Community- and ecosystem-level effects of multiple environmental change drivers

Beyond null model testing

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Understanding the joint effect of multiple drivers of environmental change is a key scientific challenge. The dominant approach today is to compare observed joint effects with predictions from various types of null models. Drivers are said to combine synergistically (antagonistically) when their observed joint effect is larger (smaller) than that predicted by the null model. Here, I argue that this approach does not promote understanding of effects on important community- and ecosystem-level variables such as biodiversity and ecosystem function. I use ecological theory to show that different mechanisms can lead to the same deviation from a null model's prediction. Inversely, I show that the same mechanism can lead to different deviations from a null model's prediction. These examples illustrate that it is not possible to make strong mechanistic inferences from null models. Next, I present an alternative framework to study such effects. This framework makes a clear distinction between two different kinds of drivers (resource ratio shifts and multiple stressors) and integrates both by incorporating stressor effects into resource uptake theory. I show that this framework can advance understanding because of three reasons. First, it forces formalization of “multiple stressors,” using factors that describe the number and kind of stressors, their selectivity and dynamic behaviour, and the initial trait diversity and tolerance among species. Second, it produces testable predictions on how these factors affect biodiversity and ecosystem function, alone and in combination with resource ratio shifts. Third, it can fail in informative ways. That is, its assumptions are clear, so that different kinds of deviations between predictions and observed effects can guide new experiments and theory improvement. I conclude that this framework will more effectively progress understanding of global change effects on communities and ecosystems than does the current practice of null model testing.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)5021-5030
Number of pages10
JournalGlobal Change Biology
Volume24
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2018

Fingerprint

Ecosystems
environmental change
ecosystem
Testing
Biodiversity
prediction
ecosystem function
resource
biodiversity
ecological theory
effect
global change
tolerance
Experiments
experiment

Keywords

  • community ecology
  • ecosystems
  • environmental stress
  • eutrophication
  • multiple stressors
  • resource-ratio theory
  • theoretical ecology
  • traits

Cite this

@article{9ba3059da0e14ccc930f833e6ad111b6,
title = "Community- and ecosystem-level effects of multiple environmental change drivers: Beyond null model testing",
abstract = "Understanding the joint effect of multiple drivers of environmental change is a key scientific challenge. The dominant approach today is to compare observed joint effects with predictions from various types of null models. Drivers are said to combine synergistically (antagonistically) when their observed joint effect is larger (smaller) than that predicted by the null model. Here, I argue that this approach does not promote understanding of effects on important community- and ecosystem-level variables such as biodiversity and ecosystem function. I use ecological theory to show that different mechanisms can lead to the same deviation from a null model's prediction. Inversely, I show that the same mechanism can lead to different deviations from a null model's prediction. These examples illustrate that it is not possible to make strong mechanistic inferences from null models. Next, I present an alternative framework to study such effects. This framework makes a clear distinction between two different kinds of drivers (resource ratio shifts and multiple stressors) and integrates both by incorporating stressor effects into resource uptake theory. I show that this framework can advance understanding because of three reasons. First, it forces formalization of “multiple stressors,” using factors that describe the number and kind of stressors, their selectivity and dynamic behaviour, and the initial trait diversity and tolerance among species. Second, it produces testable predictions on how these factors affect biodiversity and ecosystem function, alone and in combination with resource ratio shifts. Third, it can fail in informative ways. That is, its assumptions are clear, so that different kinds of deviations between predictions and observed effects can guide new experiments and theory improvement. I conclude that this framework will more effectively progress understanding of global change effects on communities and ecosystems than does the current practice of null model testing.",
keywords = "community ecology, ecosystems, environmental stress, eutrophication, multiple stressors, resource-ratio theory, theoretical ecology, traits",
author = "{De Laender}, Frederik",
year = "2018",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/gcb.14382",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "5021--5030",
journal = "Global Change Biology",
issn = "1354-1013",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "11",

}

Community- and ecosystem-level effects of multiple environmental change drivers : Beyond null model testing. / De Laender, Frederik.

In: Global Change Biology, Vol. 24, No. 11, 01.11.2018, p. 5021-5030.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Community- and ecosystem-level effects of multiple environmental change drivers

T2 - Beyond null model testing

AU - De Laender, Frederik

PY - 2018/11/1

Y1 - 2018/11/1

N2 - Understanding the joint effect of multiple drivers of environmental change is a key scientific challenge. The dominant approach today is to compare observed joint effects with predictions from various types of null models. Drivers are said to combine synergistically (antagonistically) when their observed joint effect is larger (smaller) than that predicted by the null model. Here, I argue that this approach does not promote understanding of effects on important community- and ecosystem-level variables such as biodiversity and ecosystem function. I use ecological theory to show that different mechanisms can lead to the same deviation from a null model's prediction. Inversely, I show that the same mechanism can lead to different deviations from a null model's prediction. These examples illustrate that it is not possible to make strong mechanistic inferences from null models. Next, I present an alternative framework to study such effects. This framework makes a clear distinction between two different kinds of drivers (resource ratio shifts and multiple stressors) and integrates both by incorporating stressor effects into resource uptake theory. I show that this framework can advance understanding because of three reasons. First, it forces formalization of “multiple stressors,” using factors that describe the number and kind of stressors, their selectivity and dynamic behaviour, and the initial trait diversity and tolerance among species. Second, it produces testable predictions on how these factors affect biodiversity and ecosystem function, alone and in combination with resource ratio shifts. Third, it can fail in informative ways. That is, its assumptions are clear, so that different kinds of deviations between predictions and observed effects can guide new experiments and theory improvement. I conclude that this framework will more effectively progress understanding of global change effects on communities and ecosystems than does the current practice of null model testing.

AB - Understanding the joint effect of multiple drivers of environmental change is a key scientific challenge. The dominant approach today is to compare observed joint effects with predictions from various types of null models. Drivers are said to combine synergistically (antagonistically) when their observed joint effect is larger (smaller) than that predicted by the null model. Here, I argue that this approach does not promote understanding of effects on important community- and ecosystem-level variables such as biodiversity and ecosystem function. I use ecological theory to show that different mechanisms can lead to the same deviation from a null model's prediction. Inversely, I show that the same mechanism can lead to different deviations from a null model's prediction. These examples illustrate that it is not possible to make strong mechanistic inferences from null models. Next, I present an alternative framework to study such effects. This framework makes a clear distinction between two different kinds of drivers (resource ratio shifts and multiple stressors) and integrates both by incorporating stressor effects into resource uptake theory. I show that this framework can advance understanding because of three reasons. First, it forces formalization of “multiple stressors,” using factors that describe the number and kind of stressors, their selectivity and dynamic behaviour, and the initial trait diversity and tolerance among species. Second, it produces testable predictions on how these factors affect biodiversity and ecosystem function, alone and in combination with resource ratio shifts. Third, it can fail in informative ways. That is, its assumptions are clear, so that different kinds of deviations between predictions and observed effects can guide new experiments and theory improvement. I conclude that this framework will more effectively progress understanding of global change effects on communities and ecosystems than does the current practice of null model testing.

KW - community ecology

KW - ecosystems

KW - environmental stress

KW - eutrophication

KW - multiple stressors

KW - resource-ratio theory

KW - theoretical ecology

KW - traits

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053229258&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/gcb.14382

DO - 10.1111/gcb.14382

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 5021

EP - 5030

JO - Global Change Biology

JF - Global Change Biology

SN - 1354-1013

IS - 11

ER -