The Nobel prize and the grandeur view of life

As news of the latest Nobel prizes in physics and medicine were announced, science became a central story for many news outlets. Numerous stories and interviews were held about the discoveries that earned the laureates their just rewards. I’ve heard interviews with medicine winners, Elizabeth Blackburn and Carol Greider (2/3 of the prize, the other being Jack Szostak), about their discovery of telomeres and telomerase, and with Willard Boyle (for physics) on inventing an imaging semiconductor circuit (i.e., digital recording of light). The media play up the applications to humanity. Telomeres and telomerase offer a deeper understanding of cancer and potential treatments. The digital recording of light gave us digital cameras (among a plethora of other technologies).

However, in the interviews with these great scientists, there was a common thread in what they said. They reiterated the need to support basic science and that the pursuit of curiosity-driven science is a worthy and valuable enterprise. I found the fact that they found it necessary to reiterate this to be interesting and something that interviewers thought worthy of reiterating themselves. I know that news stories need to relate to a person’s everyday experience, but, I think, basic science offers something more. To quote Darwin “There is grandeur in this view of life”. That is, while the products of science have surely improved our quality of live, science has given us something deeper and more meaningful. Basic curiosity-driven research has changed our understanding of the world and our place in it. We now look up at the stars and have a pretty good idea of what they are. We know what causes thunder and lightening. We understand why our pet cat looks kinda of like a lion and gorillas like people. We no longer look to superstition and myth to explain these aspects of nature. To me, this is the fundamental contribution of science to humanity, and I wish this were as celebrated as technological advances. Though being able to take 2 gigabytes of photos and movies when my daughter is doing something cute is pretty cool too, I guess.

Blog your way to North Carolina!

(sorry for reiterating what you may have already seen)

Science in a web-base universe now has the potential to link vast numbers of researchers together and be communicated to the global citizenry. Exploring the power of the web in science is the fourth annual Science Online 2010 conference, which will be held from Jan. 14-17 in the Research Triangle Park, NC. The conference is free, but of course you still must pay for travel and housing. Unless of course you've written an outstanding evolution blog post! NESCENT, the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center, is offering two $750 awards for the best evolution blog post about an evolutionary-oriented paper published in 2009.

For more details see the Deep-Sea News post. Be sure to tell your blogger friends!

Exotic plants integrate into plant-pollinator networks

At almost any spot on the globe, there are species present that are not native to that locale, having been transported by human activities. Whether and how exotic species impact communities is a multifaceted problem that requires understanding the multitude of direct and indirect species interactions that occur. In a paper published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society, B, Montserrat Vila and colleagues asked if exotic plants where integrated into plant-pollinator networks, and whether this integration had any observable impacts on these networks. This is an important question, as most ecological theory predicts that plant-pollinator networks are actually quite resilient to perturbations since most associations tend to be between generalists as opposed to the more susceptible specialists.

They studied invaded plant communities across Europe, observing pollinator visits to flowers in multiple 50 x 50 m plots. They calculated connectance as the number of interactions standardized by network size. They showed that exotics fully integrated into plant-pollinator networks. Exotic species accounted for 42% of all pollinator visits and 24% of all network connections -a testament to the overall abundance of exotics in many communities. However, these exotics did not affect overall changes in network connectedness, revealing that these networks are quite robust to invasions.

That said, researchers must now ask if this is true in networks that do contain high numbers of specialists (e.g., orchids) or if the relative few specialists in generalist-dominated systems are more susceptible to changes from exotics.

Vila, M., Bartomeus, I., Dietzsch, A., Petanidou, T., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Stout, J., & Tscheulin, T. (2009). Invasive plant integration into native plant-pollinator networks across Europe Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 276 (1674), 3887-3893 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2009.1076

How to keep up on your favorite journals

Researchers live busy lives. Either you are spending your waking hours writing grant proposals, running experiments, analyzing data, writing papers, preparing lectures, supervising students, attending committee meetings, and not to mention taking care of your personal life. Often the activity that slips to the bottom of this list is keeping up on the current literature. How should one go about maximizing their ability to efficiently peruse recent publications. I think the best approach is to use journals RSS feeds (otherwise known as Really Simple Syndication). RSS is a web format that allows publishers to syndicate the abstracts of papers as they are published online.

The simplest way to do this is to make sure you have a Google account and use their Google reader. If you go to a journal's website you click on either of these symbols:

or

You'll be sent to their RSS feed page and at the top is a subscription option and you can select Google to subscribe using:

When you click on 'Subscribe Now', it prompts you to select the Google homepage or reader -I use reader, but that just depends on your preference. You can subscribe to as many Journals as you want, and I think that all the major ones have RSS set up. Then to keep up on recently published papers, you simply go to your Google reader and scroll through the journals you have RSS subscriptions. Or if you check it more often, the reader keeps a list of the most recent items from all your subscriptions. No more getting e-mail alerts and no more going to a bunch of different journal pages.

By the way, you can also subscribe to this blog in the same way (see 'subscribe to' links on side panel).

Global warming and shifts in food web strucutre

Predicting the effects of global warming on biological systems is of critical importance for informing proactive policy decisions. Most research so far has been on trying to predict shifts in species distributions and changes in interactions within local habitats. But what many of these studies assume is that the basic biological processes and requirements of the individual species will not change -that is their biology is fixed and they simply need to find the place that best suits them. Not so, say Mary O'Connor and colleagues, in a just-released study in PLoS Biology.

O'Connor and colleagues experimentally warmed marine microcosms and tested two alternative hypotheses on food web structure: 1) that productivity increases with warming; and 2) warming increases metabolic rates, thus changing consumer-autotroph (i.e., primary producers) interactions. What they found was that warming indeed altered consumer-autotroph interactions. Warming increased base metabolic rates of consumers, as well as primary production, and the net effect was that food webs shifted towards increasing consumer control (i.e., top-down control).

What this research means is that global warming may alter food web interactions by increasing resource needs of organisms as their metabolic rates increase. This may increase the stress on communities and change diversity patterns as increased needs may shift competitive hierarchies or affect autotroph's ability to withstand consumer effects.

O'Connor, M., Piehler, M., Leech, D., Anton, A., & Bruno, J. (2009). Warming and Resource Availability Shift Food Web Structure and Metabolism PLoS Biology, 7 (8) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000178

Everything but extinct: invasion impacts on native diversity

There has been a persistent debate in the plant invasions literature about whether exotic plant invasions are a major threat to native plant persistence. While there are clear examples of animal invasions resulting in large scale extinction -e.g., the brown tree snake or Nile perch, evidence has been ambiguous for plants. Most ecologists are not so sanguine as to actually conclude that plant invasions are not a threat, and I think most believe that plant invader effects are an issue of temporal and spatial scale and that the worst is yet to come.

In a forthcoming paper from Heinke Jäger and colleagues in the Journal of Ecology, Cinchona pubescens invasions on the Galápagos Islands were monitored in long-term plots for more than seven years. What they found was that there was a four-fold increase in Cinchona density as the invasion progressed and that this increase had measurable effects on native species abundance. While they did not observe any native extirpations in their plots, native densities decreased by at least 50%. Of the greatest concern was that Island endemics appear to the most susceptible to this invasion.

What these results show is that, while there were not any observed extinctions, there were serious deleterious changes to native diversity. Further, the native species, and especially the endemics, are now more susceptible to other invasions or disturbances due to their lower abundances. The impact of exotic invaders may not be readily apparent but may be a major contributor to increased extinction risk.

Jäger, H., Kowarik, I., & Tye, A. (2009). Destruction without extinction: long-term impacts of an invasive tree species on Galápagos highland vegetation Journal of Ecology DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2009.01578.x

BES day two...

It was a day full of talks, and I really enjoyed being able to spend the whole day just absorbing the presentations. Here are some highlights from today's events:

• Ian Wright gave an interesting talk about the history of functional plant ecology. Basically, covering where trait ecology has been and where we are now. It is really amazing to see the truly large scale analysis and collaborations currently driving modern trait analysis.
• In another overview type talk, Gerlinde De Deyn, talked about carbon sequestration in soils. I'm sure to many ecosystem ecologists this maybe well known, but I found it fascinating. Did you know that tundra ecosystem have as much soil carbon as tropical rain forests? The reason is that tundra has very slow process rates (cold) while rain forests have fast production rates. In fertilization experiments, soil carbon is reduced, so in order to manipulate soil carbon stores one must understand the interaction between plant traits and soil organisms.
• Finally, Kyle Dexter, in a great field survey of Inga tree species in a region of Peru, showed that different functional diversity metrics show differing patterns of over- and under-dispersion. For example, phylogenetic diversity tends to be under-dispersed for Inga assemblages, while chemical and anti-herbivory traits are over dispersed and leaf size measures are under-dispersed.
  

Also, there was the annual general meeting, which was rather somber as three obituaries were read aloud. The three deceased, John Harper, Bob Jefferies and Simon Thirgood, were all superb ecologists who absences were obviously felt. Harper (my Master's advisor's advisor) and Jefferies (my colleague at Toronto) were both eminent ecologists with long and distinguished careers, while Thirgood (a fellow Senior Editor at the Journal of Applied Ecology) was in the prime of his very successful career.

Exploring ecology through GMOs

This year's Tansley Lecture at the BES meeting was a superb presentation given by Ian Baldwin from the Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology. He was enjoyable to watch as his folksy, mid-western American style disarmed the listener and leaving them unprepared for his ascorbic wit and, at times, controversial message. Prof. Baldwin* is a chemical ecologist who studies plant biochemical and physiological processes and their interaction with herbivores. Through his use of molecular tools and superb natural history, he has gained new insights into how and why plants respond to herbivory. He has discovered the pathways allowing wild tobacco, Nicotiana attenuata, to detect chemicals in tobacco hornworm spit and the resulting chemical defense response. More than this though, part of his talk was about the use of transformed plants to study this plant defense response. Using genetic tools, his group was able to knockout certain segments of these biochemical pathways in order to determine how various chemicals affected hornworms. He showed chemical responses involved signaling hornworm predators whereas other responses directly targeted wornworm's ability to digest plant material.

I think that ecologists are often wary of GMOs and his talk was a convincing case for their use in basic research, and he advocated for a more reasoned approach to their use.




*Note: He has run into trouble with German authorities over using the title 'Dr.' -see here.

An ecological meeting, British style.

I'm in Hatfield, outside of London, for the British Ecological Society (BES) meeting, and I'll be blogging thoughts, happenings, etc. I posted several observations from the American equivalent (ESA) last month, and one thing is readily apparent, even though talks do not start until tomorrow. While the ESA meeting is a great chance to meet a lot of people and see a lot of talks, at a few thousand conference goers, it can be a bit overwhelming. At any given time the ESA meeting had up to 26 concurrent sessions, which makes for a lot of running around if there are talks you want to see in different sessions. At the BES there is a maximum of 7 concurrent session. The BES is definitely smaller than ESA and the meeting and venue feel compact and intimate. I'm looking forward to experiencing the BES meeting this week.

Check back for more.

Ecology and evolution jobs 2009

After a horrendous year of canceled job searches and a barren landscape lacking many opportunities for academic-track job seekers, the jobs posted this season seem to be a stark contrast. In a previous post, I blogged about the best ecology job wiki, and when you look through last year's job postings you notice that the 'updates' column contains a multitude that had their searches canceled. Most people assumed that there wouldn't be very many tier-one academic jobs this year, but looking at the list of jobs announced so far this year, things look pretty good! I've also caught wind of a few other positions at good institutions that have not yet advertised. Job seekers keep your eyes open, and definitely check the job wiki regularly. This could be your year!

I for one have been (overly) optimistic and really didn't buy the hype that the job market would crash this year and for the foreseeable future. I think that many institutions over-reacted to the recession. Of course some states, like California, are in absolute dire straights. But my feeling is that over the next couple of years many institutions will try to recover from their self-imposed professor deficits, meaning that many similar-sounding job searches will be active at the same time. The net result is that schools will be competing against one another for good researchers.

March of the polyploids!

Speciation by polyploidy (see here for a general description of polyploidy) is one of the mechanisms of speciation and evolutionary diversification. We all learn about it in Bio 101, right after allopatry and sympatry. It is thought to be an especially important driver of speciation in plants, and anecdotal evidence, such as the origination of the invasive polyploid, Spartina anglica in the UK in the 1800's, reinforced that view. But how important has been unanswered until now.

In a new publication in PNAS by Wood et al. -from the Loren Rieseberg lab (one of the best lab homepages BTW) this questions has been answered. The authors go through all available chromosome counts on the Missouri Botanical Garden's Index to Plant Chromosome Numbers, and assess the proportion of polyploid species. They find that about 15% of all angiosperm speciation events coincided with an increase in chromosome number (and about 30% of fern species). Further, about 35% of all genera contain polyploids. Looking across the phylogeny of major plant groups, they find that all major lineages, except Gymnosperms, have significant proportions of polyploids (again with ferns have the greatest proportion). Polyploidy is a ubiquitous feature of plant diversity and a major driver of plant speciation. And now we can quantify just how important.

Wood, T., Takebayashi, N., Barker, M., Mayrose, I., Greenspoon, P., & Rieseberg, L. (2009). The frequency of polyploid speciation in vascular plants Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106 (33), 13875-13879 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0811575106

Unifying invader success and impact

Something that has continuously bothered me about our collective narrative concerning invasions has been the conflicting processes determining invader success and impact. Numerous studies (including some of my own) show that invaders are successful often because they are different from residents. That is, they are thought to occupy some unique niche. However, occupying a unique niche means that competition is minimized and these successful invaders should have relatively low impact on residents. Conversely, species that have large impacts are thought to be superior competitors, but why are they able to be so successful?

In a new paper in the Journal of Ecology, Andrew MacDougall, Benjamin Gilbert and Jonathan Levin use Peter Chesson's framework where ability for two species to coexistence (or conversely the strength of competitive exclusion) is a process relative to two factors -the magnitude of fitness differences and the degree of resource use overlap. Here competitive exclusion is rapid if species have a large fitness difference and high resource overlap, and slow if fitness differences are low. Species that are successful because of reduced resource overlap likely have little impact unless there are large fitness inequalities.

If we then view the invasions process on a continuum (see figure), then by determining basic fitness and resource use, we can predict success and impact. This is an exciting development and I hope it inspires a new generation of experiments.

MacDougall, A., Gilbert, B., & Levine, J. (2009). Plant invasions and the niche Journal of Ecology, 97 (4), 609-615 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2745.2009.01514.x

Macroecology is dead, long live macroecology!

I went to a session on a macroecology yesterday, which featured some wonderful speakers, and came away with an unsure feeling about this field. The Session started off with a fantastic talk by Rob Dunn on how macroecologists differ on what the main mechanisms are for explaining diversity patterns. He argued that perhaps the complexity of natural and human-altered systems make simple generalizations not very fulfilling. Next Lauren Buckley showed how species turnover had complex relationships with broad environmental changes and that species turnover patterns are better correlated with other species turnover then with the environmental variables we think drive the patterns. Next Brian McGill tried to make the case for a truly unified theory. He walked through several general models of random species packing, showing that some models fit observed data very well. I was impressed by the data/model fits but am skeptical of a general theory which lacks biological mechanisms. My view of a scientific theory is that it ought to contain basic mechanisms and that a unified theory should explain patterns and processes at multiple scales. That said, I also think McGill has done more to forward the field than almost any other younger ecologist. In Allen Hurlbert's talk, he nicely showed how independently accounting for energy and area can provide a better basis to constructing and understanding species-area relationships. The basic reason is that area and energy availability differentially affect the number of individuals.

Back to my real life tomorrow!

Pleasant invasions surprise

Normally I run around ESA looking for talks that have the best potential to inform or entertain me. This time around I decided to go to a session on invasions and communities and settle in for the long haul. Am I glad I did. I was afraid the session would be dominated by similar sounding talks, but instead each talk was wildly interesting and different. Talks included looking at the genetic variability of the dominant native resident as a proxy for niche preemption. Another good one looked at the role of propagule pressure for an understory invasion into tropical dry forests -I seldomly hear about invasions into these ecosystems. Next was a look at how invaders behave over long term successional trajectories and they by and large appear to follow native trends. Next was a great modeling talk where individual-based models and riverine networks were used to assess the role of distrubance and trait differences in invasion dynamics. The final one I saw was on how to potentially restore Californian serpetine plant communities using little more that gravel and a few chemicals, with the goal of reintroducing extirpated butterflies, which have not been able to cope with the shift to exotic-dominated grasslands.

I am looking forward to more great talks!

Species interactions & evolution

Hi from ESA Albuquerque!

I've been in the organized session on species interactions and evolution all morning and there were some great talks (e.g., Silvertown, Ackerly, Cavender-Bares, etc.). But I think what really got me excited were some of the questions after each talk. Following Jonathan Silvertown's talk, Steve Hubbell asked some questions that get to the heart of addressing what phylogenies mean for community assembly. Silvertown showed that within plots, species of a large South African family of plants in the Fynbos seemed to spatially segragate according to hydrological niches and that within these plots there was a lack of phylogenetic signal in this niche. Hubbell then asked two critical questions: How many other species (in other families) co-occur in these niches and if related species have similar niches at a larger scale. To me this is at the core of uderstanding how phylogenies inform our understanding of community assembly. Basically, what haven't we measured? If we include all sister species into a phylogeny, do we change our understanding of the processes structuring communities?

More later!

Incommunicado Apologies & ESA next week

Dear readers of EEB and flow,

Sorry for the lack of postings as of late. I've just started a professorship, which involved a move from my postdoc in California to my new position in Toronto, Canada, and I guess I failed to completely appreciate how much of a time sink all this would be.

Anyway, I've resurfaced and will be blogging from the ESA annual meeting in Albuquerque next week. I'll be speaking in a workshop on Sunday that deals with whether exotics are different from native species, and there are some great ecologists that will be speaking (like Dov Sax, John Maron, Dave Richardson, Peter Kotanen and John D. Parker). Also, I'm talking in an organized oral session on species interactions and relatedness with a stellar group (e.g., Jeannine Cavender-Bares, Jonathan Silvertown, David Ackerly, Steve Kembel, Jonathan Davies and Andras Prinzing), which is a little daunting. Looking at the schedule, there are way too many interesting talks and my schedule is already double-booked with talks I want to attend. Rock, Paper, Scissors. Should be great time!

Hope to see you in Albuquerque,
Marc

The sushi of tomorrow… Jellyfish rolls?

With the world’s fisheries teetering on the edge of collapse, familiar items at your local sushi bar might disappear in the near future. One candidate for replacing the Hamachi, Ikura, Maguru, Tai, and Toro on the menu is the jellyfish, which seems to be doing well – too well, actually – in today’s environment.

In recent years, jellyfish outbreaks have become more frequent and more severe. These outbreaks can have lasting ecological and economic consequences. They can wreak havoc on the tourist industry by closing beaches and harming swimmers, cause power outages by blocking cooling intakes at coastal power plants, reduce commercial fish abundance via competition and predation, spread fish parasites, burst fishing nets, and contaminate catches.

A review by Anthony Richardson and his collaborators suggests that human activities such as overfishing, eutrophication, climate change, translocation, and habitat modification have dramatically increased jellyfish numbers. Their research, which was published this week in Trends in Ecology and Evolution, highlights that the structure of pelagic ecosystems can abruptly transition from one that is dominated by fish to one that is dominated by jellyfish.

Richardson and his collaborators present a potential mechanism to explain how local jellyfish aggregations can spread, displace fish, and form an alternative stable state to fish-dominated ecosystems. Jellyfish are like the opportunistic weed of the sea, giving them an edge in environments stressed by climate change, eutrophication, and overfishing. In these disturbed environments, the abundance of jellyfish relative to filter-feeding fish increases until a tipping point is reached. Under normal conditions, filter-feeding fish keep jellyfish populations in check via competition for planktonic food and (perhaps) predation on an early life-stage of the jellyfish. At the tipping point, jellyfish numbers are such that they begin to overwhelm any control of their vulnerable life-cycle stages by fish predators. At the same time, jellyfish progressively eliminate competitors and predators via their predation on fish eggs and larvae. As jellyfish abundance increases, sexual reproduction becomes more efficient, allowing them to infest new habitats where fish might have formally controlled jellyfish numbers.

Richardson and his collaborators suggest that one way to hit the brakes on what they call the “the never-ending jellyfish joyride” is to harvest more jellyfish for human consumption. Jellyfish have been eaten for more than 1000 years in China, where they are often added to salads. In Japan they are served as sushi and in Thailand they are turned into a crunchy noodle concoction. Although the taste and texture of jellyfish might not be appealing to some westerners, I for one have yet to meet a sushi that I didn’t like. Of course, jellyfish harvesting is unlikely to return systems to their fish-dominated state if the stresses that caused the ecosystem shift remain.

Richardson, A. J., A. Bakun, G. C. Hays, and M. J. Gibbons. 2009. The jellyfish joyride: Causes, consequences and management responses to a more gelatinous future. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 24 (6), 312-322 DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2009.01.010

How long does it take for an ecosystem to recover?

Numerous human activities, such as logging, fishing, pollution and the introduction of exotic species negatively impact ecosystems around the world. These negative impacts mean ecosystems lose species diversity, biomass production, carbon storage, and nutrient uptake. An important question is, how long does it take for ecosystems to recover from perturbations. The answer to this question can inform conservation policy and strategies and could help focus management resources.

In a recent PLoS ONE paper, Jones and Schmitz attempt to answer this question by reviewing 240 published studies that examine post-disturbance ecosystem diversity and function. While they report that many ecosystems recover on the order of decades and that this is likely more rapid than previously thought, there are some important caveats. First, is that only about half of the 240 studies report a recovered state and either they were not carried out long enough or there are certain types of disturbances or systems where recovery takes much longer. Second is that there are important differences among habitat types. For example benthic algal recovery to hurricanes or oil spills may take 2-10 years, while the recovery of tree diversity to logging may take 20 to 100 years (or more). Thirdly, different measures of ecosystems general resulted in differing recovery times. For example, bird populations may recover quite quickly to logging (likely because they are migratory), whereas soil microbial communities and processes may take many decades due to changes in the soil environment. Finally, the nature of the disturbance can be an important determinant of time to recovery. Logging and agriculture require the greatest recovery time, while large storms and oil spills appear to require relative little time.

While these results may give us a general picture of ecosystem recovery, the data they use highlight the importance of knowing how disturbance type affect recovery and how different ecosystem measures can alter recovery time estimates.

Jones, H., & Schmitz, O. (2009). Rapid Recovery of Damaged Ecosystems PLoS ONE, 4 (5) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005653

Fire and the changing world

This is probably the most appropriate blog I have ever written. My family and I were evacuated two weeks ago because of the Jesusita fire in Santa Barbara, and several homes in our neighborhood were lost. Here in Santa Barbara we have experienced multiple years of extremely large fires, with this last one occurring much earlier than previous fires.

Wildfires have been a part of the Earth’s biota likely since organisms first died and dried on land. Ecosystems have been shaped by fire, numerous organisms have evolved strategies to cope with fire and human cultural development has close tied to fire. In a recent review paper in Science by David Bowman, Jennifer Balch and colleagues, they asked the question: how have fires changed and what does the future look like? Human activities are changing fire patterns and climate change may be entering a feedback with fire. Global warming has been linked to increases in extreme fire weather, making large, destructive fires more probable. However, these large fires feedback into this loop because they release compounds that have strong greenhouse effects. Further, smoke plumes inhibit cloud formation, reinforcing the dry conditions that lead to the fires in the first place.

They argue that fire needs to be incorporating into models of climate change and especially those that link ecosystem properties climate change. Fire may change the distribution of specific habitat types beyond that predicting by responses to climate change alone.

Bowman, D., Balch, J., Artaxo, P., Bond, W., Carlson, J., Cochrane, M., D'Antonio, C., DeFries, R., Doyle, J., Harrison, S., Johnston, F., Keeley, J., Krawchuk, M., Kull, C., Marston, J., Moritz, M., Prentice, I., Roos, C., Scott, A., Swetnam, T., van der Werf, G., & Pyne, S. (2009). Fire in the Earth System Science, 324 (5926), 481-484 DOI: 10.1126/science.1163886

It's not me, It's you: self recognition and plant responses to herbivory

Many multicellular organisms have the ability to distinguish self and non-self. This is clear in animals, but is not so well documented in plants. A recent experiment published in Ecology Letters by Karban and Shiojiri clearly demonstrate that self recognition in plants can affect their response against herbivores. This very elegant experiment compared herbivory rates of plants growing near clipped clones of the same plants (themselves), and clipped individuals of non-self plants. Clipping is a standard way to mimic herbivory; plants grew in pots so they couldn’t communicate via roots and they did not touch each other. They found that plants that grew by a clipped clone had 42% less herbivory than plants growing by a non-clone. This is strong evidence that plants growing near clones (themselves) responded more effectively to volatiles cues compared to plants growing near a genetically different individuals. This study sheds light on the effects of communication among plants, which is clearly a topic that needs to be more explored, and that could be crucial to understand some ecological and evolutionary processes.

Karban, R., & Shiojiri, K. (2009). Self-recognition affects plant communication and defense Ecology Letters, 12 (6), 502-506 DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01313.x

Hurricanes might contribute to global warming

In a large-scale study published this week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Hongcheng Zeng and colleagues show that hurricane damage can diminish a forest’s ability to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Their results suggest that an increase in hurricane frequency due to global warming may further amplify global warming.

The annual amount of carbon dioxide a forest absorbs from the atmosphere is determined by the ratio of tree growth to tree mortality each year. When hurricanes cause extensive tree mortality, not only are there fewer trees in the forest to absorb greenhouse gases, but these tree die-offs also emit carbon dioxide, thus potentially warming the climate.

Using field measurements, satellite image analyses, and empirical models to evaluate forest and carbon cycle impacts of hurricanes, the researchers established that an average of 97 million trees have been affected each year for the past 150 years over the continental United States, resulting in a 53-million ton annual biomass loss and an average carbon release of 25 million tons per year. Over the period of 1980–1990, released CO2 potentially offset carbon absorption by forest trees by 9–18% over the entire United States. Impacts on forests were primarily located in Gulf Coast areas such as southern Texas, Louisiana, and Florida, but significant impacts also occurred in eastern North Carolina.

These results have important implications for evaluating positive feedback loops between global warming and environmental change.


Zenga, H., J. Q. Chambers, R. I. Negrón-Juárez, G. C. Hurtt, D. B. Baker, and M. D. Powell. (2009). Impacts of tropical cyclones on U.S. forest tree mortality and carbon flux from 1851 to 2000. PNAS, 106 (19), 7888-7892. DOI:10.1073/pnas.0808914106

Biological carbon pump potentially slows down with sea surface warming

Biological activity in the world open ocean’s surface is characterized by autotrophic and by heterotrophic processes. Phytoplankton organisms take up dissolved CO2 (dissolved inorganic carbon, DIC) and together with other inorganic nutrients and light they produce biomass (particulate organic carbon, POC) and dissolved organic carbon (DOC). By these processes marine phytoplankton is responsible for approximately half of the worlds primary production. These two carbon compounds (POC and DOC) either sink down to the deep ocean (which is basically the biological carbon pump) or they are consumed by other trophic levels. One important part of the planktonic food web is the microbial community which consists of bacteria (smaller than 3 µm), auto- and heterotrophic flagellates and other protists (larger than three µm). This community takes up both POC and DOC and by respiration recycles these carbon compounds back into DIC. Thus in terms of carbon flux the microbial community potentially competes with the biological carbon pump.
In a mesocosm experiment with natural marine plankton Julia Wohlers and her colleagues manipulated future ocean surface warming and measured the carbon flux during the plankton bloom peak. Whereas in this experiment phytoplankton biomass production (POC of autotrophs) was not affected by warming the authors found that respiration by the microbial community, in particular by organism larger than 3 µm, significantly increased. This increase in respiration led to a significant decrease in net DIC reduction in the whole planktonic foodweb. The results are a potential sign for future declining carbon sequestration by biological processes in the world oceans.


Julia Wohlers, Anja Engel, Eckart Zöllner, Petra Breithaupt, Klaus Jürgens, Hans-Georg Hoppe, Ulrich Sommer and Ulf Riebesell (2009). Changes in biogenic carbon flow in response to sea surface warming. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. DOI:10.1073/pnas.0812743106

Enrichment and diversity loss: a mechanism tested

To paraphrase Thomas Henry Huxley: How stupid of us not to have thought of that!

In what has to be one of the most elegant and simple experiments I've seen in a long time, Yann Hautier, Pascal Niklaus and Andy Hector tested a basic mechanism of why nutrient enrichment results in species loss. This is a critically important issue as it has been repeatedly shown that while adding nitrogen to plant communities causes increases in productivity, species go locally extinct. We may bare witness to local diversity declines because human activity has greatly increased nutrient deposition. This pattern has been observed for a couple of decades, but the exact mechanism has never been adequately tested, with some camps believing that enrichment increases below-ground competition for other resources that become limiting, or above ground for light.

As reveled in the most recent issue of Science, Hautier et al. performed an exceedingly simple experiment; they added light to the understory of plant communities with or without nitrogen additions. They made two compelling observations. First, when communities were enriched without elevated light, they lost about 3 of the 6 initial species compared to the control, while light addition in the enriched communities maintained the 6 member community (as did a light only treatment). The second result was that the light plus nitrogen treatment obtained much higher biomass than either the nitrogen or light only treatments, and in fact the light only treatment did not significantly increase productivity, meaning that the communities are not normally light-limited. Further, they failed to detect any elevated belowground competition for other resources.

These results reveal that nutrient enrichment causes diversity loss because increased plant size increases light competition and plants that grow taller with elevated nitrogen are better light competitors. An old problem solved with the right experiment.

Hautier, Y., Niklaus, P., & Hector, A. (2009). Competition for Light Causes Plant Biodiversity Loss After Eutrophication Science, 324 (5927), 636-638 DOI: 10.1126/science.1169640

People value rare species; at least from their computers

Do people value rare species more than common ones? This is an important question for conservation because not only does valuation justify public funds being spent conserving rare species, but valuation can have negative implications as well. In what is called the ‘anthropogenic Allee effect’, increased valuation can increase species desirability –thus enhancing monetary value for exotic pets, building ecotourism lodges in sensitive habitats, or exotic tasty dishes (ah, The Freshman). In what is probably the most unique approach to assessing whether behavior is affected by the notion of species rarity, Angula and Courchamp, at the Université Paris Sud, used a web-based slideshow measure the amount of time people would wait to see a slideshow of rare versus common species.

Cleverly, they created a French website where visitors could select to view either a slideshow of common or rare species (and the links randomly changed positions on the site). The trick was that a download status bar appears and freezes near the end, and so Angula and Courchamp were able to measure how many visitors selected the rare species show and how long they waited until they gave up. Visitors were much more likely to select the rare species and to wait longer to see them.

I think that this study is extremely neat for two reasons. First it offers a novel way to quantify valuation, and second, it shows how the internet can be used to assess conservation issues in an efficient low-cost way.

Now will they please just show us the pictures of the cute, endangered species!

Angulo, E., & Courchamp, F. (2009). Rare Species Are Valued Big Time PLoS ONE, 4 (4) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005215

A mechanism on why communities of exotic species are less diverse than communities of native species

Plant communities dominated by exotics tend to be less diverse than plant communities dominated by natives. Apparently, few people have been curious enough to plan an experiment to try to further understand why this is the case. A recent paper in ecology letters Brian Wilsey and collaborators showed the results of an experiment designed to explore this. What they did is to create monocultures of a series of exotics and natives species, and mix cultures of exotics (a mix of 9 exotics, zero natives ) and mix cultures of natives (9 natives, zero exotics). They found that large exotics (plants with high aboveground biomass) tended to be even bigger when growing in mix cultures than in the monocultures, so big plants got bigger, which tend to reduce plant richness since it may displace other plants. On the other hand, for natives, small plants tended to get bigger, which is a mechanism for promoting biodiversity (communities may be more even). This research highlights the importance of understanding the mechanisms of plant coexistence and the fact that exotic species may behave very differently than native species.

Wilsey, B., Teaschner, T., Daneshgar, P., Isbell, F., & Polley, H. (2009). Biodiversity maintenance mechanisms differ between native and novel exotic-dominated communities Ecology Letters, 12 (5), 432-442 DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01298.x

Climate change increases West Nile Virus outbreaks in the U.S.

According to a study recently published in Environmental Health Perspectives, climate change has increased the prevalence of West Nile Virus infections in the United States. In one of the largest surveys of West Nile Virus cases to date, the authors find a correlation between increasing temperature and rainfall and outbreaks of the mosquito-borne disease between 2001 and 2005. Because warming weather patterns and increasing rainfall are both projected to accelerate with global warming, the authors predict that climate change will exacerbate West Nile Virus outbreaks in the future.

In the study, Dr. Jonathan Soverow and his collaborators matched more than 16,000 confirmed West Nile cases in 17 states to local meteorological data.

Warmer temperatures had the greatest effect on outbreaks. By extending the length of the mosquito breeding season and decreasing the amount of time it takes mosquitoes to reach their adult, biting stage, warmer weather means more biting mosquitoes longer. Moreover, increasing temperature speeds multiplication of the virus within insects, so mosquitoes in warmer climates have a greater viral load, making them more likely to infect humans.

Increased precipitation was also correlated with higher rates of West Nile Virus infection. A single, heavy rainstorm resulting in two or more inches of rain increased infection rates by 33%, while smaller storms had less of an effect on infection rates. Heavier rainfall events can increase disease prevalence by creating pools of water in which mosquitoes can breed and by increasing humidity, which stimulates mosquitoes to bite and breed. Total weekly rainfall had a smaller but significant effect on West Nile Virus infections, with an increase of 0.75 inch of rain/week increasing the number of infections by about 5%.

Warmer, wetter weather patterns might expand the niches of the mosquito species that carry West Nile Virus. In California, for instance, several mosquito species carrying the West Nile Virus have extended their ranges into higher elevations and coastal areas as temperatures have warmed. Changing weather patterns might also affect certain species of birds that are reservoirs for West Nile Virus. For example, droughts can push bird populations into urban areas, making West Nile Virus outbreaks in human populations more likely.

Soverow, J.E., G.A. Wellenius, D.N. Fisman, and M.A. Mittleman. 2009. Infectious disease in a warming world: How weather influenced West Nile Virus in the United States (2001-2005). Environmental Health Perspectives. Online 16 March 2009 DOI: 10.1289/ehp.0800487

Letting out your little Monet

I realized, sometime not too long ago, that I really enjoy adding aesthetically pleasing details to my figures in scientific publications. All scientists look at hundreds of boring, monochromatic scatterplots, bar charts and ordination plots every month, so why not make them a little more appealing? If done right, the benefits are that people are more likely to remember your key figures and perhaps results, you can convey more information by incorporating imagery, and you may actually get a little joy out of preparing those figures. The downfalls are, if done poorly, they are distracting and publishing color figures is always costly for print editions.

Here are some examples of artistically augmented publication figures -but if you have other good examples, let me know and I'll add them:
This is from a recent Ecology Letters from Crutsinger, Cadotte (me) and Sanders (2009), 12: 285-292, trying to explain how we partitioned arthropod diversity into spatial components.


This one is from Ellwood et al. (2009) in Ecology Letters 12: 277-284, which shows co-occurrence null histograms for patterns of arthropods at various hight locations on trees.

This one is from Crutsinger et al (2006) Science 313: 966-968 that displays patterns at differing trophic levels by juxtaposing photos of specific tropic members.















Finally, the use of drawings and images to illustrate phylogenetic trends in phenotypic evolution is particularly useful. Above are two examples, on the left is from Carlson et al. 2009 Evolution 63: 767-778, showing patterns of darter evolution; and on the right is from Oakley and Cunningham 2002 PNAS 99: 1426-1430, showing evolutionary pathways of compound eyes.


And here's one from Dolph Schluter (2000) American Naturalist 156: S4-S16, using drawings to illustrate how fish morphology corresponds to an abstracted index on the bottom axis.

Here are two from Joe Baily while working in Tom Whitham's Cottonwood Ecology Group that are effective ways to remind the reader what the treatments or dependent variables were (elk herbivory, leaf shape/genotype) and what the response variables were (bird predation, wood consumption by beavers). The left hand figure is from Baily & Whitham (2003) Oikos 101: 127-134 and the one on the right is from Baily et al. (2004) Ecology 85: 603-608.

Here is a great one posted by Ethan on Jabberwocky Ecology on Hurlbert's Unicorn!

The evolutionary meaning of autumn colors

As a kid growing up in Ontario, Canada, I have vivid memories of vast expanses of forests set ablaze by their autumn colors. Whole landscapes look like the canvas of a painter whose love of red, orange, gold and yellow are readily apparent. But, like most biologists, I had been taught that these colors are simply the by-product of leaf senescence, nothing more than a biochemical accident. I was amazed to read Marco Archetti's recent work showing that there may actually be adaptive benefits to changing leaf color in autumn and for particular colors. Generally the adaptive benefits involve either protection against abiotic factors or as a response to plant-animal interactions. One of his interesting results is that autumn coloration has evolved repeatedly and cannot be explained by being related to an ancestor who changed colors, rather that there must be some other evolutionary or adaptive explanation. While he suggests a large number of candidate hypotheses, some more plausible than others, I'll list five for example:

1) Sunscreen: Pigments provide photoprotection against photooxidation during the recovery of nutrients.

2) Leaf warming: Colors absorb light and warm the leaves during cooling temperatures.

3) Coevolution: Tells overwintering insects that the tree is not suitable (poisonous or low nutrition) for hibernation.

4) Camouflage: Many insects lack red photoreceptor, making leaves difficult to see -thus protecting trees from overwintering pests.

5) Unpalatability: Pigments (e.g., red -anthocyanins) are unpalatable.

So, we may quibble about particular hypotheses, but the point for me is that there may be deeper explanations as to why certain species produce the vivid colors they do. At a minimum, Archetti provides ammunition to experimental botanists and evolutionary biologists for testing new hypotheses. I'll never look at an autumn forest the same again.

Archetti, M. (2009). Classification of hypotheses on the evolution of autumn colours Oikos, 118 (3), 328-333 DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2008.17164.x

Archetti, M. (2008). Phylogenetic analysis reveals a scattered distribution of autumn colours Annals of Botany, 103 (5), 703-713 DOI: 10.1093/aob/mcn259

Archetti, M., Döring, T., Hagen, S., Hughes, N., Leather, S., Lee, D., Lev-Yadun, S., Manetas, Y., Ougham, H., & Schaberg, P. (2009). Unravelling the evolution of autumn colours: an interdisciplinary approach Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 24 (3), 166-173 DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2008.10.006

Conserve now or wait for the data?

E. O. Wilson, referring to the ethical imperative we should apply to the conservation of life, said “The ethical imperative should be, first of all, prudence. We should judge every scrap of biodiversity as priceless while we learn to use it and to come to understand what it means to humanity” (pg. 351, The Diversity of Life). Although, I would argue we should aim to learn biodiversity’s value, both intrinsic and extrinsic, as opposed to what it solely means to humanity, his point is protect now, study later. The reason being that there is still so much to learn in order to adequately assess the Earth’s biological riches, by the time we inventory and map a fraction of biodiversity, we would have lost numerous unique regions and species. Of course the opposing point of view is that we need detailed information in order to best use limited resources to best protect biodiversity. This is a major philosophical divide. In a recent, important paper by Hedley Grantham and colleagues published in Ecology Letters, the question of how long should we wait to take conservation actions was empirically tested.

The authors used simulations based on 20 years of habitat loss data from the biologically-rich Fynbos region of South Africa and knowledge about spatial distribution of Protea diversity. Protea surveys (The Protea Atlas) have been carried out over 20 years, inventorying 40,000 plots and recording 381 species within the Proteaceae. They began their simulations with no information about Protea diversity patterns and included annually increasing knowledge, set against annual habitat destruction. They showed that waiting to make conservation decisions after only 2 years resulted in species loss, because habitat loss far outweighed any advantage to gaining more information. Further, more detailed information did not appear to increase the effectiveness of conservation decisions over cruder habitat-level maps.

The philosophical divide between protect now-learn later versus the need for detailed information to maximize resources appears bridgeable. It seems that by just accumulating some rough data may go a long way towards making those important conservation decisions. Of course, the irony is that this study needed 20 years of data to adequately assess this.

Grantham, H., Wilson, K., Moilanen, A., Rebelo, T., & Possingham, H. (2009). Delaying conservation actions for improved knowledge: how long should we wait? Ecology Letters, 12 (4), 293-301 DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01287.x

Being a clover isn’t always so lucky

Happy St. Patrick’s Day! I thought that covering an article about Trifolium (clover) seemed very appropriate. In a recent paper, Matthias Schleuning and colleagues examine the population dynamics of Trifolium montanum, a species in decline in central Germany. They examined the relative threats of habitat fragmentation and degradation on T. montanum’s population dynamics. They found that both degradation and fragmentation were having serious negative impacts. Degraded habitats in this system mean the shift away from nutrient-poor conditions and include the invasion of taller species that are better light competitors. T. montanum is a poor light competitor and maintains larger populations in mown or grazed habitats that keep taller invaders out. This species also faces the double whammy of fragmented habitats resulting in isolated populations. These isolates have lower reproductive output likely due to greater inbreeding and less genetic transfer, via pollinators, among different populations.

I always think of Trifolium species as being particularly common and widely distributed, but there are some that are threatened and potentially tell us about the threats faced by imperiled plant populations. In fact, while a number of North American Trifolium species have successfully invaded North America, but T. montanum is not, according to the USDA Plants Database. These results reveal that these negative effects affect plants at different stages of their life cycle (growth to maturity vs. recuitment) and that log-term persistence of these populations requires management activities that ameliorate both of these effects.

SCHLEUNING, M., NIGGEMANN, M., BECKER, U., & MATTHIES, D. (2009). Negative effects of habitat degradation and fragmentation on the declining grassland plant Trifolium montanum Basic and Applied Ecology, 10 (1), 61-69 DOI: 10.1016/j.baae.2007.12.002

A roadmap to generalized linear mixed models

In a recent paper in TREE, Ben Bolker (from the University of Florida) and colleagues describe the use of generalized linear mixed models for ecology and evolution. GLMMs are used more and more in evolution and ecology given how powerful they are, basically because they allow the use of random and fix effects and can analyze non-normal data better than other models. The authors made a really good job at explaining what to use when. Despite the fact that you need more than basic knowledge of stats to fully understand this guide, I think that people should take a look at it before starting to plan their projects, since it outlines really well all the possible alternatives (and challenges) that one can have when analyzing data. This article also describes what is available in each software package; this is really useful since is not obvious with program in SAS or R you need to use when dealing with some specific GLMMs.

Bolker, B., Brooks, M., Clark, C., Geange, S., Poulsen, J., Stevens, M., & White, J. (2009). Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 24 (3), 127-135 DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2008.10.008

Salamaders and climate change -impending extinctions?

By the now the evidence of a global frog decline, perhaps even an extinction crisis, has been well documented. But what about salamanders? They are normally less abundant and less-studied compared to frogs, but is there evidence of the same general pattern of declining population sizes? According to Sean Rovito and colleagues, the answer is unfortunately yes. They repeated a plethodontid (lungless) salamander survey done in the 1970’s in Central America and found that many species have declined. In fact they failed to find a couple of previously very abundant species. They also found that species declines were phylogenetically non-random and so these declines may result in the loss of whole clades of species, meaning that the evolutionary history of these salamanders is at risk.

The authors attempted to determine the cause of these declines and found that neither habitat loss or the chytridiomycosis fungal disease implicated in other declines explained these salamander declines. The authors hypothesize that these declines are a direct result of climate change –namely changing temperature and humidity. If so, we may be witnessing some of the first extinctions that are directly caused by climate change.

S. M. Rovito, G. Parra-Olea, C. R. Vasquez-Almazan, T. J. Papenfuss, D. B. Wake (2009). Dramatic declines in neotropical salamander populations are an important part of the global amphibian crisis Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106 (9), 3231-3236 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0813051106

Post script:
We had a comment questioning the use of climate change as an explanation and here is my response.

Science works by finding parsimonious explanations, until through experimentation or observation another, better explanation emerges. The previous explanations of habitat loss or fungal infections were not supported. These habitats, known as cloud forests, are very humid. The lungless salamanders have no lungs and instead breath through their skin, which must be kept moist. These forest are becoming drier, hence the probable connection. Here's a quote from the paper:

"Pounds et al. (25) used modeling to show that largescale warming led to a greater decrease in relative humidity at Monteverde compared to that caused by deforestation. Species of cloud forest salamanders that can still be found rely at least
in part on bromeliads. Bromeliads depend on cloud water deposition and are predicted to be articularly vulnerable to climate change (26, 27)."

Doesn't sound like "magic" to me, rather a robust hypothesized mechanism worthy of more testing. Given that species are going extinct, it is important to suggest likely mechanisms, providing an impetus for more research.

For those that think that scientists use climate change as boogey man to scare up more research funding (i.e., Crichton), please read the science. You'll discover honest, hardworking folks that are trying to understand this changing world and whose research can only benefit you , me and the salamanders.

Phytoplankton motility and morphology might influence red tides

Thin layers, intense congregations of phytoplankton that can extend horizontally for kilometers, can be either a boon or a bust to marine food webs. On the one hand, these layers can stimulate the food web from the bottom up by providing elevated concentrations of marine snow (e.g., protozoa and organic detritus), bacteria, and plankton. On the other hand, because many of the phytoplankton species found in thin layers can be toxic, these layers can disrupt grazing, cause zooplankton and fish die-offs, and seed algal blooms at the ocean’s surface that can generate red tides. Understanding the processes driving the formation of thin layers is crucial for predicting their occurrence and ecological impact.

Although thin layer formation was previously thought to be solely influenced by abiotic forces, a recent paper in Science by William M. Durham and colleagues suggests that plankton’s swimming and shape play a role. Many phytoplankton species swim upward against gravity. When the water is calm, they swim up in a straight path. But add ocean currents to the equation, and the plankton start to encounter vertical shear where layers of faster- and slower- moving water meet. These shear forces can cause the plankton to tumble and spin instead of swimming straight up. The tumbling plankton become trapped in these regions of high shear, accumulating in a thin layer. The strength of the shear forces interacts with the morphology of the plankton to determine which species get trapped. For instance, bottom heavy species require higher shear to knock them off their straight path. Durham et al.’s findings suggest that vertical shear and cell morphology could be important predictors of red tides.

W. M. Durham, J. O. Kessler, R. Stocker (2009). Disruption of Vertical Motility by Shear Triggers Formation of Thin Phytoplankton Layers Science, 323 (5917), 1067-1070 DOI: 10.1126/science.1167334