Termite activity and decomposition are influenced by digging mammal reintroductions along an aridity gradient

Coggan, Nicole; Hayward, Matt W.; Gibb, Heloise

doi:10.1016/j.jaridenv.2016.06.005

Cited by 23 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Further, before‐after sampling in reintroductions, invasions and extinctions is rare, so there is often no baseline for comparison; thus, knowledge of “appropriate” densities is limited (Verdon et al., ). The enormous effort required to conduct reintroductions also means that studies are often pseudoreplicated and rely on large sample sizes that are unlikely to be truly independent (Hurlbert, ; but see Coggan et al., for an example of true replication at the appropriate scale), (Appendix S4).…”

Section: What Are the Primary Methods Used To Examine Engineer Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most research was conducted at the microhabitat scale (areas or distances <5 m 2 , 56%), followed by macrohabitat (patch, up to 1 km or 100 ha, 15%), and landscape‐scale studies (>1 km or 100 ha, 11%), (Figure b). Observations that encompass broader landscape scales are challenging to replicate, but they may reveal the importance of local context for engineering outcomes (Coggan et al., ). The majority of all research publications reported engineering impacts and interactions as snapshots in time (87% of studies), with very few studies tracking impacts or interactions across longer periods (13%) (Figure c; Ringler, Hödl & Ringler 2015).…”

Section: What Are the Primary Methods Used To Examine Engineer Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three of the eight species studied were reintroduced. Because these engineers were reintroduced after long periods of regional extinction, it was possible to observe how the presence of burrowing species not only facilitated the survival and establishment of other threatened species (Hayward et al., ), but was also strongly associated with changes in ground‐dwelling arthropod, fungal and microbial communities (Clarke et al., ; Eldridge et al., ; Silvey et al., ), and changes in abundance and behaviour that affected the function of other engineers (Coggan, Hayward, & Gibb, ). The role of all burrowing species (particularly vertebrates) in supporting diversity by providing shelter is reflected in observations globally (see reviews by Davidson et al., ; Root‐Bernstein & Ebensperger, ).…”

Section: What Are the Impacts Of Ecosystem Engineers In Terrestrial Hmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Authors of engineer reintroduction papers have suggested that a lack of species reintroduction sanctuaries necessitate single‐site studies (James & Eldridge, ). However multiple sanctuaries are available in similar biomes (e.g., dry/arid habitats), with one published study (Coggan et al., ) using multiple sanctuaries to replicate reintroduction impacts (Appendix S4), suggesting that spatial replication may be less prohibitive than perceived. Emerging evidence from reintroduction studies indicates that engineer species’ trophic roles may act in tandem with their engineering functions to influence community composition (Appendix S3, Clarke et al., ) and ecosystem processes (Appendix S4, Coggan et al., ).…”

Section: Future Directions and The Way Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However multiple sanctuaries are available in similar biomes (e.g., dry/arid habitats), with one published study (Coggan et al., ) using multiple sanctuaries to replicate reintroduction impacts (Appendix S4), suggesting that spatial replication may be less prohibitive than perceived. Emerging evidence from reintroduction studies indicates that engineer species’ trophic roles may act in tandem with their engineering functions to influence community composition (Appendix S3, Clarke et al., ) and ecosystem processes (Appendix S4, Coggan et al., ). These interactions cross over into trophic cascade research and are also relevant to co‐extinctions and translocations, as these can depend strongly on the densities of closely interacting species (Moir et al., ).…”

Section: Future Directions and The Way Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A global database and “state of the field” review of research into ecosystem engineering by land animals

Coggan

Hayward

Gibb

2018

Journal of Animal Ecology

Self Cite

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecosystem engineers have been widely studied for terrestrial systems, but global trends in research encompassing the range of taxa and functions have not previously been synthesised. We reviewed contemporary understanding of engineer fauna in terrestrial habitats and assessed the methods used to document patterns and processes, asking: (a) which species act as ecosystem engineers and with whom do they interact? (b) What are the impacts of ecosystem engineers in terrestrial habitats and how are they distributed? (c) What are the primary methods used to examine engineer effects and how have these developed over time? We considered the strengths, weaknesses and gaps in knowledge related to each of these questions and suggested a conceptual framework to delineate "significant impacts" of engineering interactions for all terrestrial animals. We collected peer-reviewed publications examining ecosystem engineer impacts and created a database of engineer species to assess experimental approaches and any additional covariates that influenced the magnitude of engineer impacts. One hundred and twenty-two species from 28 orders were identified as ecosystem engineers, performing five ecological functions. Burrowing mammals were the most researched group (27%). Half of all studies occurred in dry/arid habitats. Mensurative studies comparing sites with and without engineers (80%) were more common than manipulative studies (20%). These provided a broad framework for predicting engineer impacts upon abundance and species diversity. However, the roles of confounding factors, processes driving these patterns and the consequences of experimentally adjusting variables, such as engineer density, have been neglected. True spatial and temporal replication has also been limited, particularly for emerging studies of engineer reintroductions. Climate change and habitat modification will challenge the roles that engineers play in regulating ecosystems, and these will become important avenues for future research. We recommend future studies include simulation of engineer effects and experimental manipulation of engineer densities to determine the potential for ecological cascades through trophic and engineering pathways due to functional decline. We also recommend improving knowledge of long-term engineering effects and replication of engineer reintroductions across landscapes to better understand how large-scale ecological gradients alter the magnitude of engineering impacts.

show abstract

Section: What Are the Primary Methods Used To Examine Engineer Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: What Are the Primary Methods Used To Examine Engineer Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: What Are the Impacts Of Ecosystem Engineers In Terrestrial Hmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Future Directions and The Way Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Future Directions and The Way Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A global database and “state of the field” review of research into ecosystem engineering by land animals

Coggan

Hayward

Gibb

2018

Journal of Animal Ecology

Self Cite

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Rewilding soil and litter invertebrates and fungi increases decomposition rates and alters detritivore communities

Contos,

Murphy,

Kayll

et al. 2024

Ecology and Evolution

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Habitat degradation and associated reductions in ecosystem functions can be reversed by reintroducing or ‘rewilding’ keystone species. Rewilding projects have historically targeted restoration of processes such as grazing regimes or top‐down predation effects. Few projects focus on restoring decomposition efficiency, despite the pivotal role decomposition plays in global carbon sequestration and nutrient cycling. Here, we tested whether rewilding entire communities of detritivorous invertebrates and fungi can improve litter decomposition efficiency and restore detritivore communities during ecological restoration. Rewilding was conducted by transplanting leaf litter and soil, including associated invertebrate and fungal communities from species‐rich remnant sites into species‐poor, and geographically isolated, revegetated farmland sites in a temperate woodland region of southeastern Australia. We compared communities in sites under the following treatments: remnant (conservation area and source of litter transplant), rewilded revegetation (revegetated farmland site with litter transplant) and control revegetation (revegetated site, no transplant). In one ‘before’ and three ‘after’ sampling periods, we measured litter decomposition and the abundance and diversity of detritivorous invertebrates and fungi. We quantified the effect of detritivores on the rate of litter decomposition using piecewise Structural Equation Modelling. Decomposition was significantly faster in rewilding sites than in both control and remnant areas and was largely driven by a greater abundance of invertebrate detritivores. Similarly, the abundance of invertebrate detritivores in rewilding revegetation sites exceeded the level of remnant communities, whereas there was little difference between control and remnant sites. In contrast, rewilding did not increase saprotrophic fungi relative abundance/diversity and there was no strong relationship between decomposition and fungal diversity. Our findings suggest the relatively simple act of transplanting leaf litter and soil can increase functional efficiency during restoration and alter community composition. Our methods may prove important across a range of contexts where other restoration methods have failed to restore ecosystem processes to pre‐degradation levels.

show abstract

Experimental evidence for ecological cascades following threatened mammal reintroduction

Gibb

Silvey

Robinson

et al. 2020

Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Species extinction has reached unprecedented rates globally, and can cause unexpected ecological cascades. Since Europeans arrived in Australia, many endemic mammals have declined or become extinct, but their ecological roles and outcomes of their reintroduction for ecosystems are poorly understood. Using surveys and novel long‐term exclusion and disturbance experiments, we tested how digging mammal reintroduction affects predatory invertebrates. Mammal exclusion tended to decrease bare ground. Although scorpion burrow abundance increased with bare ground, mammals also had direct negative effects on scorpions. Increased disturbance alone decreased scorpion abundance, but other mechanisms, such as predation, also contributed to the mammal effect. Despite negative associations between scorpions and spiders, both groups increased and spider composition changed following mammal exclusion. Our long‐term research showed that threatened digging mammals drive ecosystem cascades, affecting biota through a variety of pathways. Reintroductions of locally extinct digging mammals can restore ecosystems, but ecosystem cascades may lead to unexpected restructuring.

show abstract

Termite activity and decomposition are influenced by digging mammal reintroductions along an aridity gradient

Cited by 23 publications

References 45 publications

A global database and “state of the field” review of research into ecosystem engineering by land animals

A global database and “state of the field” review of research into ecosystem engineering by land animals

Rewilding soil and litter invertebrates and fungi increases decomposition rates and alters detritivore communities

Experimental evidence for ecological cascades following threatened mammal reintroduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About