Statistical Power of Presence-Absence Data to Detect Population Declines

Abstract: Population declines may be inferred from a decrease in the number of sites at which a species is detected. Although such presence-absence data often are interpreted informally, it is simple to test the statistical significance of changes in the number of sites occupied by a species. I used simulations to examine the statistical power (i.e., the probability of making the Type II error that no population decline has occurred when the population actually has declined) of presence-absence designs. Most presence-absence designs have low power to detect declines of < 20–50% in populations but have adequate power to detect steeper declines. Power was greater if the population disappeared entirely from a subset of formerly occupied sites than if it declined evenly over its entire range. Power also rose with (1) increases in the number of sites surveyed; (2) increases in population density or sampling effort at a site; and (3) decreases in spatial variance in population density. Because of potential problems with bias and inadequate power, presence-absence designs should be used and interpreted cautiously.     

Hydrology and grazing jointly control a large-river food web

Inputs of fresh water and grazing both can control aquatic food webs, but little is known about the relative strengths of and interactions between these controls. We use long-term data on the food web of the freshwater Hudson River estuary to investigate the importance of, and interactions between, inputs of fresh water and grazing by the invasive zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha). Both freshwater inputs and zebra mussel grazing have strong, pervasive effects on the Hudson River food web. High flow tended to reduce population size in most parts of the food web. High grazing also reduced populations in the planktonic food web, but increased populations in the littoral food web, probably as a result of increases in water clarity. The influences of flow and zebra mussel grazing were roughly equal (i.e., within a factor of 2) for many variables over the period of our study. Zebra mussel grazing made phytoplankton less sensitive to freshwater inputs, but water clarity and the littoral food web more sensitive to freshwater inputs, showing that interactions between these two controlling factors can be strong and varied.     

Advancing the Integration of History and Ecology for Conservation

Abstract: The important role of humans in the development of current ecosystems was recognized decades ago; however, the integration of history and ecology in order to inform conservation has been difficult. We identified four issues that hinder historical ecological research and considered possible solutions. First, differences in concepts and methods between the fields of ecology and history are thought to be large. However, most differences stem from miscommunication between ecologists and historians and are less substantial than is usually assumed. Cooperation can be achieved by focusing on the features ecology and history have in common and through understanding and acceptance of differing points of view. Second, historical ecological research is often hampered by differences in spatial and temporal scales between ecology and history. We argue that historical ecological research can only be conducted at extents for which sources in both disciplines have comparable resolutions. Researchers must begin by clearly defining the relevant scales for the given purpose. Third, periods for which quantitative historical sources are not easily accessible (before AD 1800) have been neglected in historical ecological research. Because data from periods before 1800 are as relevant to the current state of ecosystems as more recent data, we suggest that historical ecologists actively seek out data from before 1800 and apply analytic methods commonly used in ecology to these data. Fourth, humans are not usually considered an intrinsic ecological factor in current ecological research. In our view, human societies should be acknowledged as integral parts of ecosystems and societal processes should be recognized as driving forces of ecosystem change.     

The Contribution of Headwater Streams to Biodiversity in River Networks1

Abstract: The diversity of life in headwater streams (intermittent, first and second order) contributes to the biodiversity of a river system and its riparian network. Small streams differ widely in physical, chemical, and biotic attributes, thus providing habitats for a range of unique species. Headwater species include permanent residents as well as migrants that travel to headwaters at particular seasons or life stages. Movement by migrants links headwaters with downstream and terrestrial ecosystems, as do exports such as emerging and drifting insects. We review the diversity of taxa dependent on headwaters. Exemplifying this diversity are three unmapped headwaters that support over 290 taxa. Even intermittent streams may support rich and distinctive biological communities, in part because of the predictability of dry periods. The influence of headwaters on downstream systems emerges from their attributes that meet unique habitat requirements of residents and migrants by: offering a refuge from temperature and flow extremes, competitors, predators, and introduced species; serving as a source of colonists; providing spawning sites and rearing areas; being a rich source of food; and creating migration corridors throughout the landscape. Degradation and loss of headwaters and their connectivity to ecosystems downstream threaten the biological integrity of entire river networks.