A promising future for integrative biodiversity research: an increased role of scale-dependency and functional biology

Abstract

One contribution of 11 to a theme issue 'The regulators of biodiversity in deep time'. Studies into the complex interaction between an organism and changes to its biotic and abiotic environment are fundamental to understanding what regulates biodiversity. These investigations occur at many phylogenetic, temporal and spatial scales and within a variety of biological and geological disciplines but often in relative isolation. This issue focuses on what can be achieved when ecological mechanisms are integrated into analyses of deep-time biodiversity patterns through the union of fossil and extant data and methods. We expand upon this perspective to argue that, given its direct relevance to the current biodiversity crisis, greater integration is needed across biodiversity research. We focus on the need to understand scaling effects, how lower-level ecological and evolutionary processes scale up and vice versa, and the importance of incorporating functional biology. Placing function at the core of biodiversity research is fundamental, as it establishes how an organism interacts with its abiotic and biotic environment and it is functional diversity that ultimately determines important ecosystem processes. To achieve full integration, concerted and ongoing efforts are needed to build a united and interactive community of biodiversity researchers, with education and interdisciplinary training at its heart.

The challenges to inferring the regulators of biodiversity in deep time

“…[137, p. 245] The challenge is not to find a dynamic signature of ecological interactions in macroevolutionary dynamics, but rather to isolate a particular generating mechanism from the many sources of bias, the role of random chance and the disparity of potential outcomes. Continued dialogue and ever-closer union of fossil and modern approaches will prove essential in maintaining this momentum [138]. Concluding this volume, Price et al [138] extend the argument that morphological traits 'bind the past and present together' [121] to an explicitly functional context, arguing that this focus alongside greater integration across biodiversity research silos will enable scientists to better understand how lower level ecological and evolutionary processes scale up and down.…”

On-Board Video Recording Unravels Bird Behavior and Mortality Produced by High-Speed Trains

“…Added to these resources, would be preparation time for field material and datasets (total of around 24 person-days). In short, on-board recording systems can enable much more efficient data collection than traditional methods based on direct personal observation (83 vs. 216 person-days in this example), underscoring the current trend of increasing reliance on information technology for ecological studies (Tomkiewicz et al, 2010;Galliard et al, 2012;Gurarie et al, 2016;Price and Schmitz, 2016). In our case, automation not only saved labor costs but also enabled us to broaden the study beyond what is possible with direct fieldwork to the more than 300 km that comprise the entire rail line.…”

Understanding ecological change across large spatial, temporal and taxonomic scales: integrating data and methods in light of theory

“…We are far from the first to discuss integration among approaches in community ecology (Beck et al 2012, Fritz et al 2013, Price and Schmitz 2016, Pearse et al 2018). Our perspective on integration is guided by recent progress towards a unified theory of ecological communities (Vellend 2010, Leibold and Chase 2018; see also Pásztor et al 2016, Worm andTittensor 2018) and our view is that one of the major barriers to integration is conceptual: the seemingly intractable disparity and complexity -in processes, data and methods -that underlies ecological systems at large spatial, temporal and taxonomic scales.…”

“…Discussion of integration among ecological data sources and methods has generally focused on how integration may elucidate the general processes underlying assemblage dynamics (Cavender-Bares et al 2009, Beck et al 2012, Fritz et al 2013, Price and Schmitz 2016, Pearse et al 2018. While this focus has led to the consensus that integration is a key step, it has been less successful at providing conceptual and practical ways in which integration among different spatiotemporal data sources and methods can be implemented.…”

“…Ultimately, the main obstacle for both pattern-first and process-first approaches to macroecology has been the inability to examine patterns and processes across the entirety of spatial and temporal scales relevant to understanding assemblage changes (Levin 2012, Leibold andChase 2018). Today, the availability of ecological data from disparate ecological sub-disciplines across spatial and temporal scales is increasing and a panoply of novel analytical methods have been developed to make use of these data; yet, the inability to fully integrate data and methods from different sub-disciplines remains a major obstacle to understanding the spatiotemporal dynamics of assemblages (Price and Schmitz 2016).…”