callaway 1997 “the widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic...

19
Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox rather than simple semantic differences. The definitions of communities and ecosystems are irrelevant to the fundamental issue of independence versus interdependence.” The fact that conservation often uses the interconnectedness of species in an ecosystem and keystone species to demonstrate the importance of biodiversity indicates there are either genuine artifacts of communities or that such conservation practices are based on fallacy.

Upload: rudolph-hodges

Post on 13-Dec-2015

216 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

Callaway 1997

“The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox rather than simple semantic differences. The definitions of communities and ecosystems are irrelevant to the fundamental issue of independence versus interdependence.”

The fact that conservation often uses the interconnectedness of species in an ecosystem and keystone species to demonstrate the importance of biodiversity indicates there are either genuine artifacts of communities or that such conservation practices are based on fallacy.

Page 2: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

Positive interactions…?

• The importance or even presence of positive interactions shift on environmental gradients…– drought, low nitrogen availability, high soil salinity,

extremes of timberline/altitude, etc.

• Example given is P. albicaulis and A. lasiocarpa– Often compete, but in some areas presence of former

dependent on presence of latter.

• Indirect interactions (parasitic plants, mycorrhizal interactions, etc.) and mutualisms connect most plants to some other members of community.

Page 3: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

Bastow’s community

• Bastow’s loose definition of community may allow flexibility to include the variations in positive interactions…

• If we were to define communities based on some level of positive interactions, perhaps we would just end up with plant communities in some places, and “competitive assemblages” in others?

• To simply call any assemblage of plants in an area a community, and to recognize that they interact with each other in some way, seems to agree with the author’s ideas.

Page 4: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

Questions…

• How does Callaway’s emphasis on the existence of some form of interaction between plants make you feel about the prevalence of positive interactions? Of communities based on interaction?

• Is our whole emphasis on biodiversity in conservation largely a sham, or do ecosystem components really hold together? If so, why not communities?

Page 5: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

Communication between plants:

Induced resistance in wild tobacco plants following clipping of

neighboring sagebrush

Talking Trees

Karban, Baldwin, Baxter, Laue, Felton

Page 6: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

Experiment

• Question: Do tobacco plants near clipped sagebrush have increased resistance to herbivores?

• Methyl Jasmonate: proposed signal– 10.8 fold increase in air around clipped

branches– PPO is a chemical that provides resistance to

several herbivores (including grasshoppers).– PPO levels increased in plants near clipping

Page 8: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox
Page 9: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

Signal Transfer

Plastic bags used to test signal transfer through soil and air.

Page 10: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

• Decreased shaded area after clipping was one hypothetical explanation for decrease in herbivore resistance.

Page 11: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

Relation to Bastow

• Bastow says this experiment validates the ‘talking trees’ mechanism

• Bastow: “Plants can often increase their content of defence compounds when grazed”– Do we have proof of the frequency he

suggests?

Page 12: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

Bastow’s Remaining Question

• Bastow asks if ‘talking trees’ can be a result of natural selection.

• Well?

Page 13: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

Competition for Space

• Does it exist?

• Is it simply a proxy for other resources?

Page 14: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

From the animal world

• Moksnes (2004)• Shore crab instar growth and migration

– Crab growth (carapace width) is decreased under crowded conditions, even when food availability is held constant

– More migration away from food source occurs when density of individuals is highest

• Underwood (2000)– Space to settle needed by marine intertidal species

Page 15: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

From the plant world

• Stafford and Bell (2006)– Competition for space between invasive alga

(Caulerpa prolifera) and seagrass (Halodule wrightii)

– In response to disturbance, alga was able to preempt open space more quickly than seagrass

• Kastendiek (1982)– Competition between alga by overtopping (but

mechanism was denial of access to light)

Page 16: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

From the plant world

• Schienk, Callaway, and Mahall (1999)– Competition for rooting space – Review of evidence for root segregation and

mechanisms causing it (e.g. allelopathy)– But is this evidence for competition for space

per se, or simply a mechanism of competition for other resources?

Page 17: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

From the Cyber World

• Grist (1999)– Cellular automata to model occupation of

space– Nifty since models overlapping use of space

(as leaves overlap)– Implies competition for light

Page 18: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

Competition for Space

• Does it exist?

• Is it simply a proxy for other resources?

• Is it a useful concept for understanding plant communities, or should we be more explicit about space as a proxy?

Page 19: Callaway 1997 “The widespread acceptance of individualistic species assemblages, but holistic ecosystems, in academic ecological thought suggests a paradox

Chapter 2 Summary

• Foundation is unclear – Chapter conclusion to show how concepts are

building toward explanation of community

• Not enough detail– Arguments left unexplored, statements made without

explanation– Provide synthesis of studies rather than list of

references

• Audience – Buffet style with tidbits of info – like or dislike?