Cargando…

Species richness response to human pressure hides important assemblage transformations

Human activities’ negative impact on biodiversity is undisputed, but debate remains vivid on their effect on species richness, a key index in ecology and conservation. While some studies suggest that species richness declines with human pressure, others show that it can be insensitive or even respon...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Cazalis, Victor
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: National Academy of Sciences 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9171506/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35500119
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2107361119
_version_ 1784721682104057856
author Cazalis, Victor
author_facet Cazalis, Victor
author_sort Cazalis, Victor
collection PubMed
description Human activities’ negative impact on biodiversity is undisputed, but debate remains vivid on their effect on species richness, a key index in ecology and conservation. While some studies suggest that species richness declines with human pressure, others show that it can be insensitive or even respond positively to some human pressure, because some species (“losers”) are replaced by others (“winners”). However, many winners are favored by intermediate pressure but decline when pressure becomes too high, and we can thus expect species richness to decline above a certain human pressure. Analyzing eBird data in tropical forests, I find that, under a certain threshold, increasing human footprint causes important composition changes, with losers (habitat specialist, endemic, sensitive, and threatened species) being replaced by winners (habitat non-specialist, large-range, human-tolerant, anthropophilic, and non-native species), resulting in a slight increase in species richness. Above this threshold though, richness in winners stops increasing (except for anthropophilic and non-native species), leading to a steep decline in overall species richness. I find that the shape of species richness response to human footprint varies between regions (comparing results from the North America Breeding Bird Survey, PREDICTS database, and eBird data across eight biodiversity hotspots) and identify five different trajectories in species richness response to human pressure. I suggest that they can be classified depending on their slope and monotony in the “replace then remove framework,” unifying contradictory effects of human pressure on species richness.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9171506
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher National Academy of Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91715062022-11-02 Species richness response to human pressure hides important assemblage transformations Cazalis, Victor Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Biological Sciences Human activities’ negative impact on biodiversity is undisputed, but debate remains vivid on their effect on species richness, a key index in ecology and conservation. While some studies suggest that species richness declines with human pressure, others show that it can be insensitive or even respond positively to some human pressure, because some species (“losers”) are replaced by others (“winners”). However, many winners are favored by intermediate pressure but decline when pressure becomes too high, and we can thus expect species richness to decline above a certain human pressure. Analyzing eBird data in tropical forests, I find that, under a certain threshold, increasing human footprint causes important composition changes, with losers (habitat specialist, endemic, sensitive, and threatened species) being replaced by winners (habitat non-specialist, large-range, human-tolerant, anthropophilic, and non-native species), resulting in a slight increase in species richness. Above this threshold though, richness in winners stops increasing (except for anthropophilic and non-native species), leading to a steep decline in overall species richness. I find that the shape of species richness response to human footprint varies between regions (comparing results from the North America Breeding Bird Survey, PREDICTS database, and eBird data across eight biodiversity hotspots) and identify five different trajectories in species richness response to human pressure. I suggest that they can be classified depending on their slope and monotony in the “replace then remove framework,” unifying contradictory effects of human pressure on species richness. National Academy of Sciences 2022-05-02 2022-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9171506/ /pubmed/35500119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2107361119 Text en Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by PNAS https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Biological Sciences
Cazalis, Victor
Species richness response to human pressure hides important assemblage transformations
title Species richness response to human pressure hides important assemblage transformations
title_full Species richness response to human pressure hides important assemblage transformations
title_fullStr Species richness response to human pressure hides important assemblage transformations
title_full_unstemmed Species richness response to human pressure hides important assemblage transformations
title_short Species richness response to human pressure hides important assemblage transformations
title_sort species richness response to human pressure hides important assemblage transformations
topic Biological Sciences
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9171506/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35500119
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2107361119
work_keys_str_mv AT cazalisvictor speciesrichnessresponsetohumanpressurehidesimportantassemblagetransformations