Metapopulation persistence in a dynamic landscape: more habitat or better stewardship?

Habitat loss and fragmentation has created metapopulations where there were once continuous populations. Ecologists and conservation biologists have become interested in the optimal way to manage and conserve such metapopulations. Several authors have considered the effect of patch disturbance and recovery on metapopulation persistence, but almost all such studies assume that every patch is equally susceptible to disturbance. We investigated the influence of protecting patches from disturbance on metapopulation persistence, and used a stochastic metapopulation model to answer the question: How can we optimally trade off returns from protection of patches vs. creation of patches? We considered the problem of finding, under budgetary constraints, the optimal combination of increasing the number of patches in the metapopulation network vs. increasing the number of protected patches in the network. We discovered that the optimal trade-off is dependent upon all of the properties of the system: the species dynamics, the dynamics of the landscape, and the relative costs of each action. A stochastic model and accompanying methodology are provided allowing a manager to determine the optimal policy for small metapopulations. We also provide two approximations, including a rule of thumb, for determining the optimal policy for larger metapopulations. The method is illustrated with an example inspired by information for the greater bilby, Macrotis lagotis, inhabiting southwestern Queensland, Australia. We found that given realistic costs for each action, protection of patches should be prioritized over patch creation for improving the persistence of the greater bilby during the next 20 years.     

Towards a framework for assessment and management of cumulative human impacts on marine food webs

Effective ecosystem‐based management requires understanding ecosystem responses to multiple human threats, rather than focusing on single threats. To understand ecosystem responses to anthropogenic threats holistically, it is necessary to know how threats affect different components within ecosystems and ultimately alter ecosystem functioning. We used a case study of a Mediterranean seagrass (Posidonia oceanica) food web and expert knowledge elicitation in an application of the initial steps of a framework for assessment of cumulative human impacts on food webs. We produced a conceptual seagrass food web model, determined the main trophic relationships, identified the main threats to the food web components, and assessed the components’ vulnerability to those threats. Some threats had high (e.g., coastal infrastructure) or low impacts (e.g., agricultural runoff) on all food web components, whereas others (e.g., introduced carnivores) had very different impacts on each component. Partitioning the ecosystem into its components enabled us to identify threats previously overlooked and to reevaluate the importance of threats commonly perceived as major. By incorporating this understanding of system vulnerability with data on changes in the state of each threat (e.g., decreasing domestic pollution and increasing fishing) into a food web model, managers may be better able to estimate and predict cumulative human impacts on ecosystems and to prioritize conservation actions.     

Effects of threat management interactions on conservation priorities

Decisions need to be made about which biodiversity management actions are undertaken to mitigate threats and about where these actions are implemented. However, management actions can interact; that is, the cost, benefit, and feasibility of one action can change when another action is undertaken. There is little guidance on how to explicitly and efficiently prioritize management for multiple threats, including deciding where to act. Integrated management could focus on one management action to abate a dominant threat or on a strategy comprising multiple actions to abate multiple threats. Furthermore management could be undertaken at sites that are in close proximity to reduce costs. We used cost‐effectiveness analysis to prioritize investments in fire management, controlling invasive predators, and reducing grazing pressure in a bio‐diverse region of southeastern Queensland, Australia. We compared outcomes of 5 management approaches based on different assumptions about interactions and quantified how investment needed, benefits expected, and the locations prioritized for implementation differed when interactions were taken into account. Managing for interactions altered decisions about where to invest and in which actions to invest and had the potential to deliver increased investment efficiency. Differences in high priority locations and actions were greatest between the approaches when we made different assumptions about how management actions deliver benefits through threat abatement: either all threats must be managed to conserve species or only one management action may be required. Threatened species management that does not consider interactions between actions may result in misplaced investments or misguided expectations of the effort required to mitigate threats to species.     

Changes in seed dispersal processes and the potential for between-patch connectivity for an arid land daisy

Dispersal is a major and critical process in population biology that has been particularly challenging to study. Animals can have major roles in seed dispersal even in species that do not appear specifically adapted to animal-aided dispersal. This can occur by two processes: direct movement of diaspores by animals and modification of landscape characteristics by animals in ways that greatly influence dispersal. We exploited the production of large, persistent dispersal structures (seed heads, henceforth) by Erodiophyllum elderi (Asteraceae), a daisy from arid Australia, to further understand secondary dispersal. Seed head dispersal on and off animal tracks in eight E. elderi patches was monitored for 9.5 months by periodically recording the location of marked seed heads. Sites were located inside a reserve that excludes sheep but not kangaroos, and in a nearby area with both kangaroos and sheep. The distance moved and likelihood of seed head movement was higher in areas with sheep, and especially along animal tracks. There was clear evidence that seed heads were channeled down animal tracks during large rainfall events. Seed head dispersal away from patches occurred to a limited extent via their physical contact with sheep and potentially via wind dispersal. Thus, the advantages of this study system allowed us to demonstrate the two postulated effects of herbivores on dispersal via direct movement of seed heads, and two distinct indirect effects through landscape modification by herbivores from the creation of animal tracks and the denudation of vegetation.     

Diversity and stability of herbivorous fishes on coral reefs

Biodiversity may provide insurance against ecosystem collapse by stabilizing assemblages that perform particular ecological functions (the "portfolio effect"). However, the extent to which this occurs in nature and the importance of different mechanisms that generate portfolio effects remain controversial. On coral reefs, herbivory helps maintain coral dominated states, so volatility in levels of herbivory has important implications for reef ecosystems. Here, we used an extensive time series of abundances on 35 reefs of the Great Barrier Reef of Australia to quantify the strength of the portfolio effect for herbivorous fishes. Then, we disentangled the contributions of two mechanisms that underlie it (compensatory interactions and differential responses to environmental fluctuations ["response diversity"]) by fitting a community-dynamic model that explicitly includes terms for both mechanisms. We found that portfolio effects operate strongly in herbivorous fishes, as shown by nearly independent fluctuations in abundances over time. Moreover, we found strong evidence for high response diversity, with nearly independent responses to environmental fluctuations. In contrast, we found little evidence that the portfolio effect in this system was enhanced by compensatory ecological interactions. Our results show that portfolio effects are driven principally by response diversity for herbivorous fishes on coral reefs. We conclude that portfolio effects can be very strong in nature and that, for coral reefs in particular, response diversity may help maintain herbivory above the threshold levels that trigger regime shifts.     

The distribution of herbivorous fishes on the Great Barrier Reef

The composition and functionality of ecologically important herbivorous fish assemblages were examined throughout much of Australia’s Great Barrier Reef (GBR). Diversity and abundance of surgeonfishes (Acanthuridae), parrotfishes (Labridae) and rabbitfishes (Siganidae) were strongly associated with position on the continental shelf, whilst effects of latitude were weaker and inconsistent. Species distributions varied considerably amongst taxonomic groups; parrotfishes were mostly widespread whilst distributions of surgeonfishes were often restricted. Most inshore environments supported depauperate herbivore assemblages dominated by different taxa and functional groups compared with assemblages in offshore environments. There were also strong cross-shelf transitions in the main taxa performing each functional role. Overall, this study show that the functional contributions of herbivorous fish assemblages to important ecosystem processes and the contributing taxa vary considerably amongst different GBR environments. Additionally, the two most numerically dominant herbivores actively select detritus, not algae, supporting increasing evidence for the importance of detritus in coral reef ecology.     

Forest conservation delivers highly variable coral reef conservation outcomes

Coral reefs are threatened by human activities on both the land (e.g., deforestation) and the sea (e.g., overfishing). Most conservation planning for coral reefs focuses on removing threats in the sea, neglecting management actions on the land. A more integrated approach to coral reef conservation, inclusive of land-sea connections, requires an understanding of how and where terrestrial conservation actions influence reefs. We address this by developing a land-sea planning approach to inform fine-scale spatial management decisions and test it in Fiji. Our aim is to determine where the protection of forest can deliver the greatest return on investment for coral reef ecosystems. To assess the benefits of conservation to coral reefs, we estimate their relative condition as influenced by watershed-based pollution and fishing. We calculate the cost-effectiveness of protecting forest and find that investments deliver rapidly diminishing returns for improvements to relative reef condition. For example, protecting 2% of forest in one area is almost 500 times more beneficial than protecting 2% in another area, making prioritization essential. For the scenarios evaluated, relative coral reef condition could be improved by 8-58% if all remnant forest in Fiji were protected rather than deforested. Finally, we determine the priority of each coral reef for implementing a marine protected area when all remnant forest is protected for conservation. The general results will support decisions made by the Fiji Protected Area Committee as they establish a national protected area network that aims to protect 20% of the land and 30% of the inshore waters by 2020. Although challenges remain, we can inform conservation decisions around the globe by tackling the complex issues relevant to integrated land-sea planning.     

No reduction in aggression after loss of a broodmate: a test of the brood size hypothesis

In some vertebrate species, parents create a large brood or litter then, in the event of unfavourable ecological conditions, apparently allow the number of offspring to be adaptively reduced through siblicide. But how is sibling aggression regulated so that deaths occur only in unfavourable conditions? One proposed mechanism is brood size-dependent aggression. Two experiments tested for this mechanism by reducing three-chick broods of blue-footed boobies either during or after the period of dominance hierarchy establishment. In neither experiment did aggression of the two eldest and highest ranking chicks decline after removal of the youngest broodmate, in comparison with controls. These results suggest that dominant booby chicks do not become less aggressive to each other after disappearance of their youngest broodmate and that this species does not show brood size dependent aggression. Elder blue-footed booby chicks increase their attacks on broodmates when they receive less food, and this mechanism may be sufficient to tailor brood size to food availability.