DOCSLIB.ORG

Regime Shifts in Marine Ecosystems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

DRAFTPRE-RELEASE! ! DRAFT ! DRAFT PRE-RELEASE! ! DRAFT ! DRAFT Directorate-GeneralPRE-RELEASE! !Fo r DRAFTinternal Policies POLICY DEPARTMENT Directorate-General For internal Policies STRUCTURAL AND COHESION POLICIES B POLICY DEPARTMENT AgricultureAgriculture and Rural and Development Rural Development STRUCTURAL AND COHESION POLICIES B CultureCulture and Education and Education Role The Policy Departments are research units that provide specialised advice Fisheries to committees, inter-parliamentary delegations and other parliamentary bodies. Fisheries RegionalRegional Development Development Policy Areas TransportTransport and andTourism Tourism Agriculture and Rural Development Culture and Education Fisheries Regional Development Transport and Tourism Documents Visit the European Parliament website: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/studies PHOTO CREDIT: iStock International Inc., Photodisk, Phovoir DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT B: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION POLICIES FISHERIES REGIME SHIFTS IN MARINE ECOSYSTEMS: HOW OVERFISHING CAN PROVOKE SUDDEN ECOSYSTEM CHANGES WORKSHOP This document was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Fisheries. AUTHORS Christian MÖLLMANN Institute for Hydrobiology and Fisheries Science, University of Hamburg, Germany Michele CASINI Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Aquatic Resources, Institute of Marine Research, Sweden Georgi M. DASKALOV Institute of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Research, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (IBER- BAS), Bulgaria Brad DE YOUNG Physics and Physical Oceanography, Memorial University, Canada RESPONSIBLE ADMINISTRATOR Irina POPESCU Policy Department Structural and Cohesion Policies European Parliament E-mail: [email protected] EDITORIAL ASSISTANCE Virginija KELMELYTE LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN Translation: DE, ES, FR, IT, PT ABOUT THE EDITOR To contact the Policy Department or to subscribe to its monthly newsletter please write to: [email protected] Manuscript completed in November 2011. Brussels, © European Parliament, 2011. This document is available on the Internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/studies DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorized, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT B: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION POLICIES FISHERIES REGIME SHIFTS IN MARINE ECOSYSTEMS: HOW OVERFISHING CAN PROVOKE SUDDEN ECOSYSTEM CHANGES WORKSHOP Abstract Regime shifts, i.e. sudden changes in the structure and function of ecosystems, are of growing concern for fisheries management. This workshop reviewed the present state of our understanding of regime shifts in marine ecosystems, focusing on shifts which largely took place as a result of overfishing. The workshop presented examples of shifts in overexploited marine ecosystems around the world and provided recommendations for management responses. Two case studies discussed the Baltic and Black Sea ecosystem shifts, which are among the most prominent regime shifts recorded so far. November 2011 PE 474.557 EN Regime shifts in marine ecosystems CONTENTS FOREWORD 5 ECOSYSTEM REGIME SHIFTS TRIGGERED BY OVERFISHING Christian MÖLLMANN 7 ECOSYSTEM SHIFTS IN THE BALTIC SEA Michele CASINI 45 ECOSYSTEM SHIFTS IN THE BLACK SEA Georgi M. DASKALOV 83 MANAGEMENT RESPONSES TO REGIME SHIFTS IN MARINE ECOSYSTEMS Brad DE YOUNG 123 3 Policy Department B: Structural and Cohesion Policies 4 Regime shifts in marine ecosystems FOREWORD Sudden changes in the structure and function of marine ecosystems, termed regime shifts, have been increasingly reported from all parts of the world's oceans. Regime shifts are commonly defined as abrupt changes between contrasting, persistent states of ecosystems. Far from being an abstract scientific concept, they are of growing concern for fisheries management both because of their suddeness (making it difficult for management to respond) and their persistency (meaning that they have to be dealt with for a long time, decades or longer). Regime shifts can lead to the collapse of commercially important fish stocks, generating significant economic and social effects. Moreover, regime shifts could lead to the large-scale redistribution of marine species, and this potential should be considered in fisheries management and international agreements. The workshop "Regime shifts in marine ecosystems: how overfishing can provoke sudden ecosystem changes" was organised by the European Parliament's Policy Department B at the request of the Committee on Fisheries (PECH), and was held at the PECH meeting on 20 December 20111. The workshop reviewed the present state of our understanding of regime shifts in the ocean in the context of fisheries management, focusing on regime shifts which, to a large extent, took place as a result of overfishing. It was intended to present Members of the European Parliament with examples of shifts in overexploited marine ecosystems around the world and to provide recommendations for management responses to regime shifts. Two case studies gave particular attention to the Baltic and Black Sea ecosystem shifts, which are among the most prominent regime shifts recorded so far. The workshop was structured around four briefing notes: Ecosystem regime shifts triggered by overfishing (Christian MÖLLMANN, Institute for Hydrobiology and Fisheries Science, University of Hamburg, Germany) Case study: Ecosystem shifts in the Baltic Sea (Michele CASINI, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Aquatic Resources, Institute of Marine Research, Sweden) Case study: Ecosystem shifts in the Black Sea (Georgi M. DASKALOV, Institute of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Research, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Bulgaria) Management responses to regime shifts in marine ecosystems (Brad DE YOUNG, Physics and Physical Oceanography, Memorial University, Canada) Although algal blooms do not represent ecosystem shifts sensu stricto, an additional briefing note entitled "Does overfishing promote algal blooms?" was presented and discussed at the workshop2. 1 The record of the workshop can be accessed online at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ep-live/en/committees/video?event=20111220-0900-COMMITTEE- PECH&category=COMMITTEE&format=wmv 2 B.K. Eriksson, 2011. Does overfishing promote algal blooms? European Parliament, Policy Department B - Structural and cohesion policies, 68 pp. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/studiesdownload.html?languageDocument=EN&file=65911 5 Policy Department B: Structural and Cohesion Policies The briefing notes presented at the workshop indicate that different factors contribute to regime shifts. Overfishing is shown to be a major driver, causing regime shifts directly or by degrading the resilience of the ecosystem, i.e. its ability to resist disruption without changing state. Other drivers can also be involved, such as climate, eutrophication and species invasion. Most commonly, regime shifts are triggered by a combination of these factors acting together, e.g. overfishing/hydro-climatic changes/eutrophication in the Baltic Sea (Casini, this volume) or overfishing/climate/eutrophication/introduction of the invasive jellyfish Mnemiopsis in the Black Sea (Daskalov, this volume). The common internal mechanism of regime shifts is a trophic cascade, defined as the top down reorganisation of the food web. The collapse of a predatory species at the top of the food web due to overfishing can provoke an explosive increase in its prey, which becomes the dominant species. Cascading effects are transmitted down the food web, with up to four trophic levels affected (piscivorous fish, planktivores (fish and jellyfish), zooplankton and phytoplankton), as is the case in the Baltic and the Black Sea. Trophic cascades can also change the food web regulation from bottom up (resource controlled) to top down (consumer controlled). Vulnerability to overfishing-induced trophic cascading appears to be higher in the case of marine ecosystems with lower species diversity and relatively simple food webs, for which the Baltic and the Black Sea are good examples. After a regime shift, a marine ecosystem is unlikely to return to the previous state, as there are so many available states. The ecosystem will evolve in response to local forcing and its internal dynamics, which may be different following the shift. Nevertheless, the recovery of collapsed stocks is possible, if the fishing pressure is sufficiently low and the general hydro- climatic and trophic conditions are favourable. The cod stock in the Baltic has shown signs of some recovery in recent years, following the EU cod management plan. Also, planktivorous fish in the Black Sea (mainly anchovy) have partially recovered after the drastic reduction of the fishing capacity in the area in the early 1990's and the decrease of the Mnemiopsis population. However, partial recovery of the collapsed stocks is not a reasonable ecosystem objective in itself, as further changes may drive the system into the next catastrophic loop. Although the briefing notes have been produced independently, they all converge on a similar conclusion: recognizing that fishing affects not only the state of the targeted fish stocks but a whole range of complex interactions that
Recommended publications
  • Historical Overfishing and the Recent Collapse of Coastal Ecosystems

    Historical Overfishing and the Recent Collapse of Coastal Ecosystems

    E COLOGY T HROUGH T IME REVIEW Historical Overfishing and the Recent Collapse of Coastal Ecosystems Jeremy B. C. Jackson,1,2* Michael X. Kirby,3 Wolfgang H. Berger,1 Karen A. Bjorndal,4 Louis W. Botsford,5 Bruce J. Bourque,6 Roger H. Bradbury,7 Richard Cooke,2 Jon Erlandson,8 James A. Estes,9 Terence P. Hughes,10 Susan Kidwell,11 Carina B. Lange,1 Hunter S. Lenihan,12 John M. Pandolfi,13 Charles H. Peterson,12 Robert S. Steneck,14 Mia J. Tegner,1† Robert R. Warner15 Ecological extinction caused by overfishing precedes all other pervasive longer term cycles or shifts in oceanographic human disturbance to coastal ecosystems, including pollution, degrada- regimes and productivity (15–17). To help ad- tion of water quality, and anthropogenic climate change. Historical abun- dress this problem, we describe ecosystem dances of large consumer species were fantastically large in comparison structure predating modern ecological studies with recent observations. Paleoecological, archaeological, and historical using well-dated time series based on biological data show that time lags of decades to centuries occurred between the (18, 19), biogeochemical (20, 21), physical onset of overfishing and consequent changes in ecological communities, (22), and historical (23) proxies that are infor- because unfished species of similar trophic level assumed the ecological mative over a variety of spatial scales and bio- roles of overfished species until they too were overfished or died of geographic realms (24). Although proxies vary epidemic diseases related to overcrowding. Retrospective data not only in precision and clarity of the signals they mea- help to clarify underlying causes and rates of ecological change, but they sure, the use of multiple proxies that give the also demonstrate achievable goals for restoration and management of same ecological signal greatly increases confi- coastal ecosystems that could not even be contemplated based on the dence in results.
  • Effective Population Size and Genetic Conservation Criteria for Bull Trout

    Effective Population Size and Genetic Conservation Criteria for Bull Trout

    North American Journal of Fisheries Management 21:756±764, 2001 q Copyright by the American Fisheries Society 2001 Effective Population Size and Genetic Conservation Criteria for Bull Trout B. E. RIEMAN* U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 316 East Myrtle, Boise, Idaho 83702, USA F. W. A LLENDORF Division of Biological Sciences, University of Montana, Missoula, Montana 59812, USA Abstract.ÐEffective population size (Ne) is an important concept in the management of threatened species like bull trout Salvelinus con¯uentus. General guidelines suggest that effective population sizes of 50 or 500 are essential to minimize inbreeding effects or maintain adaptive genetic variation, respectively. Although Ne strongly depends on census population size, it also depends on demographic and life history characteristics that complicate any estimates. This is an especially dif®cult problem for species like bull trout, which have overlapping generations; biologists may monitor annual population number but lack more detailed information on demographic population structure or life history. We used a generalized, age-structured simulation model to relate Ne to adult numbers under a range of life histories and other conditions characteristic of bull trout populations. Effective population size varied strongly with the effects of the demographic and environmental variation included in our simulations. Our most realistic estimates of Ne were between about 0.5 and 1.0 times the mean number of adults spawning annually. We conclude that cautious long-term management goals for bull trout populations should include an average of at least 1,000 adults spawning each year. Where local populations are too small, managers should seek to conserve a collection of interconnected populations that is at least large enough in total to meet this minimum.
  • Regime Shifts in the Anthropocene: Drivers, Risk, and Resilience

    Regime Shifts in the Anthropocene: Drivers, Risk, and Resilience

    Supplementary Information for Regime Shifts in the Anthropocene: drivers, risk, and resilience by Juan-Carlos Rocha, Garry D. Peterson & Reinette O. Biggs. This document presents a worked example of a regime shift. We first provide a synthesis of the regime shift dynamics and a causal loop diagram (CLD). We then compare the resulting CLD with other regime shifts to make explicit the role of direct and indirect drivers. For each regime shift analyses in this study we did a similar literature synthesis and CLD which are available in the regime shift database. A longer version of this working example and CLDs can be found at www.regimeshifts.org. 1. Kelps transitions Summary. Kelp forests are marine coastal ecosystems located in shallow areas where large macroalgae ecologically engineer the environment to produce a coastal marine environmental substantially different from the same area without kelp. Kelp forests can undergo a regime shift to turf-forming algae or urchin barrens. These shift leads to loss of habitat and ecological complexity. Shifts to turf algae are related to nutrient input, while shifts to urchin barrens are related to trophic-level changes. The consequent loss of habitat complexity may affect commercially important fisheries. Managerial options include restoring biodiversity and installing wastewater treatment plants in coastal zones. Kelps are marine coastal ecosystems dominated by macroalgae typically found in temperate areas. This group of species form submarine forests with three or four layers, which provides different habitats to a variety of species. These forests maintain important industries like lobster and rockfish fisheries, the chemical industry with products to be used in e.g.
  • Red Sea Large Marine Ecosystem (Lme

    Red Sea Large Marine Ecosystem (Lme

    III-6 Red Sea: LME #33 S. Heileman and N. Mistafa The Red Sea LME is bordered by Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Yemen. It has a surface area of 458,620 km2, of which 2.33% is protected and includes 3.8% of the world’s coral reefs (Sea Around Us 2007). It is characterised by dense, salty water formed by net evaporation with rates up to 1.4 - 2.0 m yr-1 (Hastenrath & Lamb 1979) and deep convection in the northern sector resulting in the formation of a deep water mass flowing out into the Gulf of Aden underneath a layer of less saline inflowing water (Morcos 1970). A dominant phenomenon affecting the oceanography and meteorology of the region is the Arabian monsoon. In winter, northeast monsoon winds extend well into the Gulf of Aden and the southern Red Sea, causing a seasonal reversal in the winds over this entire region (Patzert 1974). The seasonal monsoon reversal and the local coastal configuration combine in summer to force a radically different circulation pattern composed of a thin surface outflow, an intermediate inflowing layer of Gulf of Aden thermocline water and a vastly reduced (often extinguished) outflowing deep layer (Patzert 1974). Within the basin itself, the general surface circulation is cyclonic (Longhurst 1998). High evaporation and low precipitation maintain the Red Sea LME as one of the most saline water masses of the world oceans, with a mean surface salinity of 42.5 ppt and a mean temperature of 30° C during the summer (Sofianos et al.
  • Forage Fish Management Plan

    Forage Fish Management Plan

    Oregon Forage Fish Management Plan November 19, 2016 Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Marine Resources Program 2040 SE Marine Science Drive Newport, OR 97365 (541) 867-4741 http://www.dfw.state.or.us/MRP/ Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Purpose and Need ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Federal action to protect Forage Fish (2016)............................................................................................ 7 The Oregon Marine Fisheries Management Plan Framework .................................................................. 7 Relationship to Other State Policies ......................................................................................................... 7 Public Process Developing this Plan .......................................................................................................... 8 How this Document is Organized .............................................................................................................. 8 A. Resource Analysis ....................................................................................................................................
  • Fisheries in Large Marine Ecosystems: Descriptions and Diagnoses

    Fisheries in Large Marine Ecosystems: Descriptions and Diagnoses

    Fisheries in Large Marine Ecosystems: Descriptions and Diagnoses D. Pauly, J. Alder, S. Booth, W.W.L. Cheung, V. Christensen, C. Close, U.R. Sumaila, W. Swartz, A. Tavakolie, R. Watson, L. Wood and D. Zeller Abstract We present a rationale for the description and diagnosis of fisheries at the level of Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs), which is relatively new, and encompasses a series of concepts and indicators different from those typically used to describe fisheries at the stock level. We then document how catch data, which are usually available on a smaller scale, are mapped by the Sea Around Us Project (see www.seaaroundus.org) on a worldwide grid of half-degree lat.-long. cells. The time series of catches thus obtained for over 180,000 half-degree cells can be regrouped on any larger scale, here that of LMEs. This yields catch time series by species (groups) and LME, which began in 1950 when the FAO started collecting global fisheries statistics, and ends in 2004 with the last update of these datasets. The catch data by species, multiplied by ex-vessel price data and then summed, yield the value of the fishery for each LME, here presented as time series by higher (i.e., commercial) groups. Also, these catch data can be used to evaluate the primary production required (PPR) to sustain fisheries catches. PPR, when related to observed primary production, provides another index for assessing the impact of the countries fishing in LMEs. The mean trophic level of species caught by fisheries (or ‘Marine Trophic Index’) is also used, in conjunction with a related indicator, the Fishing-in-Balance Index (FiB), to assess changes in the species composition of the fisheries in LMEs.
  • Resilience of Alternative States in Spatially Extended Ecosystems

    Resilience of Alternative States in Spatially Extended Ecosystems

    RESEARCH ARTICLE Resilience of Alternative States in Spatially Extended Ecosystems Ingrid A. van de Leemput*, Egbert H. van Nes, Marten Scheffer Department of Environmental Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands * [email protected] Abstract Alternative stable states in ecology have been well studied in isolated, well-mixed systems. However, in reality, most ecosystems exist on spatially extended landscapes. Applying ex- isting theory from dynamic systems, we explore how such a spatial setting should be ex- pected to affect ecological resilience. We focus on the effect of local disturbances, defining resilience as the size of the area of a strong local disturbance needed to trigger a shift. We show that in contrast to well-mixed systems, resilience in a homogeneous spatial setting does not decrease gradually as a bifurcation point is approached. Instead, as an environ- OPEN ACCESS mental driver changes, the present dominant state remains virtually ‘indestructible’, until at Citation: van de Leemput IA, van Nes EH, Scheffer a critical point (the Maxwell point) its resilience drops sharply in the sense that even a very M (2015) Resilience of Alternative States in Spatially Extended Ecosystems. PLoS ONE 10(2): e0116859. local disturbance can cause a domino effect leading eventually to a landscape-wide shift to doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0116859 the alternative state. Close to this Maxwell point the travelling wave moves very slow. Under Academic Editor: Emanuele Paci, University of these conditions both states have a comparable resilience, allowing long transient co-occur- Leeds, UNITED KINGDOM rence of alternative states side-by-side, and also permanent co-existence if there are mild Received: April 11, 2014 spatial barriers.
  • Status and Trends of Land Degradation and Restoration and Associated Changes in Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functions

    Status and Trends of Land Degradation and Restoration and Associated Changes in Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functions

    IPBES/6/INF/1/Rev.1 Chapter 4 Status and trends of land degradation and restoration and associated changes in biodiversity and ecosystem functions Coordinating Lead Authors Stephen Prince (United States of America), Graham Von Maltitz (South Africa), Fengchun Zhang (China) Lead Authors Kenneth Byrne (Ireland), Charles Driscoll (United States of America), Gil Eshel (Israel), German Kust (Russian Federation), Cristina Martínez-Garza (Mexico), Jean Paul Metzger (Brazil), Guy Midgley (South Africa), David Moreno Mateos (Spain), Mongi Sghaier (Tunisia/OSS), San Thwin (Myanmar) Fellow Bernard Nuoleyeng Baatuuwie (Ghana) Contributing Authors Albert Bleeker (the Netherlands), Molly E. Brown (United States of America), Leilei Cheng (China), Kirsten Dales (Canada), Evan Andrew Ellicot (United States of America), Geraldo Wilson Fernandes (Brazil), Violette Geissen (the Netherlands), Panu Halme (Finland), Jim Harris (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), Roberto Cesar Izaurralde (United States of America), Robert Jandl (Austria), Gensuo Jia (China), Guo Li (China), Richard Lindsay (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), Giuseppe Molinario (United States of America), Mohamed Neffati (Tunisia), Margaret Palmer (United States of America), John Parrotta (United States of America), Gary Pierzynski (United States of America), Tobias Plieninger (Germany), Pascal Podwojewski (France), Bernardo Dourado Ranieri (Brazil), Mahesh Sankaran (India), Robert Scholes (South Africa), Kate Tully (United States of America), Ernesto F. Viglizzo (Argentina), Fei Wang (China), Nengwen Xiao (China), Qing Ying (China), Caiyun Zhao (China) Review Editors Chencho Norbu (Bhutan), Jim Reynolds (United States of America) This chapter should be cited as: Prince, S., Von Maltitz, G., Zhang, F., Byrne, K., Driscoll, C., Eshel, G., Kust, G., Martínez-Garza, C., Metzger, J.
  • Ecocide: the Missing Crime Against Peace'

    Ecocide: the Missing Crime Against Peace'

    35 690 Initiative paper from Representative Van Raan: 'Ecocide: The missing crime against peace' No. 2 INITIATIVE PAPER 'The rules of our world are laws, and they can be changed. Laws can restrict, or they can enable. What matters is what they serve. Many of the laws in our world serve property - they are based on ownership. But imagine a law that has a higher moral authority… a law that puts people and planet first. Imagine a law that starts from first do no harm, that stops this dangerous game and takes us to a place of safety….' Polly Higgins, 2015 'We need to change the rules.' Greta Thunberg, 2019 Table of contents Summary 1 1. Introduction 3 2. The ineffectiveness of current legislation 7 3. The legal framework for ecocide law 14 4. Case study: West Papua 20 5. Conclusion 25 6. Financial section 26 7. Decision points 26 Appendix: The institutional history of ecocide 29 Summary Despite all our efforts, the future of our natural environments, habitats, and ecosystems does not look promising. Human activity has ensured that climate change continues to persist. Legal instruments are available to combat this unprecedented damage to the natural living environment, but these instruments have proven inadequate. With this paper, the initiator intends to set forth an innovative new legal concept. This paper is a study into the possibilities of turning this unprecedented destruction of our natural environment into a criminal offence. In this regard, we will use the term ecocide, defined as the extensive damage to or destruction of ecosystems through human activity.
  • Introduction to Theoretical Ecology

    Introduction to Theoretical Ecology

    Introduction to Theoretical Ecology Natal, 2011 Objectives After this week: The student understands the concept of a biological system in equilibrium and knows that equilibria can be stable or unstable. The student understands the basics of how coupled differential equations can be analyzed graphically, including phase plane analysis and nullclines. The student can analyze the stability of the equilibria of a one-dimensional differential equation model graphically. The student has a basic understanding of what a bifurcation point is. The student can relate alternative stable states to a 1D bifurcation plot (e.g. catastrophe fold). Study material / for further study: This text Scheffer, M. 2009. Critical Transitions in Nature and Society, Princeton University Press, Princeton and Oxford. Scheffer, M. 1998. Ecology of Shallow Lakes. 1 edition. Chapman and Hall, London. Edelstein-Keshet, L. 1988. Mathematical models in biology. 1 edition. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York. Tentative programme (maybe too tight for the exercises) Monday 9:00-10:30 Introduction Modelling + introduction Forrester diagram + 1D models (stability graphs) 10:30-13:00 GRIND Practical CO2 chamber - Ethiopian Wolf Tuesday 9:00-10:00 Introduction bifurcation (Allee effect) and Phase plane analysis (Lotka-Volterra competition) 10:00-13:00 GRIND Practical Lotka-Volterra competition + Sahara Wednesday 9:00-13:00 GRIND Practical – Sahara (continued) and Algae-zooplankton Thursday 9:00-13:00 GRIND practical – Algae zooplankton spatial heterogeneity Friday 9:00-12:00 GRIND practical- Algae zooplankton fish 12:00-13:00 Practical summary/explanation of results - Wrap up 1 An introduction to models What is a model? The word 'model' is used widely in every-day language.
  • Desertification and Agriculture

    Desertification and Agriculture

    BRIEFING Desertification and agriculture SUMMARY Desertification is a land degradation process that occurs in drylands. It affects the land's capacity to supply ecosystem services, such as producing food or hosting biodiversity, to mention the most well-known ones. Its drivers are related to both human activity and the climate, and depend on the specific context. More than 1 billion people in some 100 countries face some level of risk related to the effects of desertification. Climate change can further increase the risk of desertification for those regions of the world that may change into drylands for climatic reasons. Desertification is reversible, but that requires proper indicators to send out alerts about the potential risk of desertification while there is still time and scope for remedial action. However, issues related to the availability and comparability of data across various regions of the world pose big challenges when it comes to measuring and monitoring desertification processes. The United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification and the UN sustainable development goals provide a global framework for assessing desertification. The 2018 World Atlas of Desertification introduced the concept of 'convergence of evidence' to identify areas where multiple pressures cause land change processes relevant to land degradation, of which desertification is a striking example. Desertification involves many environmental and socio-economic aspects. It has many causes and triggers many consequences. A major cause is unsustainable agriculture, a major consequence is the threat to food production. To fully comprehend this two-way relationship requires to understand how agriculture affects land quality, what risks land degradation poses for agricultural production and to what extent a change in agricultural practices can reverse the trend.
  • Multiple Stable States and Regime Shifts - Environmental Science - Oxford Bibliographies 3/30/18, 10:15 AM

    Multiple Stable States and Regime Shifts - Environmental Science - Oxford Bibliographies 3/30/18, 10:15 AM

    Multiple Stable States and Regime Shifts - Environmental Science - Oxford Bibliographies 3/30/18, 10:15 AM Multiple Stable States and Regime Shifts James Heffernan, Xiaoli Dong, Anna Braswell LAST MODIFIED: 28 MARCH 2018 DOI: 10.1093/OBO/9780199363445-0095 Introduction Why do ecological systems (populations, communities, and ecosystems) change suddenly in response to seemingly gradual environmental change, or fail to recover from large disturbances? Why do ecological systems in seemingly similar settings exhibit markedly different ecological structure and patterns of change over time? The theory of multiple stable states in ecological systems provides one potential explanation for such observations. In ecological systems with multiple stable states (or equilibria), two or more configurations of an ecosystem are self-maintaining under a given set of conditions because of feedbacks among biota or between biota and the physical and chemical environment. The resulting multiple different states may occur as different types or compositions of vegetation or animal communities; as different densities, biomass, and spatial arrangement; and as distinct abiotic environments created by the distinct ecological communities. Alternative states are maintained by the combined effects of positive (or amplifying) feedbacks and negative (or stabilizing feedbacks). While stabilizing feedbacks reinforce each state, positive feedbacks are what allow two or more states to be stable. Thresholds between states arise from the interaction of these positive and negative feedbacks, and define the basins of attraction of the alternative states. These feedbacks and thresholds may operate over whole ecosystems or give rise to self-organized spatial structure. The combined effect of these feedbacks is also what gives rise to ecological resilience, which is the capacity of ecological systems to absorb environmental perturbations while maintaining their basic structure and function.