Program in Human Ecology and Archaeobiology, Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20013-7012, USA.
Conserv Biol. 2013 Feb;27(1):45-54. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2012.01920.x. Epub 2012 Sep 14.
The search for novel approaches to establishing ecological baselines (reference conditions) is constrained by the fact that most ecological studies span the past few decades, at most, and investigate ecosystems that have been substantially altered by human activities for decades, centuries, or more. Paleobiology, archeology, and history provide historical ecological context for biological conservation, remediation, and restoration. We argue that linking historical ecology explicitly with conservation can help unify related disciplines of conservation paleobiology, conservation archeobiology, and environmental history. Differences in the spatial and temporal resolution and extent (scale) of prehistoric, historic, and modern ecological data remain obstacles to integrating historical ecology and conservation biology, but the prolonged temporal extents of historical ecological data can help establish more complete baselines for restoration, document a historical range of ecological variability, and assist in determining desired future conditions. We used the eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) fishery of the Chesapeake Bay (U.S.A.) to demonstrate the utility of historical ecological data for elucidating oyster conservation and the need for an approach to conservation that transcends disciplinary boundaries. Historical ecological studies from the Chesapeake have documented dramatic declines (as much as 99%) in oyster abundance since the early to mid-1800 s, changes in oyster size in response to different nutrient levels from the sixteenth to nineteenth centuries, and substantial reductions in oyster accretion rates (from 10 mm/year to effectively 0 mm/year) from the Late Holocene to modern times. Better integration of different historical ecological data sets and increased collaboration between paleobiologists, geologists, archeologists, environmental historians, and ecologists to create standardized research designs and methodologies will help unify prehistoric, historic, and modern time perspectives on biological conservation.
寻找建立生态基线(参照条件)的新方法受到了限制,因为大多数生态研究最多只跨越过去几十年,并且调查的生态系统已经被人类活动在几十年、几个世纪甚至更长的时间里发生了实质性的改变。古生物学、考古学和历史学为生物保护、补救和恢复提供了历史生态背景。我们认为,明确地将历史生态学与保护联系起来,可以帮助统一保护古生物学、保护考古生物学和环境历史学等相关学科。史前、历史和现代生态数据在空间和时间分辨率以及范围(尺度)上的差异仍然是整合历史生态学和保护生物学的障碍,但历史生态学数据的时间范围较长,可以帮助建立更完整的恢复基线,记录生态变异性的历史范围,并有助于确定期望的未来条件。我们使用切萨皮克湾(美国)的东方牡蛎(Crassostrea virginica)渔业来证明历史生态数据对于阐明牡蛎保护以及需要超越学科界限的保护方法的有用性。切萨皮克湾的历史生态学研究记录了自 19 世纪中叶以来牡蛎数量的急剧下降(高达 99%),16 至 19 世纪因不同营养水平而导致的牡蛎大小变化,以及自全新世晚期到现代,牡蛎附生率(从 10 毫米/年到实际上的 0 毫米/年)的大幅减少。更好地整合不同的历史生态数据集,并增加古生物学家、地质学家、考古学家、环境历史学家和生态学家之间的合作,以创建标准化的研究设计和方法,将有助于统一史前、历史和现代生物保护的观点。