School of BioSciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia.
School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia.
Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2018 Feb;93(1):529-554. doi: 10.1111/brv.12358. Epub 2017 Sep 19.
Many wetlands harbour highly diverse biological communities and provide extensive ecosystem services; however, these important ecological features are being altered, degraded and destroyed around the world. Despite a wealth of research on how animals respond to anthropogenic changes to natural wetlands and how they use created wetlands, we lack a broad synthesis of these data. While some altered wetlands may provide vital habitat, others could pose a considerable risk to wildlife. This risk will be heightened if such wetlands are ecological traps - preferred habitats that confer lower fitness than another available habitat. Wetlands functioning as ecological traps could decrease both local and regional population persistence, and ultimately lead to extinctions. Most studies have examined how animals respond to changes in environmental conditions by measuring responses at the community and population levels, but studying ecological traps requires information on fitness and habitat preferences. Our current lack of knowledge of individual-level responses may therefore limit our capacity to manage wetland ecosystems effectively since ecological traps require different management practices to mitigate potential consequences. We conducted a global meta-analysis to characterise how animals respond to four key drivers of wetland alteration: agriculture, mining, restoration and urbanisation. Our overarching goal was to evaluate the ecological impacts of human alterations to wetland ecosystems, as well as identify current knowledge gaps that limit both the current understanding of these responses and effective wetland management. We extracted 1799 taxon-specific response ratios from 271 studies across 29 countries. Community- (e.g. richness) and population-level (e.g. density) measures within altered wetlands were largely comparable to those within reference wetlands. By contrast, individual fitness measures (e.g. survival) were often lower, highlighting the potential limitations of using only community- and population-level measures to assess habitat quality. Only four studies provided habitat-preference data, preventing investigation of the potential for altered wetlands to function as ecological traps. This is concerning because attempts to identify ecological traps may detect previously unidentified conservation risks. Although there was considerable variability amongst taxa, amphibians were typically the most sensitive taxon, and thus, may be a valuable bio-indicator of wetland quality. Despite suffering reduced survival and reproduction, measures such as time to and mass at metamorphosis were similar between altered and reference wetlands, suggesting that quantifying metamorphosis-related measures in isolation may not provide accurate information on habitat quality. Our review provides the most detailed evaluation to date of the ecological impacts of human alterations to wetland ecosystems. We emphasise that the role of wetlands in human-altered ecosystems can be complex, as they may represent important habitat but also pose potential risks to animals. Reduced availability of natural wetlands is increasing the importance of altered wetlands for aquatic animals. Consequently, we need to define what represents habitat quality from the perspective of animals, and gain a greater understanding of the underlying mechanisms of habitat selection and how these factors could be manipulated. Furthermore, strategies to enhance the quality of these wetlands should be implemented to maximise their conservation potential.
许多湿地拥有高度多样化的生物群落,并提供广泛的生态系统服务;然而,这些重要的生态特征正在世界各地发生改变、退化和破坏。尽管有大量研究关注动物如何对自然湿地的人为变化做出反应以及它们如何利用人工湿地,但我们缺乏对这些数据的广泛综合。虽然一些受干扰的湿地可能提供重要的栖息地,但其他湿地可能对野生动物构成相当大的风险。如果这些湿地是生态陷阱——即提供的适应性比另一种可用栖息地差的首选栖息地,那么这种风险将会增加。作为生态陷阱运作的湿地可能会降低当地和区域种群的持久性,并最终导致灭绝。大多数研究通过测量社区和种群水平的反应来研究动物对环境条件变化的反应,但研究生态陷阱需要有关适应性和栖息地偏好的信息。由于生态陷阱需要不同的管理实践来减轻潜在后果,因此我们目前对个体水平反应的了解不足可能会限制我们有效管理湿地生态系统的能力。我们进行了一项全球荟萃分析,以描述动物对湿地改变的四个关键驱动因素的反应:农业、采矿、恢复和城市化。我们的总体目标是评估人类对湿地生态系统的干扰的生态影响,并确定当前限制对这些反应的理解和有效湿地管理的知识空白。我们从 29 个国家的 271 项研究中提取了 1799 个特定于分类群的反应比。受干扰湿地内的群落(例如丰富度)和种群(例如密度)水平的指标与参考湿地内的指标大致相当。相比之下,个体适应性(例如生存)指标通常较低,这突出表明仅使用群落和种群水平的指标来评估栖息地质量可能存在潜在限制。只有四项研究提供了栖息地偏好数据,这使得无法调查受干扰湿地是否可能成为生态陷阱。这令人担忧,因为识别生态陷阱的尝试可能会发现以前未被发现的保护风险。尽管在分类群之间存在相当大的差异,但两栖动物通常是最敏感的分类群,因此可能是湿地质量的有价值的生物指标。尽管受干扰湿地的动物存活率和繁殖率降低,但变态相关指标(例如变态时间和变态时的体重)在受干扰和参考湿地之间相似,这表明单独量化变态相关指标可能无法提供有关栖息地质量的准确信息。我们的综述提供了迄今为止对人类对湿地生态系统干扰的生态影响的最详细评估。我们强调,湿地在人为干扰生态系统中的作用可能很复杂,因为它们可能代表重要的栖息地,但也可能对动物构成潜在风险。天然湿地的供应减少增加了受干扰湿地对水生动物的重要性。因此,我们需要从动物的角度来定义什么代表栖息地质量,并更深入地了解栖息地选择的潜在机制以及如何操纵这些因素。此外,应实施增强这些湿地质量的策略,以最大程度地发挥其保护潜力。