Biodiversity Loss and the Taxonomic Bottleneck: Emerging Biodiversity Science

Human domination of the Earth has resulted in dramatic changes to global and local patterns of biodiversity. Biodiversity is critical to human sustainability because it drives the ecosystem services that provide the core of our life-support system. As we, the human species, are the primary factor leading to the decline in biodiversity, we need detailed information about the biodiversity and species composition of specific locations in order to understand how different species contribute to ecosystem services and how humans can sustainably conserve and manage biodiversity. Taxonomy and ecology, two fundamental sciences that generate the knowledge about biodiversity, are associated with a number of limitations that prevent them from providing the information needed to fully understand the relevance of biodiversity in its entirety for human sustainability: (1) biodiversity conservation strategies that tend to be overly focused on research and policy on a global scale with little impact on local biodiversity; (2) the small knowledge base of extant global biodiversity; (3) a lack of much-needed site-specific data on the species composition of communities in human-dominated landscapes, which hinders ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation; (4) biodiversity studies with a lack of taxonomic precision; (5) a lack of taxonomic expertise and trained taxonomists; (6) a taxonomic bottleneck in biodiversity inventory and assessment; and (7) neglect of taxonomic resources and a lack of taxonomic service infrastructure for biodiversity science. These limitations are directly related to contemporary trends in research, conservation strategies, environmental stewardship, environmental education, sustainable development, and local site-specific conservation. Today’s biological knowledge is built on the known global biodiversity, which represents barely 20% of what is currently extant (commonly accepted estimate of 10 million species) on planet Earth. Much remains unexplored and unknown, particularly in hotspots regions of Africa, South Eastern Asia, and South and Central America, including many developing or underdeveloped countries, where localized biodiversity is scarcely studied or described. ‘‘Backyard biodiversity’’, defined as local biodiversity near human habitation, refers to the natural resources and capital for ecosystem services at the grassroots level, which urgently needs to be explored, documented, and conserved as it is the backbone of sustainable economic development in these countries. Beginning with early identification and documentation of local flora and fauna, taxonomy has documented global biodiversity and natural history based on the collection of ‘‘backyard biodiversity’’ specimens worldwide. However, this branch of science suffered a continuous decline in the latter half of the twentieth century, and has now reached a point of potential demise. At present there are very few professional taxonomists and trained local parataxonomists worldwide, while the need for, and demands on, taxonomic services by conservation and resource management communities are rapidly increasing. Systematic collections, the material basis of biodiversity information, have been neglected and abandoned, particularly at institutions of higher learning. Considering the rapid increase in the human population and urbanization, human sustainability requires new conceptual and practical approaches to refocusing and energizing the study of the biodiversity that is the core of natural resources for sustainable development and biotic capital for sustaining our life-support system. In this paper we aim to document and extrapolate the essence of biodiversity, discuss the state and nature of taxonomic demise, the trends of recent biodiversity studies, and suggest reasonable approaches to a biodiversity science to facilitate the expansion of global biodiversity knowledge and to create useful data on backyard biodiversity worldwide towards human sustainability

Using Phylogenetic, Functional and Trait Diversity to Understand Patterns of Plant Community Productivity

BACKGROUND:Two decades of research showing that increasing plant diversity results in greater community productivity has been predicated on greater functional diversity allowing access to more of the total available resources. Thus, understanding phenotypic attributes that allow species to partition resources is fundamentally important to explaining diversity-productivity relationships. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Here we use data from a long-term experiment (Cedar Creek, MN) and compare the extent to which productivity is explained by seven types of community metrics of functional variation: 1) species richness, 2) variation in 10 individual traits, 3) functional group richness, 4) a distance-based measure of functional diversity, 5) a hierarchical multivariate clustering method, 6) a nonmetric multidimensional scaling approach, and 7) a phylogenetic diversity measure, summing phylogenetic branch lengths connecting community members together and may be a surrogate for ecological differences. Although most of these diversity measures provided significant explanations of variation in productivity, the presence of a nitrogen fixer and phylogenetic diversity were the two best explanatory variables. Further, a statistical model that included the presence of a nitrogen fixer, seed weight and phylogenetic diversity was a better explanation of community productivity than other models. CONCLUSIONS:Evolutionary relationships among species appear to explain patterns of grassland productivity. Further, these results reveal that functional differences among species involve a complex suite of traits and that perhaps phylogenetic relationships provide a better measure of the diversity among species that contributes to productivity than individual or small groups of traits

Inconsistent impacts of decomposer diversity on the stability of aboveground and belowground ecosystem functions

The intensive discussion on the importance of biodiversity for the stability of essential processes in ecosystems has prompted a multitude of studies since the middle of the last century. Nevertheless, research has been extremely biased by focusing on the producer level, while studies on the impacts of decomposer diversity on the stability of ecosystem functions are lacking. Here, we investigate the impacts of decomposer diversity on the stability (reliability) of three important aboveground and belowground ecosystem functions: primary productivity (shoot and root biomass), litter decomposition, and herbivore infestation. For this, we analyzed the results of three laboratory experiments manipulating decomposer diversity (1–3 species) in comparison to decomposer-free treatments in terms of variability of the measured variables. Decomposer diversity often significantly but inconsistently affected the stability of all aboveground and belowground ecosystem functions investigated in the present study. While primary productivity was mainly destabilized, litter decomposition and aphid infestation were essentially stabilized by increasing decomposer diversity. However, impacts of decomposer diversity varied between plant community and fertility treatments. There was no general effect of the presence of decomposers on stability and no trend toward weaker effects in fertilized communities and legume communities. This indicates that impacts of decomposers are based on more than effects on nutrient availability. Although inconsistent impacts complicate the estimation of consequences of belowground diversity loss, underpinning mechanisms of the observed patterns are discussed. Impacts of decomposer diversity on the stability of essential ecosystem functions differed between plant communities of varying composition and fertility, implicating that human-induced changes of biodiversity and land-use management might have unpredictable effects on the processes mankind relies on. This study therefore points to the necessity of also considering soil feedback mechanisms in order to gain a comprehensive and holistic understanding of the impacts of current global change phenomena on the stability of essential ecosystem functions

Scientific Opinion addressing the state of the science on risk assessment of plant protection products for in-soil organisms

Following a request from EFSA, the Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues developed an opinion on the science behind the risk assessment of plant protection products for in-soil organisms. The current risk assessment scheme is reviewed, taking into account new regulatory frameworks and scientific developments. Proposals are made for specific protection goals for in-soil organisms being key drivers for relevant ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes such as nutrient cycling, soil structure, pest control and biodiversity. Considering the time-scales and biological processes related to the dispersal of the majority of in-soil organisms compared to terrestrial non-target arthropods living above soil, the Panel proposes that in-soil environmental risk assessments are made at in- and off-field scale considering field boundary levels. A new testing strategy which takes into account the relevant exposure routes for in-soil organisms and the potential direct and indirect effects is proposed. In order to address species recovery and long-term impacts of PPPs, the use of population models is also proposed

Potential macro-detritivore range expansion into the subarctic stimulates litter decomposition: a new positive feedback mechanism to climate change?

As a result of low decomposition rates, high-latitude ecosystems store large amounts of carbon. Litter decomposition in these ecosystems is constrained by harsh abiotic conditions, but also by the absence of macro-detritivores. We have studied the potential effects of their climate change-driven northward range expansion on the decomposition of two contrasting subarctic litter types. Litter of Alnus incana and Betula pubescens was incubated in microcosms together with monocultures and all possible combinations of three functionally different macro-detritivores (the earthworm Lumbricus rubellus, isopod Oniscus asellus, and millipede Julus scandinavius). Our results show that these macro-detritivores stimulated decomposition, especially of the high-quality A. incana litter and that the macro-detritivores tested differed in their decomposition-stimulating effects, with earthworms having the largest influence. Decomposition processes increased with increasing number of macro-detritivore species, and positive net diveristy effects occurred in several macro-detritivore treatments. However, after correction for macro-detritivore biomass, all interspecific differences in macro-detritivore effects, as well as the positive effects of species number on subarctic litter decomposition disappeared. The net diversity effects also appeared to be driven by variation in biomass, with a possible exception of net diversity effects in mass loss. Based on these results, we conclude that the expected climate change-induced range expansion of macro-detritivores into subarctic regions is likely to result in accelerated decomposition rates. Our results also indicate that the magnitude of macro-detritivore effects on subarctic decomposition will mainly depend on macro-detritivore biomass, rather than on macro-detritivore species number or identity