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

Abstract

The cross-scale resilience model suggests that system-level ecological resilience emerges from the distribution of species' functions within and across the spatial and temporal scales of a system. It has provided a quantitative method for calculating the resilience of a given system and so has been a valuable contribution to a largely qualitative field. As it is currently laid out, the model accounts for the spatial and temporal scales at which environmental resources and species are present and the functional roles species play but does not inform us about how much resource is present or how much function is provided. In short, it does not account for abundance in the distribution of species and their functional roles within and across the scales of a system. We detail the ways in which we would expect species' abundance to be relevant to the cross-scale resilience model based on the extensive abundance literature in ecology. We also put forward a series of testable hypotheses that would improve our ability to anticipate and quantify how resilience is generated, and how ecosystems will (or will not) buffer recent rapid global changes. This stream of research may provide an improved foundation for the quantitative evaluation of ecological resilience.

Operationalizing Ecological Resilience Concepts for Managing Species and Ecosystems at Risk

“…Resilience is posited to derive, in part, from the distribution of species diversity within and across scales (and in particular, the diversity of functional traits; Peterson et al, 1998). Ecological systems can often compensate for the loss or population reduction of single species, though resilience may be diminished (Sundstrom and Allen, 2014;Sundstrom et al, 2018).…”

“…Including different taxa with varying affinities to the ecosystems within the system, spatial requirements, and sensitivities to the predominant disturbances may help identify the causes of change more precisely and limit errors of interpretation. The increasing availability of data, statistical tools, and comprehensive models relating species to resilience supports multi-species approaches (Sundstrom et al, 2018).…”

Discontinuity Analysis Reveals Alternative Community Regimes During Phytoplankton Succession

“…The evaluation of cross-scale structure has been originally based on animal body sizes (Holling, 1992). More recently it has been extended to a broader discontinuity framework that accounts for abundances in ecological studies Sundstrom et al, 2018) and that accommodates metrics from non-ecological systems (e.g., city size: Garmestani et al, 2008). There is also evidence that plankton studies based on body mass of single species and biovolume of populations give similar results (Baho et al, 2015).…”

“…Patterns of discrete size structures of organisms in communities are related to a number of abiotic and biotic factors that operate across distinct scales of space and time; that is, they reflect the hierarchical organization of ecosystems (Nash et al, 2014;Sundstrom et al, 2018). This is due to competitive interactions and behavioral, life-history, and morphological adaptations to resources (e.g., food and shelter) that prevail at each scale (Holling, 1992;Segura et al, 2013).…”

“…For instance, an elephant and an ant in a savannah interact with and exploit very different scales in the system. The discrete size structure within communities, also referred to as cross-scale structure (Sundstrom et al, 2018), has been suggested to serve as a surrogate of resilience in ecosystems , and other complex systems (Sundstrom et al, 2014). This is due to the ability of one scale (discrete size structure) in the system being able to buffer against disturbances at other scales as a function of their functional trait characteristics and diversity .…”