Peter Kareiva

The Importance of Species: Perspectives on Expendability and Triage

Contributors ix Preface xiii Foreword xv Part I: USING EXPERIMENTAL REMOVALS OF SPECIES TO REVEAL THE CONSEQUENCES OF BIODIVERSITY DEPLETION P. Kareiva and S. A. Levin 1 1. Native Thistles: Expendable or Integral to Ecosystem Resistance to Invasion? S. M. Louda and T. A. Rand 5 2. The Overriding Importance of Environmental Context in Determining the Outcome of Species-Deletion Experiments B. A. Menge 16 3. Species Importance and Context: Spatial and Temporal Variation in Species Interactions C.D.G. Harley 44 4. Effects of Removing a Vertebrate versus an Invertebrate Predator on a Food Web, and What Is Their Relative Importance? T. W. Schoener and D. A. Spiller 69 5. Understanding the Effects of Reduced Biodiversity: A Comparison of Two Approaches J. T. Wootton and A. L. Downing 85 Part II: THE ANTHROPOGENIC PERSPECTIVE P. Kareiva and S. A. Levin 105 6. Models of Ecosystem Reliability and Their Implications for the Question of Expendability S. Naeem 109 7. Predicting the Effects of Species Loss on Community Stability D. Doak and M. Marvier 140 8. One Fish, Two Fish, Old Fish, New Fish: Which Invasions Matter? J. L. Ruesink 161 9. Ecological Gambling: Expendable Extinctions Versus Acceptable Invasions M. J. Wonham 179 10. Rarity and Functional Importance in a Phytoplankton Community D. E. Schindler, G. C. Chang, S. Lubetkin, S.E.B. Abella, and W. T. Edmondson 206 11. Community and Ecosystem Impacts of Single-Species Extinctions D. Simberloff 221 Part III: LINKAGES AND EXTERNALITIES P. Kareiva and S. A. Levin 235 12. Social Conflict, Biological Ignorance, and Trying to Agree Which Species Are Expendable E. G. Leigh Jr. 239 13. Which Mutualists Are Most Essential? Buffering of Plant Reproduction against the Extinction of Pollinators W. F. Morris 260 14. The Expendability of Species: A Test Case Based on the Caterpillars on Goldenrods R. B. Root 281 15. An Evolutionary Perspective on the Importance of Species: Why Ecologists Care about Evolution S. R. Palumbi 292 16. Recovering Species of Conservation Concern-Are Populations Expendable? M. Ruckelshaus, P. McElhany, and M. J. Ford 305 17. Virus Specificity in Disease Systems: Are Species Redundant? A. G. Power and A. S. Flecker 330 Conclusion P. Kareiva and S. A. Levin 347 References 353 Index 415

Mapping the global potential for marine aquaculture

Marine aquaculture presents an opportunity for increasing seafood production in the face of growing demand for marine protein and limited scope for expanding wild fishery harvests. However, the global capacity for increased aquaculture production from the ocean and the relative productivity potential across countries are unknown. Here, we map the biological production potential for marine aquaculture across the globe using an innovative approach that draws from physiology, allometry and growth theory. Even after applying substantial constraints based on existing ocean uses and limitations, we find vast areas in nearly every coastal country that are suitable for aquaculture. The development potential far exceeds the space required to meet foreseeable seafood demand; indeed, the current total landings of all wild-capture fisheries could be produced using less than 0.015% of the global ocean area. This analysis demonstrates that suitable space is unlikely to limit marine aquaculture development and highlights the role that other factors, such as economics and governance, play in shaping growth trajectories. We suggest that the vast amount of space suitable for marine aquaculture presents an opportunity for countries to develop aquaculture in a way that aligns with their economic, environmental and social objectives.Marine aquaculture has the potential to improve food security. A global analysis shows that space in coastal areas is unlikely to limit the potential for aquaculture.

Society Is Ready for a New Kind of Science—Is Academia?

Society Is Ready for a New Kind of Science—Is Academia? Bonnie L. Keeler, Rebecca Chaplin-Kramer, Anne D. Guerry, Prue F. E. Addison, Charles Bettigole, Ingrid C. Burke, Brad Gentry, Lauren Chambliss, Carrie Young, Alexander J. Travis, Chris T. Darimont, Doria R. Gordon, Jessica Hellmann, Peter Kareiva, Steve Monfort, Lydia Olander, Tim Profeta, Hugh P. Possingham, Carissa Slotterback, Eleanor Sterling, Tamara Ticktin, and Bhaskar Vira July 2017

Beyond Resilience: How to Better Prepare for the Profound Disruption of the Anthropocene

Human activity is dramatically shaping all of Earths natural systems, producing unprecedented challenges for people and nature. Climate disruption, altered hydrology, and ecosystem degradation reflect both threats to human wellbeing and changes in the ‘rules of the game’ that make management difficult. While ecologists, conservationists and environmental scientists clamor for radical action to reverse these threats, their own management actions in response to climate are too often business as usual. I hypothesize that restrictive and often unspoken mental models of ecological and environmental science are robbing these managers and their institutions of the flexibility required to respond to the Anthropocenes uncertain changes. The three most profound mental traps are: (1) an undue emphasis on historical reference points; (2) an ecological concept of resilience that fails to reckon with the Anthropocenes dynamism; and (3) a precautionary bias against new technologies and dramatic interventions. Caught in these mental traps, environmentalists too often reject entrepreneurial experimental approaches that could make them more relevant to policymakers, corporations and other institutions that seek to respond more proactively to impending disruption.

Elevating the conversation about GE crops

VOLUME 35 NUMBER 4 APRIL 2017 NATURE BIOTECHNOLOGY issues of most importance to the public as well as directly involved individuals and groups. The majority of our work involved carefully combing through the literature, focusing more on primary research studies than on reviews. Just for the three report chapters concerning currently commercialized GE crops, our report includes over 900 references. Once our committee developed a full draft of the report, it was sent to 26 reviewers with diverse expertise and perspectives (these reviewers were anonymous to the committee, until they were acknowledged in the final report). Each of the 918 comments and criticisms in the reviews had to be specifically addressed by the committee to the satisfaction of a US National Academies’ independent review board before the report could move forward for the Academies’ approval. Clearly, the report represented more than the opinions of the 20 committee members. Giddings and Miller’s statement that the report’s “unwillingness to overtly back GE crops, and the report’s efforts to give credence to alternative viewpoints —rather like the media’s obsession with giving two sides of an argument equal play, irrespective of which view is supported by the evidence” is, in effect, an uninformed indictment of the US National Academies’ process. Giddings and Miller also charge that we understate how much GE crops have contributed to yield increases, commenting that the report “muddies the debate about yields of GE crops compared with ‘conventionally’ bred crops, [and] gives undue credence and prominence to views backed by paltry peer-reviewed evidence.” In fact, our report carefully states, based on all evidence available to us, that when there was substantial pest pressure, insect-resistance traits did have higher yields compared with conventionally bred crops. However, we also report that many of the early studies purporting to show yield increases due to GE herbicide-resistance and insect-resistance traits were not designed rigorously. Furthermore, we point out that there is less evidence of herbicide-resistance traits increasing yield. So why were these GE Elevating the conversation about GE crops

Short-range dispersal maintains a volatile marine metapopulation: the brown alga Postelsia palmaeformis

The annual brown alga Postelsia palmaeformis is dependent for its survival on short-distance dispersal (SDD) where it is already established, as well as occasional long-distance colonization of novel sites. To quantify SDD, we transplanted Postelsia to sites lacking established plants within ≥10xa0m. The spatial distribution of the first naturally produced sporophyte generation was used to fit dispersal kernels in a hierarchical Bayesian framework. Mean dispersal distance within a year ranged from 0.16 to 0.50xa0m across sites; 95% of the recruits were within 0.38-1.32xa0m of the transplant. The fat-tailed exponential square root kernel was the best among the candidate models at describing offspring density and dispersal. Independent measurements of patch size over two to five generations permitted an evaluation of whether models parameterized by individual-level data could adequately predict longer-term persistence and spread at the patch scale. The observed spread rates generally fell within the 95% predictive intervals. Finally, Postelsia was eliminated from 14 occupied sites that were then followed for ≥27xa0yr. The probability of invasion when unoccupied declined and the probability of extinction when occupied increased with distance from the nearest propagule source. Sites >10xa0m from a source were rarely invaded, and one initially densely populated site isolated by 39xa0m has remained Postelsia-free since 1981. In spite of dispersal that is almost entirely within 2xa0m of the parent, the ability of our models to capture the observed dynamics of Postelsia indicates that short-range dispersal adequately explains the persistent and thriving Postelsia metapopulation on Tatoosh Island. However, the presence of Postelsia over a 2000-km coastal range with many gaps >1xa0km makes it clear that rare long-distance dispersal must be required to explain the geographic range of the species.

A keystone ecologist: Robert Treat Paine, 1933–2016

Robert T. Paine, who passed away on 13 June 2016, is among the most influential people in the history of ecology. Paine was an experimentalist, a theoretician, a practitioner, and proponent of the ecology of place, and a deep believer in the importance of natural history to ecological understanding. His scientific legacy grew from the discovery of a link between top-down forcing and species diversity, a breakthrough that led to the ideas of both keystone species and trophic cascades, and to our early understanding of the mosaic nature of biological communities, causes of zonation across physical gradients, and the intermediate-disturbance hypothesis of species diversity. Paines influence as a mentor was equally important to the growth of ecological thinking, natural resource conservation, and policy. He served ecology as an Ecological Society of America president, an editor of the Societys journals, a member of and contributor to the National Academy of Sciences and the National Research Council, and an in-demand advisor to various state and federal agencies. Paines broad interests, enthusiasm, charisma, and humor deeply affected our lives and the lives of so many others.

Robert Treat Paine III (1933–2016)

Robert Treat Paine III passed away June 13 in Seattle surrounded by family and friends. RTP, as he was known, was an emeritus Professor at the University of Washington, where he developed a career that helped define the field of community ecology. Ever an avid naturalist who paid close attention to the specifics of a bird song or a starfish’s diet, RTP’s best-known contributions were the concepts of keystone species and trophic cascades. Keystone species have effects on communities or ecosystems that are much larger than their abundances would suggest. Trophic cascades are the many changes in species diversity or abundance that ensue when a consumer is removed from an ecosystem (see ref. 1 for a more detailed synopsis). RTP was also well-known as a champion of the use of experimental methods in field ecology, helping to show that simple experiments in complex natural communities could reveal a wealth of information about how species interacted with one another. Another enduring dimension of his legacy was his mentoring and inspiration of several generations of graduate students and postdocorates in the adventure of working out the complex wiring of species interactions, all within the wild dynamics of natural ecosystems.nnnnRobert Treat Paine III. Image courtesy of Robert Steneck (University of Maine, Orono, ME).nnnnRTP was a descendent of a celebrated clan in Boston that included Thomas Paine and Robert Treat Paine Sr., a signer of the US Declaration of Independence, as well as the great mathematician George Birkhoff. RTP grew up in Boston as an avid naturalist and bird watcher, and attended … nn[↵][1]1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: spalumbi{at}stanford.edu.nn [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1

Mark Plummer's Legacy: Leave No Orthodoxy Unquestioned

ABSTRACT Inspired by Mark Plummers legacy of questioning conservation and environmental orthodoxy, we challenge several common conservation memes and patterns of thinking. First, we argue that framing conservation messages as crises typically is not an effective strategy. Second, we question conservation regulations that are inflexible and insensitive to costs, uncertainty, and competing values. We instead advocate for experimentation, flexibility, and pragmatism. Third, we suggest that precautionary approaches to conservation regulation are out of step with a rapidly changing world facing uncertain shocks and disruptions. Finally, based on a systematic review of ecosystem change following disturbance, we find simplistic models of ecosystem resilience to be poorly supported by data. Ecosystem change is more the rule than the exception, and while academic ecologists have noted this to be the case, the ramifications of this pattern have yet to be embraced by resource managers. Our goal is to challenge conservationists to question popular conceptual models relentlessly and embrace new information, even when it challenges deeply held assumptions.