Failures to disagree are essential for environmental science to effectively influence policy development

Overcoming confusion and stigma in habitat fragmentation research

Anthropogenic habitat loss is widely recognized as a primary environmental concern. By contrast, debates on the effects of habitat fragmentation persist. To facilitate overcoming these debates, here we: (i) review the state of the literature on habitat fragmentation, finding widespread confusion and stigma; (ii) identify consequences of this for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem management; and (iii) suggest ways in which research can move forward to resolve these problems. Confusion is evident from the 25 most-cited fragmentation articles published between 2017 and 2021. These articles use five distinct concepts of habitat fragmentation, only one of which clearly distinguishes habitat fragmentation from habitat area and other factors ('fragmentation per se'). Stigmatization is evident from our new findings that fragmentation papers are more charged with negative sentiments when compared to papers from other subfields in the environmental sciences, and that fragmentation papers with more negative sentiments are cited more. While most empirical studies of habitat fragmentation per se find neutral or positive effects on species and biodiversity outcomes, which implies that small habitat patches have a high cumulative value, confusion and stigma in reporting and discussing such results have led to suboptimal habitat protection policy. For example, government agencies, conservation organizations, and land trusts impose minimum habitat patch sizes on habitat protection. Given the high cumulative value of small patches, such policies mean that many opportunities for conservation are being missed. Our review highlights the importance of reducing confusion and stigma in habitat fragmentation research. To this end, we propose implementing study designs in which multiple sample landscapes are selected across independent gradients of habitat amount and fragmentation, measured as patch density. We show that such designs are possible for forest habitat across Earth's biomes. As such study designs are adopted, and as language becomes more precise, we expect that confusion and stigma in habitat fragmentation research will dissipate. We also expect important breakthroughs in understanding the situations where effects of habitat fragmentation per se are neutral, positive, or negative, and the reasons for these differences. Ultimately this will improve efficacy of area-based conservation policies, to the benefit of biodiversity and people.

Coupled patterns of natural and anthropogenic resources in typical ecosystems in coastal areas of China

The coastal area of Yancheng, China, is one of the hotspots for ecological research. Under the coupling of human and natural ecosystems, the region has gradually evolved into a coexistence of aquatic, agricultural and mudflat ecosystems. What are the patterns of natural and artificial resource inputs and patterns of change in ecosystems? How can ecological flows be analyzed at a uniform scale? Here, we selected six typical local ecosystems, namely, rice‒wheat for enterprises (RWE), rice‒wheat for smallholder households (RWS), chrysanthemum‒wheat (CW), fish polyculture (FP), juvenile crab farming (JF) and clam polyculture (CP), and analyzed their energy flow flux and sustainability based on emergy theory. The results showed that anthropogenic resource inputs were higher than natural resource inputs in all ecosystems, and the inputs of aquatic ecosystems were greater than those of agroecosystems. The greatest total input was 2.0 E+17 seJ/ha/yr for FP, and the lowest was 1.9 E+16 seJ/ha/yr for RWE. The proportions of renewable and artificial inputs for RWE, RWS, CW, FP, JF and CP were 32.8% vs. 96.1%, 40.3% vs. 96.5%, 34.7% vs. 97.0%, 32.6% vs. 99.4%, 55.1% vs. 98.5%, and 62.5% vs. 98.6%, respectively. The highest input to agroecosystems was nitrogen fertilizer, while in JF and CP, it was water, and feed (63.3%) accounted for the highest percentage of input in FP. JF and CP had lower environmental loads and higher sustainability than other ecosystems, but this still represents a high input compared to agroecosystems. Human-led resource coupling profoundly affects ecosystem sustainability, and various thresholds of energy use and ecological sustainability need to be studied in depth. Continuous exploration of methods and mechanisms for the maintenance and evolution of ecosystems with low total inputs and low inputs of non-renewable resources can contribute to high-quality sustainable development of an area or region.

Looking back on biodiversity change: lessons for the road ahead

Estimating biodiversity change across the planet in the context of widespread human modification is a critical challenge. Here, we review how biodiversity has changed in recent decades across scales and taxonomic groups, focusing on four diversity metrics: species richness, temporal turnover, spatial beta-diversity and abundance. At local scales, change across all metrics includes many examples of both increases and declines and tends to be centred around zero, but with higher prevalence of declining trends in beta-diversity (increasing similarity in composition across space or biotic homogenization) and abundance. The exception to this pattern is temporal turnover, with changes in species composition through time observed in most local assemblages. Less is known about change at regional scales, although several studies suggest that increases in richness are more prevalent than declines. Change at the global scale is the hardest to estimate accurately, but most studies suggest extinction rates are probably outpacing speciation rates, although both are elevated. Recognizing this variability is essential to accurately portray how biodiversity change is unfolding, and highlights how much remains unknown about the magnitude and direction of multiple biodiversity metrics at different scales. Reducing these blind spots is essential to allow appropriate management actions to be deployed. This article is part of the theme issue 'Detecting and attributing the causes of biodiversity change: needs, gaps and solutions'.

Bimodality and alternative equilibria do not help explain long-term patterns in shallow lake chlorophyll-a

Since its inception, the theory of alternative equilibria in shallow lakes has evolved and been applied to an ever wider range of ecological and socioecological systems. The theory posits the existence of two alternative stable states or equilibria, which in shallow lakes are characterised by either clear water with abundant plants or turbid water where phytoplankton dominate. Here, we used data simulations and real-world data sets from Denmark and north-eastern USA (902 lakes in total) to examine the relationship between shallow lake phytoplankton biomass (chlorophyll-a) and nutrient concentrations across a range of timescales. The data simulations demonstrated that three diagnostic tests could reliably identify the presence or absence of alternative equilibria. The real-world data accorded with data simulations where alternative equilibria were absent. Crucially, it was only as the temporal scale of observation increased (>3 years) that a predictable linear relationship between nutrient concentration and chlorophyll-a was evident. Thus, when a longer term perspective is taken, the notion of alternative equilibria is not required to explain the response of chlorophyll-a to nutrient enrichment which questions the utility of the theory for explaining shallow lake response to, and recovery from, eutrophication.

Consensus and controversy in the discipline of invasion science

Approaches, values, and perceptions in invasion science are highly dynamic, and like in other disciplines, views among different people can diverge. This has led to debate in the field specifically surrounding the core themes of values, management, impacts, and terminology. Considering these debates, we surveyed 698 scientists and practitioners globally to assess levels of polarization (opposing views) on core and contentious topics. The survey was distributed online (via Google Forms) and promoted through listservs and social media. Although there were generally high levels of consensus among respondents, there was some polarization (scores of ≥0.39 [top quartile]). Relating to values, there was high polarization regarding claims of invasive species denialism, whether invasive species contribute to biodiversity, and how biodiversity reporting should be conducted. With regard to management, there were polarized views on banning the commercial use of beneficial invasive species, the extent to which stakeholders' perceptions should influence management, whether invasive species use alone is an appropriate control strategy, and whether eradication of invasive plants is possible. For impacts, there was high polarization concerning whether invasive species drive or are a side effect of degradation and whether invasive species benefits are understated. For terminology, polarized views related to defining invasive species based only on spread, whether species can be labeled as invasive in their native ranges, and whether language used is too xenophobic. Factor and regression analysis revealed that views were particularly divergent between people working on different invasive taxa (plants and mammals) and in different disciplines (between biologists and social scientists), between academics and practitioners, and between world regions (between Africa and the Global North). Unlike in other studies, age and gender had a limited influence on response patterns. Better integration globally and between disciplines, taxa, and sectors (e.g., academic vs. practitioners) could help build broader understanding and consensus.

White Paper: An Integrated Perspective on the Causes of Hypometric Metabolic Scaling in Animals

Larger animals studied during ontogeny, across populations, or across species, usually have lower mass-specific metabolic rates than smaller animals (hypometric scaling). This pattern is usually observed regardless of physiological state (e.g. basal, resting, field, maximally-active). The scaling of metabolism is usually highly correlated with the scaling of many life history traits, behaviors, physiological variables, and cellular/molecular properties, making determination of the causation of this pattern challenging. For across-species comparisons of resting and locomoting animals (but less so for across populations or during ontogeny), the mechanisms at the physiological and cellular level are becoming clear. Lower mass-specific metabolic rates of larger species at rest are due to a) lower contents of expensive tissues (brains, liver, kidneys), and b) slower ion leak across membranes at least partially due to membrane composition, with lower ion pump ATPase activities. Lower mass-specific costs of larger species during locomotion are due to lower costs for lower-frequency muscle activity, with slower myosin and Ca++ ATPase activities, and likely more elastic energy storage. The evolutionary explanation(s) for hypometric scaling remain(s) highly controversial. One subset of evolutionary hypotheses relies on constraints on larger animals due to changes in geometry with size; for example, lower surface-to-volume ratios of exchange surfaces may constrain nutrient or heat exchange, or lower cross-sectional areas of muscles and tendons relative to body mass ratios would make larger animals more fragile without compensation. Another subset of hypotheses suggests that hypometric scaling arises from biotic interactions and correlated selection, with larger animals experiencing less selection for mass-specific growth or neurolocomotor performance. A additional third type of explanation comes from population genetics. Larger animals with their lower effective population sizes and subsequent less effective selection relative to drift may have more deleterious mutations, reducing maximal performance and metabolic rates. Resolving the evolutionary explanation for the hypometric scaling of metabolism and associated variables is a major challenge for organismal and evolutionary biology. To aid progress, we identify some variation in terminology use that has impeded cross-field conversations on scaling. We also suggest that promising directions for the field to move forward include: 1) studies examining the linkages between ontogenetic, population-level, and cross-species allometries, 2) studies linking scaling to ecological or phylogenetic context, 3) studies that consider multiple, possibly interacting hypotheses, and 4) obtaining better field data for metabolic rates and the life history correlates of metabolic rate such as lifespan, growth rate and reproduction.

What are mycorrhizal traits?

Traits are inherent properties of organisms, but how are they defined for organismal networks such as mycorrhizal symbioses? Mycorrhizal symbioses are complex and diverse belowground symbioses between plants and fungi that have proved challenging to fit into a unified and coherent trait framework. We propose an inclusive mycorrhizal trait framework that classifies traits as morphological, physiological, and phenological features that have functional implications for the symbiosis. We further classify mycorrhizal traits by location - plant, fungus, or the symbiosis - which highlights new questions in trait-based mycorrhizal ecology designed to charge and challenge the scientific community. This new framework is an opportunity for researchers to interrogate their data to identify novel insights and gaps in our understanding of mycorrhizal symbioses.