechanisms. Among the different postulated mechanisms, our results suggest two complementary hypotheses seldom explored: (1) Nondominant species include lineages adapted to thrive in the environment generated by dominant species. (2) Even when dominant species reduce resources to nondominant ones, dominant species could have a stronger positive effect on some nondominants by ameliorating environmental stressors affecting them, than by depleting resources and increasing the environmental stress to those nondominants. These results show that the dominant/nondominant asymmetry has ecological and evolutionary consequences fundamental to understand plant communities.Fil: Arnillas, Carlos Alberto. University of Toronto Scarborough; CanadáFil: Borer, Elizabeth. University of Minnesota; Estados UnidosFil: Seabloom, Eric. University of Minnesota; Estados UnidosFil: Alberti, Juan. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras; ArgentinaFil: Baez, Selene. Escuela Politécnica Nacional; EcuadorFil: Bakker, Jonathan. University of Washington; Estados UnidosFil: Boughton, Elizabeth H.. Archbold Biological Station; Estados UnidosFil: Buckley, Yvonne M.. Trinity College Dublin; IrlandaFil: Bugalho, Miguel Nuno. Universidad de Lisboa; PortugalFil: Donohue, Ian. Trinity College Dublin; IrlandaFil: Dwyer, John. University of Queensland; AustraliaFil: Firn, Jennifer. The University of Queensland; AustraliaFil: Gridzak, Riley. Queens University; CanadáFil: Hagenah, Nicole. University of Pretoria; SudáfricaFil: Hautier, Yann. Utrecht University; Países BajosFil: Helm, Aveliina. University of Tartu; EstoniaFil: Jentsch, Anke. University of Bayreuth; AlemaniaFil: Knops, Johannes M. H.. Xi'an Jiaotong Liverpool University; China. University of Nebraska; Estados UnidosFil: Komatsu, Kimberly J.. Smithsonian Environmental Research Center; Estados UnidosFil: Laanisto, Lauri. Estonian University of Life Sciences; EstoniaFil: Laungani, Ramesh. Poly Prep Country Day School; Estados UnidosFil: McCulley, Rebecca. University of Kentucky; Estados UnidosFil: Moore, Joslin L.. Monash University; AustraliaFil: Morgan, John W.. La Trobe University; AustraliaFil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria. Centro Regional Patagonia Sur. Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz. Agencia de Extensión Rural Río Gallegos; ArgentinaFil: Power, Sally A.. University of Western Sydney; AustraliaFil: Price, Jodi. Charles Sturt University; AustraliaFil: Sankaran, Mahesh. National Centre for Biological Sciences; IndiaFil: Schamp, Brandon. Algoma University; CanadáFil: Speziale, Karina Lilian. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Patagonia Norte. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universidad Bariloche. Instituto de Investigaciones en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente; ArgentinaFil: Standish, Rachel. Murdoch University; AustraliaFil: Virtanen, Risto. University of Oulu; FinlandiaFil: Cadotte, Marc W.. University of Toronto Scarborough; Canadá. University of Toronto; Canad

Cortical recovery of swallowing function in wound botulism

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Botulism is a rare disease caused by intoxication leading to muscle weakness and rapidly progressive dysphagia. With adequate therapy signs of recovery can be observed within several days. In the last few years, brain imaging studies carried out in healthy subjects showed activation of the sensorimotor cortex and the insula during volitional swallowing. However, little is known about cortical changes and compensation mechanisms accompanying swallowing pathology.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In this study, we applied whole-head magnetoencephalography (MEG) in order to study changes in cortical activation in a 27-year-old patient suffering from wound botulism during recovery from dysphagia. An age-matched group of healthy subjects served as control group. A self-paced swallowing paradigm was performed and data were analyzed using synthetic aperture magnetometry (SAM).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The first MEG measurement, carried out when the patient still demonstrated severe dysphagia, revealed strongly decreased activation of the somatosensory cortex but a strong activation of the right insula and marked recruitment of the left posterior parietal cortex (PPC). In the second measurement performed five days later after clinical recovery from dysphagia we found a decreased activation in these two areas and a bilateral cortical activation of the primary and secondary sensorimotor cortex comparable to the results seen in a healthy control group.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>These findings indicate parallel development to normalization of swallowing related cortical activation and clinical recovery from dysphagia and highlight the importance of the insula and the PPC for the central coordination of swallowing. The results suggest that MEG examination of swallowing can reflect short-term changes in patients suffering from neurogenic dysphagia.</p

Local Loss and Spatial Homogenization of Plant Diversity Reduce Ecosystem Multifunctionality

Biodiversity is declining in many local communities while also becoming increasingly homogenized across space. Experiments show that local plant species loss reduces ecosystem functioning and services, but the role of spatial homogenization of community composition and the potential interaction between diversity at different scales in maintaining ecosystem functioning remains unclear, especially when many functions are considered (ecosystem multifunctionality). We present an analysis of eight ecosystem functions measured in 65 grasslands worldwide. We find that more diverse grasslands—those with both species-rich local communities (α-diversity) and large compositional differences among localities (β-diversity)—had higher levels of multifunctionality. Moreover, α- and β-diversity synergistically affected multifunctionality, with higher levels of diversity at one scale amplifying the contribution to ecological functions at the other scale. The identity of species influencing ecosystem functioning differed among functions and across local communities, explaining why more diverse grasslands maintained greater functionality when more functions and localities were considered. These results were robust to variation in environmental drivers. Our findings reveal that plant diversity, at both local and landscape scales, contributes to the maintenance of multiple ecosystem services provided by grasslands. Preserving ecosystem functioning therefore requires conservation of biodiversity both within and among ecological communities