Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 48824, USA.
Lyman Briggs College, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 48824, USA.
Ecol Appl. 2019 Oct;29(7):e01957. doi: 10.1002/eap.1957. Epub 2019 Jul 22.
Broad-scale studies have improved our ability to make predictions about how freshwater biotic and abiotic properties will respond to changes in climate and land use intensification. Further, fine-scaled studies of lakes, wetlands, or streams have documented the important role of hydrologic connections for understanding many freshwater biotic and abiotic processes. However, lakes, wetlands, and streams are typically studied in isolation of one another at both fine and broad scales. Therefore, it is not known whether these three freshwater types (lakes, wetlands, and streams) respond similarly to ecosystem and watershed drivers nor how they may respond to future global stresses. In this study, we asked, do lake, wetland, and stream biotic and abiotic properties respond to similar ecosystem and watershed drivers and have similar spatial structure at the national scale? We answered this question with three U.S. conterminous data sets of freshwater ecosystems. We used random forest (RF) analysis to quantify the multi-scaled drivers related to variation in nutrients and biota in lakes, wetlands, and streams simultaneously; we used semivariogram analysis to quantify the spatial structure of biotic and abiotic properties and to infer possible mechanisms controlling the ecosystem properties of these freshwater types. We found that abiotic properties responded to similar drivers, had large ranges of spatial autocorrelation, and exhibited multi-scale spatial structure, regardless of freshwater type. However, the dominant drivers of variation in biotic properties depended on freshwater type and had smaller ranges of spatial autocorrelation. Our study is the first to document that drivers and spatial structure differ more between biotic and abiotic variables than across freshwater types, suggesting that some properties of freshwater ecosystems may respond similarly to future global changes.
大规模研究提高了我们预测淡水生物和非生物特性如何响应气候变化和土地利用强化的能力。此外,对湖泊、湿地或溪流的精细研究记录了水文联系对于理解许多淡水生物和非生物过程的重要作用。然而,在精细和广泛的尺度上,湖泊、湿地和溪流通常是相互孤立地进行研究的。因此,尚不清楚这三种淡水类型(湖泊、湿地和溪流)对生态系统和流域驱动因素的响应是否相似,也不知道它们可能如何应对未来的全球压力。在这项研究中,我们提出了以下问题:湖泊、湿地和溪流的生物和非生物特性是否对类似的生态系统和流域驱动因素有响应,并且在国家尺度上具有相似的空间结构?我们通过三个美国大陆的淡水生态系统数据集回答了这个问题。我们使用随机森林(RF)分析来量化与湖泊、湿地和溪流中的养分和生物同时变化相关的多尺度驱动因素;我们使用半变异函数分析来量化生物和非生物特性的空间结构,并推断控制这些淡水类型生态系统特性的可能机制。我们发现,无论淡水类型如何,非生物特性对类似的驱动因素有响应,具有较大的空间自相关范围,并表现出多尺度的空间结构。然而,生物特性变化的主要驱动因素取决于淡水类型,并且具有较小的空间自相关范围。我们的研究首次记录到,驱动因素和空间结构在生物和非生物变量之间的差异大于在淡水类型之间的差异,这表明一些淡水生态系统的特性可能对未来的全球变化有相似的响应。