Dynamic Interactions of Life and Its Landscape: Feedbacks at the Interface of Geomorphology and Ecology
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EARTH SURFACE PROCESSES AND LANDFORMS Earth Surf. Process. Landforms 35, 78–101 (2010) Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/esp.1912 State of Science Dynamic interactions of life and its landscape: feedbacks at the interface of geomorphology and ecology Liam Reinhardt1*, Douglas Jerolmack2, Brad J. Cardinale3, Veerle Vanacker4 and Justin Wright5 1 University of Exeter. 2 University of Pennsylvania. 3 University of California, Santa Barbara. 4 University of Louvain. 5 Duke University Received 13 May 2009; 7 August 2009; 17 August 2009 *Correspondence to: L. Reinhardt, University of Exeter, full address. Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT: There appears to be no single axis of causality between life and its landscape, but rather, each exerts a simultane- ous infl uence on the other over a wide range of temporal and spatial scales. These infl uences occur through feedbacks of differing strength and importance with co-evolution representing the tightest coupling between biological and geomorphological systems. The ongoing failure to incorporate these dynamic bio-physical interactions with human activity in landscape studies limits our ability to predict the response of landscapes to human disturbance and climate change. This limitation is a direct result of the poor communication between the ecological and geomorphological communities and consequent paucity of interdisciplinary research. Recognition of this failure led to the organization of the Meeting of Young Researchers in Earth Science (MYRES) III, titled ‘Dynamic Interactions of Life and its Landscape’. This paper synthesizes and expands upon key issues and fi ndings from that meeting, to help chart a course for future collaboration among Earth surface scientists and ecologists: it represents the con- sensus view of a competitively selected group of 77 early-career researchers. Two broad themes that serve to focus and motivate future research are identifi ed: (1) co-evolution of landforms and biological communities; and (2) humans as modifi ers of the landscape (through direct and indirect actions). Also outlined are the state of the art in analytical, experimental and modelling techniques in ecological and geomorphological research, and novel new research avenues that combine these techniques are suggested. It is hoped that this paper will serve as an interdisciplinary reference for geomorphologists and ecologists looking to learn more about the other fi eld. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Introduction recent decades researchers have returned to early views about bio-physical interactions, and have begun to show in detail how The predominant view in many fi elds of natural science organisms not only respond to their physical environment, but has long been that biology is an epiphenomenon of the also directly modify and control their physical environment in physical environment. A cursory look at textbooks in biology, ways that promote their own persistence. Entire bodies of research geology, chemistry, and others reveals the vast number of para- such as biogeomorphology (Viles, 1988), ‘ecological stoichiom- digms that are founded on the idea that the abundance, biomass, etry’ (Sterner and Elser, 2002), ‘ecosystem engineering’ (Jones et and distribution of organisms on the planet is dependent upon al., 1994), and ‘biodiversity and ecosystem functioning’ (Loreau spatial and temporal variation in physical processes, which con- et al., 2002) have emerged to illustrate how the numbers and strain where life can exist and how much life can exist. This view types of plants and animals that inhabit an ecosystem can directly has been prominent for many decades despite an earlier recogni- control the fl uxes of energy and matter that underlie biogeo- tion within the natural sciences that life and its landscape are chemical cycles, gas fl uxes, sediment transport, and the forma- intimately related through ‘interactions between the organic and tion of new physical habitat. Complimentary developments in inorganic’ (Darwin, 1881; Tansley, 1935). Although feedbacks the fi eld of ‘ecohydrology’ have also revealed numerous ways in were not forgotten entirely, they received much less attention which plants and animals can alter water fl ow paths and soil during the 20th century than many alternative topics, perhaps moisture/depth to the advantage of those species (McCarthy et because increasing specialization and disciplinary boundaries al., 1998; Rodriguez-Iturbe and Porporato, 2004; Yoo et al., minimized interactions among biologists and physical scientists 2005b; D’Odorico and Porporato, 2006; Tamea, 2007; (Renschler et al., 2007; Corenblit et al., 2008). However, in Muneepeerakul et al., 2008a, 2008b) DYNAMIC INTERACTIONS OF LIFE AND ITS LANDSCAPE 79 If physical processes drive ecosystem structure, while the phology. There are enormous benefi ts to be gained in integrat- evolving structure also modulates physical processes, then ing these ‘tools’ to answer some of society’s most pressing feedbacks between the two are likely to be important. issues. We present here an overview of some of the most However, not all bio-physical interactions will have a signifi - powerful and/or most underutilized techniques of which we cant effect upon landscape functioning and an extreme end- are aware. Numerical and physical modelling are discussed member exists where life is absent from a landscape; deciding in separate sub-sections due the scope and complexity of whether and where bio-physical feedbacks are important is a these topics. We hope that this overview and attendant bibli- key challenge. Abiotic landscapes must have existed on Earth ography will serve as a useful starting point for future interdis- prior to the colonization of land by plants during the Silurian ciplinary research. and they are currently observed on Mars (Dietrich and Perron, 2006; Corenblit and Steiger, 2009). The Earths terrestrial land- scape has undergone considerable modifi cation since the Silurian in conjunction with the evolution of terrestrial life; the Analytical tools for the fi eld and laboratory degree to which physical landscapes may co-evolve with bio- logical systems is discussed in detail in this paper. State of art It has proven diffi cult to incorporate bio-physical feedbacks Perhaps the most pervasive and most underutilized ‘toolbox’ into existing (numerical, physical and conceptual) models in currently available to ecologists and geomorphologists is that part because their importance depends upon the temporal of remote sensing. Remote sensing is a term which encom- (and likely spatial) scale under consideration (Schumm and passes both the science behind image acquisition hardware Lichty, 1965), and more importantly because such feedbacks and the subsequent processing of data supplied by those are likely to give rise to emergent behaviour that prevents the systems. A broad suite of systems and techniques are avail- use of simple ‘linearly additive’ models (Werner, 2003). Yet able, including: the need to make society-relevant predictions has never been more important. Climate models are now entering an era • ground-based, close range proximal sensing instruments where regional projections for temperature and rainfall such as hyperspectral spectroradiometers (Milton et al., in changes are possible (IPCC, 2007). Unfortunately, our models press) and high defi nition laser scanners (Wehr, 2008); for landscape evolution are not yet at this stage. What we need • airborne multispectral scanners, multispectral video is to develop a new set of conceptual as well as mathematical systems, thermal imaging sensors, aerial photography, light models of life–landscape coupling that can account for emer- detection and ranging (LiDAR) sensors (Lefsky et al., 2002), gent behaviour; fundamental science must be done to eluci- and side-looking airborne RADAR; date bio-physical coupling across a range of scales. To • spaceborne satellite systems, including nadir-viewing mul- advance this goal and to promote interdisciplinary research tispectral sensors, interferometric synthetic aperture RADAR efforts by ecologists and geomorphologists a group of early (InSAR) systems, and multiple view angle systems capable career scientists from around the world met at the third of capturing anisotropic signatures (Diner et al., 1998). Meeting of Young Researchers in Earth Science (MYRES III) at Tulane University in 2008: discussion revolved around the The repeat survey capabilities of new multi- and hyper- theme ‘Dynamic Interactions of Life and its Landscape’. spectral remotely sensed systems and missions can now be During the course of 4 days of discussion, 77 competitively- employed towards the assessment of landscape change over a selected international delegates explored several key areas for range of spatial and temporal scales. The Landsat series of future research: can one demonstrate a defi nite signature of satellites (Landsat 1 launched in 1972) can now provide up to life in landscape form? how does the functional diversity of 36 years of repeat-visit multi-spectral global coverage (Goward organisms infl uence and feed back on landscape change? and et al., 2001; Williams et al., 2006; Gillanders et al., 2008) and do the structures of landscapes and ecosystems co-evolve? In this long time series has benefi ted studies of vegetation change the following sections we expand upon these themes by iden- and ecological modelling (Cohen and Goward, 2004). Further