DOCSLIB.ORG

The White-Tailed Deer: a Keystone Herbivore

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The White-Tailed Deer: a Keystone Herbivore See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284793030 The white-tailed deer: A keystone herbivore Article in Wildlife Society Bulletin · June 1997 CITATIONS READS 298 1,143 2 authors: Donald M. Waller William Surprison Alverson University of Wisconsin–Madison University of Wisconsin–Madison 218 PUBLICATIONS 13,084 CITATIONS 66 PUBLICATIONS 2,360 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: First Stewards -- Comparing tribal vs. non-tribal mangement of forests & wildlife View project Ecological methods for studying community structure and change View project All content following this page was uploaded by Donald M. Waller on 02 November 2017. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. !"#$%"&'#(!)&*#+$,##-.$/$0#12'34#$5#-6&73-# /8'"3-92:.$,34)*+$;<$%)**#-$)4+$%&**&)=$><$/*7#-234 >38-?#.$%&*+*&@#$>3?&#'1$A8**#'&4B$C3*<$DEB$F3<$DB$,##-$G7#-)684+)4?#$9>8==#-B$HIIJ:B$KK<$DHJ( DDL M86*&2"#+$61.$/**#4$M-#22 >')6*#$NOP.$http://www.jstor.org/stable/3783435 /??#22#+.$QERHHRDQQI$HS.QH Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=acg. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Allen Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Wildlife Society Bulletin. http://www.jstor.org Ecological Aspects of Management A KEYSTONEHERBIVORE 217 The white-tailed deer: a keystone herbivore Donald M. Waller and WilliamS. Alverson Issues surrounding deer hear more each year about the high costs of crop and management tree-seedling damage, deer-vehicle collisions, and nuisance deer in suburban locales (Conover et al. During the last 3 centuries, sweeping manipula- 1995). Beyond these substantial economic costs, tions of habitat for agriculture, silviculture, and, to a however, we face new and often vexing issues re- lesser degree, game management have improved and garding the ecological costs of overabundant deer. In expanded habitat for white-tailed deer (Odocoileus some cases, it appears that these consequences will virginianus) across much of the landscape in the extend over decades and perhaps even centuries. eastern United States. For most of this century, This makes it even more important now than it was a wildlife managers sought to protect and enhance decade ago that wildlife managers assume responsi- populations of deer. With the specter of extirpation bility and take action to minimize the ecological ef- still haunting their memory, wildlife managers fects of chronically overabundant deer populations. worked hard in the early 20th century to devise and The wildlife management profession has begun to enforce bag limits, short hunting seasons, and buck- respond to the economic and ecological impacts of only hunts in order to protect the recovering herds. overabundant deer. In 1995, Wisconsin's Bureau of As they professionalized, wildlife managers were Wildlife elected to scrutinize the impacts of its own quick to follow Leopold's (1933) suggestion that the deer management policies via a comprehensive Envi- way to manage game is to manage habitat. For white- ronmental Assessment (VanderZouwen and Warnke tailed deer, this meant favoring edge and early suc- 1995). This was the first attempt, that we are aware cessional habitats by creating gaps and grassy open- of, to seriously consider the broad range of ecological ings in regions dominated by mature forest. Clear- and environmental impacts pertaining to a state's cuts, in particular, continue to be promoted for their deer management policy. Partly in response to this immediate production of slash for browse and their assessment, the Wildlife Bureau also began to insti- ready succession to shade-intolerant species such as tute new hunting regulations in some areas to ensure aspen (Populus spp.) that provide good summer that more, especially more female, deer were killed browse, at least for a few years (e.g., Masters et al. (e.g., their 1996 "Earn a Buck" program). This, how- 1993, Johnson et al. 1995). ever, has proved to be a major challenge, both be- Nearly a decade ago, we warned wildlife profes- cause it is difficult to adjust hunter effort as more ar- sionals and conservation biologists about the ecolog- eas become off-limits to hunting and because hunters ical consequences of overabundant deer populations favor a tradition and management they see as con- (Alverson et al. 1988). Since then, deer populations tributing to, rather than diminishing, their prospects and their ecological and economic impacts appear to for personal hunting success. Many hunters remain have increased and worsened. As we approach the skeptical about the seriousness of deer impacts, or at next millennium, it behooves wildlife managers to least the need to reduce deer densities in their own contemplate what consequences will result from areas (Diefenbach et al. 1997). Thus, in addition to their actions in their own professional lifetimes. We facing the irony of having done their job too well, Address for Donald M. Waller: Department of Botany, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 430 Lincoln Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA. Address for William S. Alverson: Harvard University Herbaria, 22 Divinity Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA. Key words: deer browse, plant diversity, Odocoileus virginianus WildlifeSociety Bulletin 1997, 25(2):217-226 Peer edited 218 Wildlife Society Bulletin 1997, 25(2):217-226 wildlife managers must now muster the effort to doc- pacts of deer. Considering our 3 criteria for a key- ument, and publicize, the negative consequences of stone species, we discuss the impacts of deer on tree overabundant deer if they are to effectively influence seedlings (criteria 1 and 2 above), herbaceous plants hunter effort, which is their primary tool for adjust- (criteria 1 and 2), and species on higher trophic lev- ing deer density. els (criterion 3). Because we and others have already While managers understand that they can boost reviewed much of the older literature elsewhere deer and other game populations by manipulating (Alverson et al. 1988, Warren 1991), we concentrate habitat, they have been slower to acknowledge the here on more recent results. While these data remain converse, i.e., that managing for abundant deer far from comprehensive, we conclude that ample ev- brings reciprocal effects for their habitats. If our cur- idence exists to publicly acknowledge the substantial rent deer densities adversely affected only a few par- risks posed by sustaining high deer densities. We ticularly sensitive species, or if these effects only oc- therefore conclude by discussing the larger manage- curred intermittently (during peaks in deer abun- ment issues these results raise. dance), or locally (say, in deer yards), then the issues could be addressed via ecological they posed Effects on trees and shrubs focused and proximate efforts, or perhaps even dis- missed as not being a major management issue. Allo- Wildlife biologists and foresters have known for cating large efforts to document and ameliorate such many years that deer can strongly affect the absolute scattered impacts would appear misguided and and relative abundance of woody species (e.g., wasteful, and traditional approaches to herd manage- Leopold et al. 1947, Webb et al. 1956). Such research ment would appear well justified. If instead, how- in trees is both straightforward(involving the tabula- ever, current deer densities substantially affect many tion of size or age classes) and of practical impor- species, and if their impacts are geographically wide- tance, given the economic value of trees. Indeed, spread and chronic, then wildlife managers face a dif- these effects are so widespread that forestry text- ferent and more serious set of issues (Garrott et al. books have routinely mentioned deer browse as a 1993). In particular, they face the immediate need to problem in regenerating particular species (e.g., oaks accurately monitor and assess the range and nature of [Quercus spp.]) for years (e.g., Allen and Sharpe these impacts, and, simultaneously, to reset manage- 1960). ment goals (and perhaps redesign management tech- Some of the best information on tree impacts niques) to substantially reduce the severity and scale comes from the Allegheny National Forest in north- of these impacts. western Pennsylvania, where foresters have long Here, we review evidence for the contention that been concerned that high deer densities depress the chronically high densities of white-tailed
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Krill As a Keystone Species (A Case Study) Lesson 3 : Krill As a Keystone Species (A Case Study)
    ECOSYSTEMS – AN ANTARCTIC CASE STUDY LESSON 3 KRILL AS A KEYSTONE SPECIES (A CASE STUDY) LESSON 3 : KRILL AS A KEYSTONE SPECIES (A CASE STUDY) LESSON OBJECTIVES Understand how organisms affect, and are affected by, their environment Interpret observations and data, including identifying patterns and using observations, measurements and data to draw conclusions Identify further questions arising from the result IN PARTNERSHIP WITH SPONSORED BY LESSON 3 : KRILL AS A KEYSTONE SPECIES (A CASE STUDY) WHY ARE KRILL IMPORTANT? Many people consider krill to be one of the most important species in Antarctica. Why do you think that is? IN PARTNERSHIP WITH SPONSORED BY LESSON 3 : KRILL AS A KEYSTONE SPECIES (A CASE STUDY) YOUR TURN! Krill are considered to be one of the most important species in the Antarctic! Why is this? On your cards you will find 6 facts about krill. Read the facts and discuss as a group (of 3 or 4). Order the facts from the most important reason to the least important to help explain why krill are important in Antarctic ecosystems. Be prepared to discuss your reasons (remember, there are no right or wrong answers in this activity, only ideas with explanations). IN PARTNERSHIP WITH SPONSORED BY LESSON 3 : KRILL AS A KEYSTONE SPECIES (A CASE STUDY) WHY ARE KRILL IMPORTANT? Phytoplankton are the main producers in the Antarctic. However, not many species can eat phytoplankton because they are so small. Krill have an excellent design for eating phytoplankton. During the summer they eat phytoplankton and during the winter they eat the algae under the sea ice.
    [Show full text]
  • Keystone Species: the Concept and Its Relevance for Conservation Management in New Zealand
    Keystone species: the concept and its relevance for conservation management in New Zealand SCIENCE FOR CONSERVATION 203 Ian J. Payton, Michael Fenner, William G. Lee Published by Department of Conservation P.O. Box 10-420 Wellington, New Zealand Science for Conservation is a scientific monograph series presenting research funded by New Zealand Department of Conservation (DOC). Manuscripts are internally and externally peer-reviewed; resulting publications are considered part of the formal international scientific literature. Titles are listed in the DOC Science Publishing catalogue on the departmental website http:// www.doc.govt.nz and printed copies can be purchased from [email protected] © Copyright July 2002, New Zealand Department of Conservation ISSN 11732946 ISBN 047822284X This report was prepared for publication by DOC Science Publishing, Science & Research Unit; editing by Lynette Clelland and layout by Ruth Munro. Publication was approved by the Manager, Science & Research Unit, Science Technology and Information Services, Department of Conservation, Wellington. CONTENTS Abstract 5 1. Introduction 6 2. Keystone concepts 6 3. Types of keystone species 8 3.1 Organisms controlling potential dominants 8 3.2 Resource providers 10 3.3 Mutualists 11 3.4 Ecosystem engineers 12 4. The New Zealand context 14 4.1 Organisms controlling potential dominants 14 4.2 Resource providers 16 4.3 Mutualists 18 4.4 Ecosystem engineers 19 5. Identifying keystone species 20 6. Implications for conservation management 21 7. Acknowledgements 22 8. References 23 4 Payton et al.Keystone species: the concept and its relevance in New Zealand Keystone species: the concept and its relevance for conservation management in New Zealand Ian J.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecosystem-Level Effects of Keystone Species Reintroduction: a Literature Review Sarah L
    REVIEW ARTICLE Ecosystem-level effects of keystone species reintroduction: a literature review Sarah L. Hale1,2 , John L. Koprowski1 The keystone species concept was introduced in 1969 in reference to top-down regulation of communities by predators, but has expanded to include myriad species at different trophic levels. Keystone species play disproportionately large, important roles in their ecosystems, but human-wildlife conflicts often drive population declines. Population declines have resulted in the necessity of keystone species reintroduction; however, studies of such reintroductions are rare. We conducted a literature review and found only 30 peer-reviewed journal articles that assessed reintroduced populations of keystone species, and only 11 of these assessed ecosystem-level effects following reintroduction. Nine of 11 publications assessing ecosystem-level effects found evidence of resumption of keystone roles; however, these publications focus on a narrow range of species. We highlight the deficit of peer-reviewed literature on keystone species reintroductions, and draw attention to the need for assessment of ecosystem-level effects so that the presence, extent, and rate of ecosystem restoration driven by keystone species can be better understood. Key words: ecosystem restoration, ecosystem-level effects, keystone species, population declines, reintroduction species in their ecosystems. Wolves prevent ungulate overpop- Implications for Practice ulation, and in doing so prevent overbrowsing of vegetation • More research into ecosystem-level effects of keystone (McLaren & Peterson 1994), and provide scavengers with car- species reintroduction is required to fully understand if, rion in winters (Wilmers et al. 2003). Sea otters consume sea and to what extent, keystone species act as a restoration urchins (Strongylocentrotus spp.), thereby maintain the integrity tool.
    [Show full text]
  • Keystone Species ×
    This website would like to remind you: Your browser (Apple Safari 4) is out of date. Update your browser for more × security, comfort and the best experience on this site. Encyclopedic Entry keystone species For the complete encyclopedic entry with media resources, visit: http://education.nationalgeographic.com/encyclopedia/keystone-species/ A keystone species is a plant or animal that plays a unique and crucial role in the way an ecosystem functions. Without keystone species, the ecosystem would be dramatically different or cease to exist altogether. All species in an ecosystem, or habitat, rely on each other. The contributions of a keystone species are large compared to the species' prevalence in the habitat. A small number of keystone species can have a huge impact on the environment. A keystone species is often, but not always, a predator. A few predators can control the distribution and population of large numbers of prey species. A single mountain lion near the Mackenzie Mountains in Canada, for example, can roam an area of hundreds of kilometers. The deer, rabbits, and bird species in the ecosystem are at least partly controlled by the presence of the mountain lion. Their feeding behavior, or where they choose to make their nests and burrows, are largely a reaction to the mountain lion's activity. Scavenger species, such as vultures, are also controlled by the activity of the mountain lion. A keystone species' disappearance would start a domino effect. Other species in the habitat would also disappear and become extinct. The keystone species' disappearance could affect other species that rely on it for survival.
    [Show full text]
  • Answers --Chapter 6 Preparing for the Ap Exam Multiple Choice Questions 1
    ANSWERS --CHAPTER 6 PREPARING FOR THE AP EXAM MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS 1. Which of the following is not an example of a density-independent factor? (a) Drought (b) Competition (c) Forest fire (d) Hurricane (e) Flood 2. As the size of a white-tailed deer population increases, (a) the carrying capacity of the environment for white-tailed deer will be reduced. (b) a volcanic eruption will have a greater proportional effect than it would on a smaller population. (c) the effect of limiting resources will decrease. (d) the number of gray wolves, a natural predator of white-tailed deer, will increase. (e) white-tailed deer are more likely to become extinct. 3. The graph on page 174 of the population growth of Canada geese in Ohio between 1955 and 2002 can best be described as (a) an exponential growth curve. (b) a logistic growth curve. (c) a stochastic growth curve. (d) oscillation between overshoot and die-off. (e) approaching the carrying capacity. 4. Which of the following is not a statement of the logistic growth model? (a) Population growth is limited by density-dependent factors. (b) A population will initially increase exponentially and then level off as it approaches the carrying capacity of the environment. (c) Future population growth cannot be predicted mathematically. (d) Population growth slows as the number of individuals approaches the carrying capacity. (c) A graph of population growth produces an S-shaped growth curve over time. 5. Which of the following characteristics are typical of r-selected species? I They produce many offspring in a short period of time.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Animals Are More Equal Than Others: Trophic Cascades And
    Some Animals Are More Equal than Others: Trophic Cascades and Keystone Film Guide Educator Materials Species OVERVIEW The short film Some Animals Are More Equal than Others: Trophic Cascades and Keystone Species opens by asking two fundamental questions in ecology: “What determines how many species live in a given place? Or how large can each population grow?” The film then describes the pioneering experiments by Robert Paine and James Estes, in the 1960s and 1970s, which started to address them. Paine’s experiments on the coast of Washington state showed that the starfish is a keystone species, having a disproportionately large impact on its ecosystem relative to its abundance. Estes and colleague John Palmisano discovered that the kelp forests of the North Pacific are indirectly regulated by sea otters, which feed on sea urchins that consume kelp. The presence or absence of sea otters causes a cascade of direct and indirect effects down the food chain, which in turn affect the structure of the ecosystem. These early experiments inspired countless others on keystone species and trophic cascades in ecosystems throughout the world. KEY CONCEPTS A. Keystone species have direct and indirect effects on the abundance and number of species in an ecosystem that are disproportionately large relative to their own abundance in the ecosystem. B. Not all species in an ecosystem have strong interactions. The removal of some species has little or no effect on others. C. Many keystone species are apex predators: predators at the top of a food web that are not preyed on by others. D. Removal or addition of an apex predator that is a keystone species causes changes in the type and number of species, and their population sizes, at multiple trophic levels.
    [Show full text]
  • TEACHER OVERVIEW Water Conservation and Wildlife Ecosystems 6Th – 8Th Grade
    TEACHER OVERVIEW Water Conservation and Wildlife Ecosystems 6th – 8th Grade Nature Vision Student Packet The materials contained within this packet for students have been created by Nature Vision, an environmental education nonprofit organization that brings programming to schools and local greenspaces for over 70,000 PreK-12th grade students each year in King and Snohomish Counties. This curriculum is designed to foster an understanding of the importance of water and its integral role in supporting life and shaping our planet. Packets can be completed by students either independently from home, or with the help of an adult caregiver. Materials for each day of the week build on the previous days’ learning by offering a variety of activities that involve art, writing, and safe field exploration. These materials are provided to you by Cascade Water Alliance (Cascade). Cascade wants everyone to understand the importance of conserving and protecting our limited water resources. Cascade supports Nature Vision in the development and delivery of water education programs and we are happy to offer these materials to our friends in the community. Learn more about Cascade at cascadewater.org. This unit supports NGSS Performance Expectations across various disciplines, as well as supporting K-12 Integrated Environmental and Sustainability Standards. These are listed at the bottom of this page. Teachers will be supplied with PDF formats of materials to be emailed to families, or printed and sent to students to complete at home. In this packet, students will learn about salmon as a keystone species before seeing the key role salmon play in the energy transfer within complex food webs.
    [Show full text]
  • Concepts of Keystone Species and Species Importance in Ecology
    250 Journal of Forestry Research, 12(4): 250-252 (2001) Concepts of keystone species and species importance in ecology LU Zhao-hua (Institute of Restoration Ecology, Chinese University of Mining and Technology, Beijing 100083, P. R. China) MA Ling, GOU Qing-xi (Academy of Forest Resources and Environment, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, P. R. China) Abstract: This paper discussed the keystone species concept and introduced the typical characteristics of keystone species and their identification in communities or ecosystems. Based on the research of the keystone species, the concept of species importance (SI) was first advanced in this paper. The species importance can be simply understood as the important value of species in the ecosystem, which consists of three indexes: species structural important value (SIV), functional important value (FIV) and dynamical important value (DIV). With the indexes, the evaluation was also made on species importance of arbor trees in the Three-Hardwood forests (Fraxinus mandshurica, Juglans mandshurica, and Phellodendron amurense) ecosystem. Key words: Species importance; Keystone species; Structural important value; Functional important value; Dynamical important value CLC number: $718.5 Document code: A Article ID: 1007-662X(2001)04-0250-03 Introduction Concept of keystone species Keystone species concept has been focused by ecolo- The term of keystone species was first introduced by gists and conservation biologists since its introduction by Robert T. Pain in 1969, and originally applied to a top Robert T. Pain in 1969. By now, however, identification of predator. The keystone species was defined as: The spe- the keystone species in communities or ecosystems is not cies composition and physical appearance in a community effective, especially in nature, for example, in forests and or ecosystem were greatly modified by the activities of a grasslands, even in a functional group.
    [Show full text]
  • Determination of Keystone Species in CSM Food Web: a Topological Analysis of Network Structure
    Network Biology, 2015, 5(1): 13-33 Article Determination of keystone species in CSM food web: A topological analysis of network structure LiQin Jiang1, WenJun Zhang1,2 1School of Life Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China 2International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Hong Kong E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Received 20 August 2014; Accepted 28 September 2014; Published online 1 March 2015 Abstract The importance of a species is correlated with its topological properties in a food web. Studies of keystone species provide the valuable theory and evidence for conservation ecology, biodiversity, habitat management, as well as the dynamics and stability of the ecosystem. Comparing with biological experiments, network methods based on topological structure possess particular advantage in the identification of keystone species. In present study, we quantified the relative importance of species in Carpinteria Salt Marsh food web by analyzing five centrality indices. The results showed that there were large differences in rankings species in terms of different centrality indices. Moreover, the correlation analysis of those centralities was studied in order to enhance the identifying ability of keystone species. The results showed that the combination of degree centrality and closeness centrality could better identify keystone species, and the keystone species in the CSM food web were identified as, Stictodora hancocki, small cyathocotylid, Pygidiopsoides spindalis, Phocitremoides ovale and Parorchis
    [Show full text]
  • Trophic Cascades, Habitat Fragmentation and Climate Change, the Need to Reconnect, Rewild and Restore Terrestrial Landscapes Keith Bowers, Biohabitats, Inc
    Reconnect, Rewild & Restore Trophic Cascades, Habitat Fragmentation and Climate Change, the Need to Reconnect, Rewild and Restore Terrestrial Landscapes Keith Bowers, Biohabitats, Inc. CEER 2014 Photograph Courtesy; All About Reconnect, Rewild & Restore UN, IUCN, CBD, Ramsar, World Bank US Ecosystem Restoration Top 10 large ecosystem restoration Great Lakes efforts in the US; Chesapeake Bay Puget Sound • encompassing 27 states Missouri River • affecting 125+ million people (45% Upper Mississippi of US population San Francisco Bay Delta • Investing $100b over a 25-50 yrs Florida Everglades Ohio River New York Harbor Lower Columbia Louisiana Coastal Reconnect, Rewild & Restore The one process now going on that will take millions of years to correct is the loss of genetic and species diversity by the destruction of natural habitats. This is the folly our descendants are least likely to forgive us. Edward O. Wilson, Biophilia, 1984, p, 121 Reconnect, Rewild & Restore OR-7 – A Lone Wolf's Story (AP Photo/Mail Tribune, via Allen Daniels, File) The Associated Press Reconnect, Rewild & Restore Cry wolf Reconnect, Rewild & Restore California DFG Compilation Historic Grey Wolf Range Reconnect, Rewild & Restore Center for Biological Diversity Reconnect, Rewild & Restore Reconnect, Rewild & Restore Reconnect, Rewild & Restore Reconnect, Rewild & Restore Reconnect, Rewild & Restore Habitat fragmentation Reconnect, Rewild & Restore Habitat to Nowhere Reconnect, Rewild & Restore Reconnect, Rewild & Restore Lost Creek Mt. Evans Wilderness Indian Wilderness Peaks Wilderness Rocky Mtn Nat’l Park Smaller the patch = higher and faster the rate of extinction Reconnect, Rewild & Restore Core Design Principles A Guide to Urban Habitat Conservation Planning Fig. 1. An experimentally isolated forest fragment in central Amazonia, part of the Thomas G.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6 – Reading Questions
    Chapter 6 – Reading Questions 1. Fill in 5 key events in the re-establishment of the New England forest in the Opening Story: 1. Farmers 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Broadleaf begin forest re- leaving established 2. Distinguish between each level of analysis: What does this level consist of? What do scientists study at this level? Individual Population All the individuals of a single species living in a given area at one time Community Ecosystem Flows of energy and matter or a large scale (ex: the cycling of C/N/P/H 2O in a lake) Biosphere 3. Which level of analysis would be most appropriate for a scientist to use in each scenario? i. Monitoring the Grey Wolves of Yosemite ii. Investigating the connections among organisms in a soil sample iii. Determining whether or not natural selection favors light or dark coloration in mice iv. Evaluating the status of the Florida Everglades 4. How does the Opening Story demonstrate the importance of community-level analysis and interactions between species? 5. When considering a population as a system, what 2 processes are inputs that increase population size and what 2 processes are outputs that decrease population size? Input 1: Output 1: Input 2: Output 2: 6. Five major characteristics help us understand how populations change over time: Why is this factor How c ould this factor apply to the New important? England forest in the Opening Story? Population Size Population Density Population Distribution Population Sex Ratio Ecologists may study the percentage of female Microrhopala vittata beetles Population Age Structure Determines future growth potential (via individuals of reproductive age) 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Elevated CO2 on Keystone Herbivores in Modern Arctic Ecosystems
    McWilliams and Leafloor Elevated CO2 and arctic ecosystems Effects of elevated CO2 on keystone herbivores in modern arctic ecosystems Scott R. McWilliams Dept. Natural Resources Science 105 Coastal Institute in Kingston University of Rhode Island Kingston, RI 02881 U.S.A James O. Leafloor1 Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources P.O. Box 730, 2 Third Ave. Cochrane, Ontario P0L 1C0 Canada 1Present address: Canadian Wildlife Service, Suite 150, 123 Main Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3C 4W2 Full citation: McWilliams, S.R. and J.O. Leafloor. 2003. Effects of elevated CO2 on keystone herbivores in modern arctic ecosystems. Pp. 00-00. In: J. Ehleringer, T. Cerling, and D. Dearing (eds) A history of atmospheric CO2 and its effects on plants, animals, and ecosystems. Springer-Verlag. 1 McWilliams and Leafloor Elevated CO2 and arctic ecosystems “Current atmospheric CO2 enrichment represents a dietary change of the biosphere not precedented in the past 0.5 million years.” (Korner 2000) A central theme of this chapter is that elevated atmospheric CO2 will directly alter growth and nutrient quality of arctic plants as well as indirectly change climate especially at high latitudes. Determining how this environmental change will affect arctic ecosystems requires an understanding of the physiological ecology of arctic biota as well as the strength and nature of biotic interactions. For example, changes in plant abundance and quality associated with elevated atmospheric CO2 could negatively affect herbivores and so alter the competitive interplay between species and thus the ecological community. Since much has recently been written about the effect of elevated CO2 on the physiology and ecology of arctic plant communities (Chapin et al.
    [Show full text]