Harley Christopher D G, Connell Sean D, Doubleday Zoë A, Kelaher Brendan, Russell Bayden D, Sarà Gianluca, Helmuth Brian
Department of Zoology and Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries University of British Columbia Vancouver British Columbia Canada.
Southern Seas Ecology Laboratories School of Biological Sciences & Environment Institute University of Adelaide Adelaide South Australia Australia.
Ecol Evol. 2017 Jun 28;7(15):6035-6045. doi: 10.1002/ece3.3164. eCollection 2017 Aug.
Connecting the nonlinear and often counterintuitive physiological effects of multiple environmental drivers to the emergent impacts on ecosystems is a fundamental challenge. Unfortunately, the disconnect between the way "stressors" (e.g., warming) is considered in organismal (physiological) and ecological (community) contexts continues to hamper progress. Environmental drivers typically elicit biphasic physiological responses, where performance declines at levels above and below some optimum. It is also well understood that species exhibit highly variable response surfaces to these changes so that the optimum level of any environmental driver can vary among interacting species. Thus, species interactions are unlikely to go unaltered under environmental change. However, while these nonlinear, species-specific physiological relationships between environment and performance appear to be general, rarely are they incorporated into predictions of ecological tipping points. Instead, most ecosystem-level studies focus on varying levels of "stress" and frequently assume that any deviation from "normal" environmental conditions has similar effects, albeit with different magnitudes, on all of the species within a community. We consider a framework that realigns the positive and negative physiological effects of changes in climatic and nonclimatic drivers with indirect ecological responses. Using a series of simple models based on direct physiological responses to temperature and ocean CO , we explore how variation in environment-performance relationships among primary producers and consumers translates into community-level effects via trophic interactions. These models show that even in the absence of direct mortality, mismatched responses resulting from often subtle changes in the physical environment can lead to substantial ecosystem-level change.
将多种环境驱动因素的非线性且往往违反直觉的生理效应与对生态系统产生的综合影响联系起来,是一项根本性挑战。不幸的是,在个体(生理)和生态(群落)背景下对“压力源”(如变暖)的考量方式之间的脱节,仍在阻碍进展。环境驱动因素通常会引发双相生理反应,即性能在高于和低于某个最佳水平时都会下降。人们也清楚地知道,物种对这些变化表现出高度可变的反应曲线,以至于任何环境驱动因素的最佳水平在相互作用的物种之间可能会有所不同。因此,在环境变化下物种间的相互作用不太可能保持不变。然而,尽管环境与性能之间的这些非线性、物种特异性生理关系似乎具有普遍性,但它们很少被纳入生态临界点的预测中。相反,大多数生态系统层面的研究关注不同程度的“压力”,并常常假定偏离“正常”环境条件对群落内所有物种都会产生类似影响,尽管程度不同。我们考虑一个框架,该框架将气候和非气候驱动因素变化的正负生理效应与间接生态反应重新结合起来。通过一系列基于对温度和海洋二氧化碳直接生理反应的简单模型,我们探讨初级生产者和消费者之间环境与性能关系的变化如何通过营养相互作用转化为群落层面的影响。这些模型表明,即使在没有直接死亡的情况下,物理环境中往往细微的变化所导致的不匹配反应也可能导致生态系统层面的巨大变化。