A major challenge in ecology is to understand determinants of ecosystem functioning and stability in the face of disturbance. Some important species can strongly shape community structure and ecosystem functioning, but their impacts and interactions on ecosystem-level responses to disturbance are less well known. Shallow ponds provide a model system in which to study the effects of such species because some taxa mitigate transitions between alternative ecosystem states caused by eutrophication. We performed pond experiments to test how two foundation species (a macrophyte and a mussel) affected the biomass of planktonic primary producers and its stability in response to nutrient additions. Individually, each species reduced phytoplankton biomass and tended to increase rates of recovery from disturbance, but together the species reversed these effects, particularly with larger nutrient additions. This reversal was mediated by high cyanobacterial dominance of the community and a resulting loss of trait evenness. Effects of the foundation species on primary producer biomass were associated with effects on other ecosystem properties, including turbidity and dissolved oxygen. Our work highlights the important role of foundation species and their interactive effects in determining responses of ecosystem functioning to disturbance.

Eutrophication is a persistent threat to aquatic ecosystems worldwide. Foundation species, namely those that play a central role in the structuring of communities and functioning of ecosystems, are likely important for the resilience of aquatic ecosystems in the face of disturbance. However, little is known about how interactions among such species influence ecosystem responses to nutrient perturbation. Here, using an array (N = 20) of outdoor experimental pond ecosystems (15,000 L), we manipulated the presence of two foundation species, the macrophyte Myriophyllum spicatum and the mussel Dreissena polymorpha, and quantified ecosystem responses to multiple nutrient disturbances, spread over two years. In the first year, we added five nutrient pulses, ramping up from 10 to 50 μg P/L over a 10‐week period from mid‐July to mid‐October, and in the second year, we added a single large pulse of 50 μg P/L in mid‐October. We used automated sondes to measure multiple ecosystems properties at high frequency (15‐minute intervals), including phytoplankton and dissolved organic matter fluorescence, and to model whole‐ecosystem metabolism. Overall, both foundation species strongly affected the ecosystem responses to nutrient perturbation, and, as expected, initially suppressed the increase in phytoplankton abundance following nutrient additions. However, when both species were present, phytoplankton biomass increased substantially relative to other treatment combinations: non‐additivity was evident for multiple ecosystem metrics following the nutrient perturbations in both years but was diminished in the intervening months between our perturbations. Overall, these results demonstrate how interactions between foundation species can cause surprisingly strong deviations from the expected responses of aquatic ecosystems to perturbations such as nutrient additions.

No abstract