If you have ever walked along a residential street in the
city or suburbs you will notice many similar features in each backyard. Often times personal gardens are
representative of peoples’ identities and reflect their membership in the neighbourhood. With the expansion of the urban population, an increasing area is
covered by personal yards. While each homeowner views their yard to be small
and therefore quite insignificant to the overall ecosystem- aggregated across
the country, this area quickly adds up.
Despite the expansion of urban ecosystems little research has
been devoted to understanding the patterns of ecosystem biodiversity, function
and assembly. The findings of a recent paper by Pearse et al. (2018)
investigated the extent to which “residential macro-systems” are the same
across different US cities. The main focus of the paper was to compare the
diversity, composition and structure of cultivated yards to the natural
ecosystem in different climates across the US.
The results of the study showed that indeed the phylogenetic
and species composition in yards had greater homogenization across regions
compared to the corresponding natural ecosystems. There was also evidence of
homogenization in vegetation as the tree density in yards remained similar
across regions, despite the fact that, due to environmental filters, the tree
densities in the different urban climates varied significantly. For
example, the natural ecosystems in Salt Lake City and Los Angeles almost had no
trees, but the tree density in the yards was well above zero.
Figure 1. The above
diagram shows the convex hulls (dashed line) for three species pools:
cultivated (orange), spontaneous (blue) and natural (green). The regions are
abbreviated, Boston,
Baltimore, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis–St. Paul, Phoenix, and Salt Lake
City as BOS, BA, LA, MI, MSP, PHX, and SL, respectively. The data shows that cultivated
and spontaneous pools are more similar across regions than natural area pools,
and in all cases, pools in the same geographical area are more similar than
pools across a geographical region.
(Retrieved from Pearse et al. 2018)
Surprisingly,
however, it was found that urban vegetation whether directly planted or
spontaneously growing in the yards, had greater species richness than the
comparative natural areas. The greatest phylogenetic diversity (MPD) was found
within the fully cultivated yards, suggesting that these species would be
better suited to future climate stressors due to their evolutionary
distinctiveness. This variation in species lineages provides evidence that
people prefer to have a variety of plants and flowers in their backyards which
are not often found in the species pool.
Overall
the data suggests that similarities in land cover and residential structural
characteristics lead to a decrease in microclimate divergence at a continental
scale.
These
results underscore the common human preference for maintaining yards that are
aesthetically pleasing and low maintenance. This homogenization has broad
implications as it takes effort to keep these ecosystems the same, across
forests, deserts and planes. For example, it has been observed that there is
little difference between the amount of irrigation and fertilizers used by
homeowners in the driest (Phoenix) or the wettest (Miami) cities.
While
many argue that urban and suburban habitats do not compare to natural landscapes,
recent research shows that they are more biologically diverse than previously
assumed. The increased biodiversity is mostly because of the fact that people
plant non-native species along with the native species, and artificial
maintenance is used to overcome the environmental filter. Therefore, artificially
enriched environments such as yards have both positive and negative
consequences on the surrounding environment. For instance, researchers at Boston
University found that trees in urban yards grow twice as fast as those in
nearby forests, and store carbon at a faster rate. On the other hand, it was
found that the rich mulched soils in suburban yards emitted twice as much CO2
as the soil in rural forests.
In
conclusion, although yards have been given diminished importance in the study
of human-dominated environments, they can provide great insight into how we can
make our communities more sustainable. Residents, municipalities and neighbourhood associations can help reshape their residential macro-system into
a thriving eco-system one backyard at a time. The key is to keep a balance
between human preferences and other organisms’ needs, thus designing landscapes
that are not only aesthetically pleasing but also support pollinators and
birds.
References
Groffman,
Peter M., et al. “Satisfaction, water and fertilizer use in the American
residential macrosystem.” Environment
Research Letters, vol.11, 29 Feb. 2016, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/3/034004
Humphries, Courtney. “The Residential Macrosystem.” Anthropocene, 21 June 2017, www.anthropocenemagazine.org/2017/06/residential-macrosystem-backyard-science/.
Pearse, William D., et al. “Homogenization of Plant
Diversity, Composition, and Structure in North American Urban Yards.” Ecosphere, vol. 9, no. 2, 15
Feb. 2018, doi:10.1002/ecs2.2105.
No comments:
Post a Comment