The Experts below are selected from a list of 3399 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Jan Hjort - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
does catchment Geodiversity foster stream biodiversity
Landscape Ecology, 2019Co-Authors: Ollimatti Karna, Helena Tukiainen, Jani Heino, Tiina Laamanen, Jenny Jyrkankalliomikkola, Virpi Pajunen, Janne Soininen, Kimmo Tolonen, Jan HjortAbstract:One approach to maintain the resilience of biotic communities is to protect the variability of abiotic characteristics of Earth’s surface, i.e. Geodiversity. In terrestrial environments, the relationship between Geodiversity and biodiversity is well recognized. In streams, the abiotic properties of upstream catchments influence stream communities, but the relationships between catchment Geodiversity and aquatic biodiversity have not been previously tested. The aim was to compare the effects of local environmental and catchment variables on stream biodiversity. We specifically explored the usefulness of catchment Geodiversity in explaining the species richness on stream macroinvertebrate, diatom and bacterial communities. We used 3 Geodiversity variables, 2 land use variables and 4 local habitat variables to examine species richness variation across 88 stream sites in western Finland. We used boosted regression trees to explore the effects of Geodiversity and other variables on biodiversity. We detected a clear effect of catchment Geodiversity on species richness, although the traditional local habitat and land use variables were the strongest predictors. Especially soil-type richness appeared as an important factor for species richness. While variables related to stream size were the most important for macroinvertebrate richness and partly for bacterial richness, the importance of water chemistry and land use for diatom richness was notable. In addition to traditional environmental variables, Geodiversity may affect species richness variation in streams, for example through changes in water chemistry. Geodiversity information could be used as a proxy for predicting stream species richness and offers a supplementary tool for conservation efforts.
-
opinion to advance sustainable stewardship we must document not only biodiversity but Geodiversity
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2019Co-Authors: Franziska Schrodt, Joseph J. Bailey, Jan Hjort, Daniel W Kissling, Kenneth F Rijsdijk, A C Seijmonsbergen, Derk Van Ree, Russell Lawley, Chris Williams, Mark G AndersonAbstract:Rapid environmental change is driving the need for complex and comprehensive scientific information that supports policies aimed at managing natural resources through international treaties, platforms, and networks. One successful approach for delivering such information has been the development of essential variables for climate (1), oceans (2), biodiversity (3), and sustainable development goals (4) (ECVs, EOVs, EBVs, and ESDGVs, respectively). These efforts have improved consensus on terminology and identified essential sets of measurements for characterizing and monitoring changes on our planet. In doing so, they have advanced science and informed policy. As an important but largely unanticipated consequence, conceptualizing these variables has also given rise to discussions regarding data discovery, data access, and governance of research infrastructures. Such discussions are vital to ensure effective storage, distribution, and use of data among management agencies, researchers, and policymakers (5, 6). Mining is one example of the human impact on Geodiversity. Active mines cause a decrease in local biodiversity, but in some cases they can provide an important habitat for specialized and rare species after the mine has been abandoned. Image credit: Shutterstock/1968. Although the current essential variables frameworks account for the biosphere, atmosphere, and some aspects of the hydrosphere (1⇓⇓–4), they largely overlook Geodiversity—the variety of abiotic features and processes of the land surface and subsurface (7). Analogous to biodiversity, Geodiversity is important for the maintenance of ecosystem functioning and services (8), and areas high in Geodiversity have been shown to support high biodiversity (9). Thus, consideration of Geodiversity is an important part of developing nature-based solutions to global environmental challenges and demands for natural resources, particularly in relation to human well-being and ecosystem functioning. And yet, despite many facets of sustainable development being underpinned by access to geological assets, key elements of Geodiversity are yet to … [↵][1]1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: Franziska.Schrodt1{at}nottingham.ac.uk. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1
-
is catchment Geodiversity a useful surrogate of aquatic plant species richness
Journal of Biogeography, 2019Co-Authors: Maija Toivanen, Helena Tukiainen, Jan Hjort, Jani Heino, Janne Alahuhta, Jukka AroviitaAbstract:AIM: Conserving freshwater biodiversity in a rapidly changing world requires updated planning schemes and research efforts. Geodiversity – the diversity of Earth surface forms, materials and processes – and biodiversity are interlinked at a fundamental level. This relationship is being considered in a growing number of studies, yet research from freshwater environments is scarce. We used Geodiversity (rock‐type, soil‐type and geomorphological richness), local and climatic variables to explore whether Geodiversity can be used as a surrogate for aquatic plant species richness in lakes and rivers. LOCATION: Finland. TAXON: Aquatic plants. METHODS: We compared Geodiversity variables (measured within 1‐km² grid cells) to well‐studied local (e.g. area, alkalinity) and climate (e.g. growing degree‐days) variables, and examined the patterns between habitat types (lakes and rivers) and among all taxa and major functional groups (helophytes and hydrophytes). We modelled lake (n = 145) and river (n = 146) plant species richness with generalized linear models, and further partitioned variation to measure the independent and shared contributions of the Geodiversity, climate and local environmental variable groups. As a complementary analysis, and to identify single important variables explaining variation in aquatic plant species richness, we utilized boosted regression trees. RESULTS: We found a positive relationship between aquatic plant species richness and catchment Geodiversity variation with recurring patterns across two different freshwater habitat types and two aquatic plant functional groups. Higher variation in Geodiversity (measured at landscape scale) supported higher freshwater biodiversity (measured at the local scale) of lakes and rivers. MAIN CONCLUSIONS: Geodiversity can be a useful addition to biodiversity modelling, and it should be considered in conservation schemes and monitoring efforts, further supporting the principle of conserving nature's stage. Yet, differences between habitats and functional groups suggest that more habitat‐specific approaches and multiple biodiversity measures should be considered. Our study is an important signpost guiding further studies on the biodiversity–Geodiversity relationship in freshwater ecosystems.
-
the role of Geodiversity in providing ecosystem services at broad scales
Ecological Indicators, 2018Co-Authors: Helena Tukiainen, Janne Alahuhta, Terhi Alahulkko, Raino Lampinen, Laura Purola, Anu Akujarvi, Jan HjortAbstract:Abstract Mapping of ecosystem services (ESs) provide valuable information on the geographical variation of ESs and their relation to overall diversity. Although the relationship between biodiversity and ESs has been intensively explored, little is known how Geodiversity (i.e., variety of geological, geomorphological and soil features) is associated with different ESs. We studied 1) the spatial variation of Geodiversity and biodiversity in relation to six ESs (i.e., forest carbon budget, potential supply of groundwater, milk and meat production, crop production, amount of free-time residences and nationally valuable landscapes) using variation partitioning (VP), and 2) the spatial overlap between Geodiversity and biodiversity and ESs using generalized additive models (GAM) in 1006 intensively surveyed grid cells of 100 km2 located across Finland. In the VP, biodiversity independently explained more of the variation than Geodiversity for majority of the ESs. However, shared explanation ability of biodiversity and Geodiversity was considerable for majority of ESs (forest carbon budget: 41.3%, crop production: 15.0%, free-time residences: 15.2% and valuable landscapes: 7.3%), often exceeding that of both independent contributions. GAMs indicated that increase in both biodiversity and Geodiversity enhances forest carbon budget (D2 = 66.8% and 12.4%, respectively), potential production of groundwater (8.3% and 0.1%), crop production (35.7% and 8.9%), free-time residences (40.0% and 7.9%) and valuable landscapes (11.6% and 6.9%). However, the positive relationship between diversity and ESs levelled off for many of the ESs. Our findings suggest that Geodiversity is an important complementing factor in explaining spatial variation of the ESs in high-latitude regions. We also found dominantly synergic effects between abiotic diversity and ESs. Thus, our study results highlight the need to more deeply incorporate abiotic diversity into ESs research. Environmental conservation and management would benefit from the more comprehensive integration of Geodiversity to ESs research along with the changing environmental conditions of future decades.
-
modelling native and alien vascular plant species richness at which scales is Geodiversity most relevant
Global Ecology and Biogeography, 2017Co-Authors: Joseph J. Bailey, Jan Hjort, Doreen S Boyd, Christopher P Lavers, Richard FieldAbstract:Aim: To explore the scale dependence of relationships between novel measures of Geodiversity and species richness of both native and alien vascular plants. Location: Great Britain. Time period: Data collected 1995–2015. Major taxa: Vascular plants. Methods: We calculated the species richness of terrestrial native and alien vascular plants (6,932 species in total) across the island of Great Britain at grain sizes of 1 km2 (n=219,964) and 100 km2 (n=2,121) and regional extents of 25–250 km diameter, centred around each 100-km2 cell. We compiled Geodiversity data on landforms, soils, hydrological and geological features using existing national datasets, and used a newly developed geomorphometric method to extract land- form coverage data (e.g., hollows, ridges, valleys, peaks). We used these as predictors of species richness alongside climate, commonly used topographic metrics, land-cover variety and human population.We analysed species richness across scales using boosted regression tree (BRT) modelling and compared models with and without Geodiversity data. Results: Geodiversity significantly improved models over and above the widely used topographic metrics, particularly at smaller extents and the finer grain size, and slightly more so for native species richness. For each increase in extent, the contribution of climatic variables increased and that of Geodiversity decreased. Of the Geodiversity variables, automatically extracted landform data added the most explanatory power, but hydrology (rivers, lakes) and materials (soil, superficial deposits, geology) were also important. Main conclusions: Geodiversity improves our understanding of, and our ability to model, the relationship between species richness and abiotic heterogeneity at multiple spatial scales by allowing us to get closer to the real-world physical processes that affect patterns of life. The greatest benefit comes from measuring the constituent parts of Geodiversity separately rather than one combined variable (as in most of the few studies to date). Automatically extracted landform data, the use of which is novel in ecology and biogeography, proved particularly valuable in our study.
Janne Alahuhta - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
is catchment Geodiversity a useful surrogate of aquatic plant species richness
Journal of Biogeography, 2019Co-Authors: Maija Toivanen, Helena Tukiainen, Jan Hjort, Jani Heino, Janne Alahuhta, Jukka AroviitaAbstract:AIM: Conserving freshwater biodiversity in a rapidly changing world requires updated planning schemes and research efforts. Geodiversity – the diversity of Earth surface forms, materials and processes – and biodiversity are interlinked at a fundamental level. This relationship is being considered in a growing number of studies, yet research from freshwater environments is scarce. We used Geodiversity (rock‐type, soil‐type and geomorphological richness), local and climatic variables to explore whether Geodiversity can be used as a surrogate for aquatic plant species richness in lakes and rivers. LOCATION: Finland. TAXON: Aquatic plants. METHODS: We compared Geodiversity variables (measured within 1‐km² grid cells) to well‐studied local (e.g. area, alkalinity) and climate (e.g. growing degree‐days) variables, and examined the patterns between habitat types (lakes and rivers) and among all taxa and major functional groups (helophytes and hydrophytes). We modelled lake (n = 145) and river (n = 146) plant species richness with generalized linear models, and further partitioned variation to measure the independent and shared contributions of the Geodiversity, climate and local environmental variable groups. As a complementary analysis, and to identify single important variables explaining variation in aquatic plant species richness, we utilized boosted regression trees. RESULTS: We found a positive relationship between aquatic plant species richness and catchment Geodiversity variation with recurring patterns across two different freshwater habitat types and two aquatic plant functional groups. Higher variation in Geodiversity (measured at landscape scale) supported higher freshwater biodiversity (measured at the local scale) of lakes and rivers. MAIN CONCLUSIONS: Geodiversity can be a useful addition to biodiversity modelling, and it should be considered in conservation schemes and monitoring efforts, further supporting the principle of conserving nature's stage. Yet, differences between habitats and functional groups suggest that more habitat‐specific approaches and multiple biodiversity measures should be considered. Our study is an important signpost guiding further studies on the biodiversity–Geodiversity relationship in freshwater ecosystems.
-
the role of Geodiversity in providing ecosystem services at broad scales
Ecological Indicators, 2018Co-Authors: Helena Tukiainen, Janne Alahuhta, Terhi Alahulkko, Raino Lampinen, Laura Purola, Anu Akujarvi, Jan HjortAbstract:Abstract Mapping of ecosystem services (ESs) provide valuable information on the geographical variation of ESs and their relation to overall diversity. Although the relationship between biodiversity and ESs has been intensively explored, little is known how Geodiversity (i.e., variety of geological, geomorphological and soil features) is associated with different ESs. We studied 1) the spatial variation of Geodiversity and biodiversity in relation to six ESs (i.e., forest carbon budget, potential supply of groundwater, milk and meat production, crop production, amount of free-time residences and nationally valuable landscapes) using variation partitioning (VP), and 2) the spatial overlap between Geodiversity and biodiversity and ESs using generalized additive models (GAM) in 1006 intensively surveyed grid cells of 100 km2 located across Finland. In the VP, biodiversity independently explained more of the variation than Geodiversity for majority of the ESs. However, shared explanation ability of biodiversity and Geodiversity was considerable for majority of ESs (forest carbon budget: 41.3%, crop production: 15.0%, free-time residences: 15.2% and valuable landscapes: 7.3%), often exceeding that of both independent contributions. GAMs indicated that increase in both biodiversity and Geodiversity enhances forest carbon budget (D2 = 66.8% and 12.4%, respectively), potential production of groundwater (8.3% and 0.1%), crop production (35.7% and 8.9%), free-time residences (40.0% and 7.9%) and valuable landscapes (11.6% and 6.9%). However, the positive relationship between diversity and ESs levelled off for many of the ESs. Our findings suggest that Geodiversity is an important complementing factor in explaining spatial variation of the ESs in high-latitude regions. We also found dominantly synergic effects between abiotic diversity and ESs. Thus, our study results highlight the need to more deeply incorporate abiotic diversity into ESs research. Environmental conservation and management would benefit from the more comprehensive integration of Geodiversity to ESs research along with the changing environmental conditions of future decades.
-
spatial relationship between biodiversity and Geodiversity across a gradient of land use intensity in high latitude landscapes
Landscape Ecology, 2017Co-Authors: Helena Tukiainen, Richard Field, Janne Alahuhta, Terhi Alahulkko, Raino Lampinen, Jan HjortAbstract:‘Conserving Nature’s stage’ has been advanced as an important conservation principle because of known links between biodiversity and abiotic environmental diversity, especially in sensitive high-latitude environments and at the landscape scale. However these links have not been examined across gradients of human impact on the landscape. To (1) analyze the relationships between land-use intensity and both landscape-scale biodiversity and Geodiversity, and (2) assess the contributions of Geodiversity, climate and spatial variables to explaining vascular plant species richness in landscapes of low, moderate and high human impact. We used generalized additive models (GAMs) to analyze relationships between land-use intensity and both Geodiversity (geological, geomorphological and hydrological richness) and plant species richness in 6191 1-km2 grid squares across Finland. We used linear regression-based variation partitioning (VP) to assess contributions of climate, Geodiversity and spatial variable groups to accounting for spatial variation in species richness. In GAMs, Geodiversity correlated negatively, and plant species richness positively, with land-use intensity. Both relationships were non-linear. In VP, Geodiversity best accounted for species richness in areas of moderate to high human impact. These overall contributions were mainly due to variation explained jointly with climate, which dominated the models. Independent Geodiversity contributions were highest in pristine environments, but low throughout. Human action increases biodiversity but may reduce Geodiversity, at landscape scale in high-latitude environments. Better understanding of the connections between biodiversity and abiotic environment along changing land-use gradients is essential in developing sustainable measures to conserve biodiversity under global change.
Helena Tukiainen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
does catchment Geodiversity foster stream biodiversity
Landscape Ecology, 2019Co-Authors: Ollimatti Karna, Helena Tukiainen, Jani Heino, Tiina Laamanen, Jenny Jyrkankalliomikkola, Virpi Pajunen, Janne Soininen, Kimmo Tolonen, Jan HjortAbstract:One approach to maintain the resilience of biotic communities is to protect the variability of abiotic characteristics of Earth’s surface, i.e. Geodiversity. In terrestrial environments, the relationship between Geodiversity and biodiversity is well recognized. In streams, the abiotic properties of upstream catchments influence stream communities, but the relationships between catchment Geodiversity and aquatic biodiversity have not been previously tested. The aim was to compare the effects of local environmental and catchment variables on stream biodiversity. We specifically explored the usefulness of catchment Geodiversity in explaining the species richness on stream macroinvertebrate, diatom and bacterial communities. We used 3 Geodiversity variables, 2 land use variables and 4 local habitat variables to examine species richness variation across 88 stream sites in western Finland. We used boosted regression trees to explore the effects of Geodiversity and other variables on biodiversity. We detected a clear effect of catchment Geodiversity on species richness, although the traditional local habitat and land use variables were the strongest predictors. Especially soil-type richness appeared as an important factor for species richness. While variables related to stream size were the most important for macroinvertebrate richness and partly for bacterial richness, the importance of water chemistry and land use for diatom richness was notable. In addition to traditional environmental variables, Geodiversity may affect species richness variation in streams, for example through changes in water chemistry. Geodiversity information could be used as a proxy for predicting stream species richness and offers a supplementary tool for conservation efforts.
-
is catchment Geodiversity a useful surrogate of aquatic plant species richness
Journal of Biogeography, 2019Co-Authors: Maija Toivanen, Helena Tukiainen, Jan Hjort, Jani Heino, Janne Alahuhta, Jukka AroviitaAbstract:AIM: Conserving freshwater biodiversity in a rapidly changing world requires updated planning schemes and research efforts. Geodiversity – the diversity of Earth surface forms, materials and processes – and biodiversity are interlinked at a fundamental level. This relationship is being considered in a growing number of studies, yet research from freshwater environments is scarce. We used Geodiversity (rock‐type, soil‐type and geomorphological richness), local and climatic variables to explore whether Geodiversity can be used as a surrogate for aquatic plant species richness in lakes and rivers. LOCATION: Finland. TAXON: Aquatic plants. METHODS: We compared Geodiversity variables (measured within 1‐km² grid cells) to well‐studied local (e.g. area, alkalinity) and climate (e.g. growing degree‐days) variables, and examined the patterns between habitat types (lakes and rivers) and among all taxa and major functional groups (helophytes and hydrophytes). We modelled lake (n = 145) and river (n = 146) plant species richness with generalized linear models, and further partitioned variation to measure the independent and shared contributions of the Geodiversity, climate and local environmental variable groups. As a complementary analysis, and to identify single important variables explaining variation in aquatic plant species richness, we utilized boosted regression trees. RESULTS: We found a positive relationship between aquatic plant species richness and catchment Geodiversity variation with recurring patterns across two different freshwater habitat types and two aquatic plant functional groups. Higher variation in Geodiversity (measured at landscape scale) supported higher freshwater biodiversity (measured at the local scale) of lakes and rivers. MAIN CONCLUSIONS: Geodiversity can be a useful addition to biodiversity modelling, and it should be considered in conservation schemes and monitoring efforts, further supporting the principle of conserving nature's stage. Yet, differences between habitats and functional groups suggest that more habitat‐specific approaches and multiple biodiversity measures should be considered. Our study is an important signpost guiding further studies on the biodiversity–Geodiversity relationship in freshwater ecosystems.
-
the role of Geodiversity in providing ecosystem services at broad scales
Ecological Indicators, 2018Co-Authors: Helena Tukiainen, Janne Alahuhta, Terhi Alahulkko, Raino Lampinen, Laura Purola, Anu Akujarvi, Jan HjortAbstract:Abstract Mapping of ecosystem services (ESs) provide valuable information on the geographical variation of ESs and their relation to overall diversity. Although the relationship between biodiversity and ESs has been intensively explored, little is known how Geodiversity (i.e., variety of geological, geomorphological and soil features) is associated with different ESs. We studied 1) the spatial variation of Geodiversity and biodiversity in relation to six ESs (i.e., forest carbon budget, potential supply of groundwater, milk and meat production, crop production, amount of free-time residences and nationally valuable landscapes) using variation partitioning (VP), and 2) the spatial overlap between Geodiversity and biodiversity and ESs using generalized additive models (GAM) in 1006 intensively surveyed grid cells of 100 km2 located across Finland. In the VP, biodiversity independently explained more of the variation than Geodiversity for majority of the ESs. However, shared explanation ability of biodiversity and Geodiversity was considerable for majority of ESs (forest carbon budget: 41.3%, crop production: 15.0%, free-time residences: 15.2% and valuable landscapes: 7.3%), often exceeding that of both independent contributions. GAMs indicated that increase in both biodiversity and Geodiversity enhances forest carbon budget (D2 = 66.8% and 12.4%, respectively), potential production of groundwater (8.3% and 0.1%), crop production (35.7% and 8.9%), free-time residences (40.0% and 7.9%) and valuable landscapes (11.6% and 6.9%). However, the positive relationship between diversity and ESs levelled off for many of the ESs. Our findings suggest that Geodiversity is an important complementing factor in explaining spatial variation of the ESs in high-latitude regions. We also found dominantly synergic effects between abiotic diversity and ESs. Thus, our study results highlight the need to more deeply incorporate abiotic diversity into ESs research. Environmental conservation and management would benefit from the more comprehensive integration of Geodiversity to ESs research along with the changing environmental conditions of future decades.
-
spatial relationship between biodiversity and Geodiversity across a gradient of land use intensity in high latitude landscapes
Landscape Ecology, 2017Co-Authors: Helena Tukiainen, Richard Field, Janne Alahuhta, Terhi Alahulkko, Raino Lampinen, Jan HjortAbstract:‘Conserving Nature’s stage’ has been advanced as an important conservation principle because of known links between biodiversity and abiotic environmental diversity, especially in sensitive high-latitude environments and at the landscape scale. However these links have not been examined across gradients of human impact on the landscape. To (1) analyze the relationships between land-use intensity and both landscape-scale biodiversity and Geodiversity, and (2) assess the contributions of Geodiversity, climate and spatial variables to explaining vascular plant species richness in landscapes of low, moderate and high human impact. We used generalized additive models (GAMs) to analyze relationships between land-use intensity and both Geodiversity (geological, geomorphological and hydrological richness) and plant species richness in 6191 1-km2 grid squares across Finland. We used linear regression-based variation partitioning (VP) to assess contributions of climate, Geodiversity and spatial variable groups to accounting for spatial variation in species richness. In GAMs, Geodiversity correlated negatively, and plant species richness positively, with land-use intensity. Both relationships were non-linear. In VP, Geodiversity best accounted for species richness in areas of moderate to high human impact. These overall contributions were mainly due to variation explained jointly with climate, which dominated the models. Independent Geodiversity contributions were highest in pristine environments, but low throughout. Human action increases biodiversity but may reduce Geodiversity, at landscape scale in high-latitude environments. Better understanding of the connections between biodiversity and abiotic environment along changing land-use gradients is essential in developing sustainable measures to conserve biodiversity under global change.
-
Combining Geodiversity with climate and topography to account for threatened species richness
Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2016Co-Authors: Helena Tukiainen, Joseph J. Bailey, Richard Field, Katja Kangas, Jan HjortAbstract:Improved understanding of threatened species diversity is important for long-term conservation planning and natural area management, especially under ongoing global change. Geodiversity – the diversity of earth surface materials, forms and processes – may be a useful biodiversity surrogate for conservation planning, as well as having conservation value itself. Links between Geodiversity and species richness have been demonstrated; establishing whether Geodiversity also relates to threatened species’ diversity and distribution patterns is a logical next step for conservation biology. We used four Geodiversity variables (rock type richness, soil type richness, geomorphological diversity, hydrological diversity), in addition to four climatic and topographic variables, to account for threatened species diversity across 31 of Finland’s national parks. We also analyzed rarity-weighted richness (a measure of site complementarity) of threatened vascular plants, fungi, bryophytes, and all species combined. Our 1km2-resolution dataset included 271 threatened species from 16 major taxa. We modeled threatened species richness (raw and rarity-weighted) using boosted regression trees. Commonly used climatic variables, especially the annual temperature sum above 5°C, dominated our models, consistent with the critical role of temperature in this boreal environment. Importantly, Geodiversity added significant explanatory power, improving our understanding of threatened species. Greater Geodiversity was consistently associated with increased threatened species richness across taxa; the combined effect of Geodiversity variables was greater still in the rarity-weighted richness analyses (except for fungi). Geodiversity measures correlated most strongly with 3 species richness (raw and rarity-weighted) of threatened vascular plants and bryophytes; such correlations were weakest for molluscs, lichens, and mammals. While it is well known that simple measures of topography improve biodiversity modeling and conservation practice, our results suggest that Geodiversity data relating to geology, landforms, and hydrology are also worth including. This reinforces recent arguments that ‘conserving Nature’s stage’ is an important principle in conservation.
Richard Field - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
models of upland species distributions are improved by accounting for Geodiversity
Landscape Ecology, 2018Co-Authors: Joseph J. Bailey, Doreen S Boyd, Richard FieldAbstract:Recent research suggests that novel Geodiversity data on landforms, hydrology and surface materials can improve biodiversity models at the landscape scale by quantifying abiotic variability more effectively than commonly used measures of spatial heterogeneity. However, few studies consider whether these variables can account for, and improve our understanding of, species’ distributions. Assess the role of Geodiversity components as macro-scale controls of plant species’ distributions in a montane landscape. We used an innovative approach to quantifying a landscape, creating an ecologically meaningful Geodiversity dataset that accounted for hydrology, morphometry (landforms derived from geomorphometric techniques), and soil parent material (data from expert sources). We compared models with Geodiversity to those just using topographic metrics (e.g. slope and elevation) and climate data. Species distribution models (SDMs) were produced for ‘rare’ (N = 76) and ‘common’ (N = 505) plant species at 1 km2 resolution for the Cairngorms National Park, Scotland. The addition of automatically produced landform Geodiversity data and hydrological features to a basic SDM (climate, elevation, and slope) resulted in a significant improvement in model fit across all common species’ distribution models. Adding further Geodiversity data on surface materials resulted in a less consistent statistical improvement, but added considerable conceptual value to many individual rare and common SDMs. The Geodiversity data used here helped us capture the abiotic environment’s heterogeneity and allowed for explicit links between the geophysical landscape and species’ ecology. It is encouraging that relatively simple and easily produced Geodiversity data have the potential to improve SDMs. Our findings have important implications for applied conservation and support the need to consider Geodiversity in management.
-
modelling native and alien vascular plant species richness at which scales is Geodiversity most relevant
Global Ecology and Biogeography, 2017Co-Authors: Joseph J. Bailey, Jan Hjort, Doreen S Boyd, Christopher P Lavers, Richard FieldAbstract:Aim: To explore the scale dependence of relationships between novel measures of Geodiversity and species richness of both native and alien vascular plants. Location: Great Britain. Time period: Data collected 1995–2015. Major taxa: Vascular plants. Methods: We calculated the species richness of terrestrial native and alien vascular plants (6,932 species in total) across the island of Great Britain at grain sizes of 1 km2 (n=219,964) and 100 km2 (n=2,121) and regional extents of 25–250 km diameter, centred around each 100-km2 cell. We compiled Geodiversity data on landforms, soils, hydrological and geological features using existing national datasets, and used a newly developed geomorphometric method to extract land- form coverage data (e.g., hollows, ridges, valleys, peaks). We used these as predictors of species richness alongside climate, commonly used topographic metrics, land-cover variety and human population.We analysed species richness across scales using boosted regression tree (BRT) modelling and compared models with and without Geodiversity data. Results: Geodiversity significantly improved models over and above the widely used topographic metrics, particularly at smaller extents and the finer grain size, and slightly more so for native species richness. For each increase in extent, the contribution of climatic variables increased and that of Geodiversity decreased. Of the Geodiversity variables, automatically extracted landform data added the most explanatory power, but hydrology (rivers, lakes) and materials (soil, superficial deposits, geology) were also important. Main conclusions: Geodiversity improves our understanding of, and our ability to model, the relationship between species richness and abiotic heterogeneity at multiple spatial scales by allowing us to get closer to the real-world physical processes that affect patterns of life. The greatest benefit comes from measuring the constituent parts of Geodiversity separately rather than one combined variable (as in most of the few studies to date). Automatically extracted landform data, the use of which is novel in ecology and biogeography, proved particularly valuable in our study.
-
spatial relationship between biodiversity and Geodiversity across a gradient of land use intensity in high latitude landscapes
Landscape Ecology, 2017Co-Authors: Helena Tukiainen, Richard Field, Janne Alahuhta, Terhi Alahulkko, Raino Lampinen, Jan HjortAbstract:‘Conserving Nature’s stage’ has been advanced as an important conservation principle because of known links between biodiversity and abiotic environmental diversity, especially in sensitive high-latitude environments and at the landscape scale. However these links have not been examined across gradients of human impact on the landscape. To (1) analyze the relationships between land-use intensity and both landscape-scale biodiversity and Geodiversity, and (2) assess the contributions of Geodiversity, climate and spatial variables to explaining vascular plant species richness in landscapes of low, moderate and high human impact. We used generalized additive models (GAMs) to analyze relationships between land-use intensity and both Geodiversity (geological, geomorphological and hydrological richness) and plant species richness in 6191 1-km2 grid squares across Finland. We used linear regression-based variation partitioning (VP) to assess contributions of climate, Geodiversity and spatial variable groups to accounting for spatial variation in species richness. In GAMs, Geodiversity correlated negatively, and plant species richness positively, with land-use intensity. Both relationships were non-linear. In VP, Geodiversity best accounted for species richness in areas of moderate to high human impact. These overall contributions were mainly due to variation explained jointly with climate, which dominated the models. Independent Geodiversity contributions were highest in pristine environments, but low throughout. Human action increases biodiversity but may reduce Geodiversity, at landscape scale in high-latitude environments. Better understanding of the connections between biodiversity and abiotic environment along changing land-use gradients is essential in developing sustainable measures to conserve biodiversity under global change.
-
Combining Geodiversity with climate and topography to account for threatened species richness
Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2016Co-Authors: Helena Tukiainen, Joseph J. Bailey, Richard Field, Katja Kangas, Jan HjortAbstract:Improved understanding of threatened species diversity is important for long-term conservation planning and natural area management, especially under ongoing global change. Geodiversity – the diversity of earth surface materials, forms and processes – may be a useful biodiversity surrogate for conservation planning, as well as having conservation value itself. Links between Geodiversity and species richness have been demonstrated; establishing whether Geodiversity also relates to threatened species’ diversity and distribution patterns is a logical next step for conservation biology. We used four Geodiversity variables (rock type richness, soil type richness, geomorphological diversity, hydrological diversity), in addition to four climatic and topographic variables, to account for threatened species diversity across 31 of Finland’s national parks. We also analyzed rarity-weighted richness (a measure of site complementarity) of threatened vascular plants, fungi, bryophytes, and all species combined. Our 1km2-resolution dataset included 271 threatened species from 16 major taxa. We modeled threatened species richness (raw and rarity-weighted) using boosted regression trees. Commonly used climatic variables, especially the annual temperature sum above 5°C, dominated our models, consistent with the critical role of temperature in this boreal environment. Importantly, Geodiversity added significant explanatory power, improving our understanding of threatened species. Greater Geodiversity was consistently associated with increased threatened species richness across taxa; the combined effect of Geodiversity variables was greater still in the rarity-weighted richness analyses (except for fungi). Geodiversity measures correlated most strongly with 3 species richness (raw and rarity-weighted) of threatened vascular plants and bryophytes; such correlations were weakest for molluscs, lichens, and mammals. While it is well known that simple measures of topography improve biodiversity modeling and conservation practice, our results suggest that Geodiversity data relating to geology, landforms, and hydrology are also worth including. This reinforces recent arguments that ‘conserving Nature’s stage’ is an important principle in conservation.
Miska Luoto - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
inclusion of explicit measures of Geodiversity improve biodiversity models in a boreal landscape
Biodiversity and Conservation, 2012Co-Authors: Jan Hjort, Risto K Heikkinen, Miska LuotoAbstract:Measures of Geodiversity may provide a potentially useful surrogate for biodiversity patterns in insufficiently surveyed areas. However, their reliability in modelling the spatial variation in species richness is inadequately understood. We investigated whether the explanatory and predictive power of species richness models can be improved by considering explicit measures of Geodiversity (variability of earth surface materials, forms and processes) in addition to climate and topography variables. Vascular plant species richness was modelled in two study areas in Northern Europe, Finland at the resolution of 500 or 1000 m, and as a function of three Geodiversity (geological, geomorphological and hydrological diversity) variables, and six climate and topography variables. Variation partitioning was used to identify the independent and shared contributions of the Geodiversity, climate and topography variable groups in explaining the spatial patterns of species richness. Generalized additive models were used to explore the ability of the different explanatory variables in predicting plant species richness within and between the study areas. In both the study areas, the inclusion of measures of Geodiversity improved the explanatory power, predictive ability and robustness of the plant species richness models. In conclusion, the explicit measures of Geodiversity appear to be promising surrogates of biodiversity, which reflect important abiotic resource factors, and may thus provide an equally, or even more reliable basis for transferring biodiversity models to new areas than models based on climate and topography variables.
-
can Geodiversity be predicted from space
Geomorphology, 2012Co-Authors: Jan Hjort, Miska LuotoAbstract:Abstract Identification of Geodiversity at regional and national scales with traditional surveying techniques remains a logistically difficult and often financially prohibitive task. Earth observation data in combination with statistical modeling may provide a unique approach for mapping and analyzing Geodiversity cost-efficiently. In this study, the possibility to map Geodiversity using digital elevation models (DEMs) and remote sensing (RS) data was scrutinized in Finland, Northern Europe at a landscape scale. The main methods in the evaluation of spatial prediction ability of Geodiversity and the relative contributions of DEM and RS data were generalized additive modeling (GAM) and variation partitioning. Based on the results, Geodiversity was mainly determined by polygenetic bedrock topography and fluvial activity, and correlated most strongly with variables describing high potential energy and topographical heterogeneity. The spatial patterns of Geodiversity were robustly predicted across the study areas using multivariate GAMs. The higher predictive performance of the DEM- versus RS-based variables was evident across the study areas. In conclusion, we propose that statistically-based spatial prediction offers an opportunity for characterizing Geodiversity of a large area in a systematic, repeatable, and spatially exhaustive manner.
-
Geodiversity of high latitude landscapes in northern finland
Geomorphology, 2010Co-Authors: Jan Hjort, Miska LuotoAbstract:Abstract Geodiversity is a rather new, emerging topic in earth science. There is now increased awareness of our need to understand patterns of Geodiversity in different landscapes facing global change. In this study, we systematically inventoried Geodiversity and topographical parameters in an area of 285 km 2 in subarctic Finland. We quantified the spatial variation of Geodiversity using four different measures and analysed the relationship between Geodiversity and topography using a spatial grid system at a landscape scale (the size of the analysis window was 500 × 500 m). The number of different elements of Geodiversity (total Geodiversity) varied from 2 to 22 per grid cell. The spatial pattern of the total Geodiversity, geomorphological process variability and Geodiversity index were fairly similar, whereas of the other Geodiversity measures, the measure of temporal diversity differed the most. Topographically, the high-diversity sites occurred in rather steep-sided valleys. Areas of high Geodiversity reflect heterogeneous abiotic conditions where both erosion and accumulation processes play a major role in landscape development. The mapping of Geodiversity may be indicative not only in the context of geomorphology, but also provide a focus for conservation initiatives. From a conservation point of view, the lack of wider knowledge of the distribution of Geodiversity and its relationship to biodiversity hinders the protection of ecologically and geomorphologically valuable regions. Thus, we recommend that further studies focus on: (1) quantifying spatial patterns of Geodiversity in different regions, (2) determining the key drivers that control the variability of Geodiversity and (3) exploring the linkage between Geodiversity and biodiversity.