Extirpation‐resistant species do not always compensate for the decline in ecosystem processes associated with biodiversity loss

Abstract

Summary 1.Accelerating rates of biodiversity loss may result in a rapid decline in important ecosystem processes such as carbon capture. Whether extirpation-resistant species compensate for the decline in ecosystem processes associated with the loss of extirpation-prone species is poorly understood. 2. We apply a novel approach to answer this question using an assemblage of salt marsh plants. First, manipulations were performed to simulate a realistic sequence of species loss, based on observed sensitivity to disturbance. Then, changes in biomass and primary production of extirpationresistant species were monitored over three consecutive growing seasons. 3. Extirpation-resistant species did not compensate for the loss of either biomass or primary production associated with the removal of extirpation-prone species. 4. Factors that determine the potential for compensation within ecosystems are discussed. These include resource-regulated compensation rates, the level of functional redundancy within an assemblage and the extirpation resistance of species which possess good compensation traits. 5. Synthesis. These results suggest that we cannot assume extirpation-resistant species will compensate for the decline in ecosystem processes associated with biodiversity loss across all ecosystems. Understanding those factors that influence the ability of ecosystems to compensate for declines in ecosystem processes associated with biodiversity loss constitutes a significant challenge.

Ocean Sprawl: Challenges and Opportunities for Biodiversity Management In A Changing World

“…Similarly, human-mediated removal of macroalgal debris and its use as fertilizer has led to soil formation and stabilization of dune systems, creating the characteristic 'machair' systems of the western coast of Ireland and the Scottish Outer Hebrides (Owen et al 2001, Kent et al 2003, Doody 2013. Conversely, there is also some evidence that deposited seaweed can have an impact on salt marshes, leading to mortality of some species (Davies et al 2011(Davies et al , 2012, perhaps compromising their role in attenuation of waves and stabilization of sediments.…”

Defaunation leads to interaction deficits, not interaction compensation, in an island seed dispersal network

“…Still, these data provide limited inferences for the prevalence or mechanism of interaction compensation because compensation involves the alteration of remaining interactions in response to the loss of other interactions, and such dynamics cannot be measured via observing a species’ realized niche in a single intact community (Brodie, ; Kurten, ). Data from controlled mesocosms and small‐scale experiments (e.g., Brosi & Briggs, ; Davies, Jenkins, Kingham, Hawkins, & Hiddink, ; Fründ, Dormann, Holzschuh, & Tscharntke, ; Stachowicz & Whitlatch, ) also suggest complementarity, but overlook potential abundance or per capita responses to mutualism disruption that may occur at larger spatial or temporal scales. An alternative and practical approach for assessing compensation at ecosystem scales are “accidental experiments” caused by unintentional mutualism disruption in space or time (HilleRisLambers et al., ).…”

The distribution and role of functional abundance in cross‐scale resilience

“…There are, however, two important limitations with regard to the capacity of a community to show compensation (Kremen , Davies et al. ). The first is that the substitutability of species is imperfect and may be especially limited when quantifying the amount of function.…”

“…It was not until a new species of similar size to the kangaroo rat colonized 18 yr later that those resources were once again used at a rate comparable to when the kangaroo rat was present. There are, however, two important limitations with regard to the capacity of a community to show compensation (Kremen 2005, Davies et al 2012). The first is that the substitutability of species is imperfect and may be especially limited when quantifying the amount of function.…”