Article

Plant spatial patterns identify alternative ecosystem multifunctionality states in global drylands

  • Nature Ecology & Evolution 1, Article number: 0003 (2017)
  • doi:10.1038/s41559-016-0003
  • Download Citation
Received:
Accepted:
Published online:

Abstract

The response of drylands to environmental gradients can be abrupt rather than gradual. These shifts largely occur unannounced and are difficult to reverse once they happen; their prompt detection is of crucial importance. The distribution of vegetation patch sizes may indicate the proximity to these shifts, but the use of this metric is hampered by a lack of large-scale studies relating these distributions to the provision of multiple ecosystem functions (multifunctionality) and comparing them to other ecosystem attributes, such as total plant cover. Here we sampled 115 dryland ecosystems across the globe and related their vegetation attributes (cover and patch size distributions) to multifunctionality. Multifunctionality followed a bimodal distribution across our sites, suggesting alternative states in the functioning of drylands. Although plant cover was the strongest predictor of multifunctionality when linear analyses were used, only patch size distributions reflected the bimodal distribution of multifunctionality observed. Differences in the coupling between nutrient cycles and in the importance of self-organizing biotic processes characterized the two multifunctionality states observed. Our findings support the use of vegetation patterns as indicators of ecosystem functioning in drylands and pave the way for developing effective strategies to monitor desertification processes.

  • Subscribe to Nature Ecology & Evolution for full access:

    $99

    Subscribe

  • Purchase article full text and PDF:

    $32

    Buy now

Additional access options:

Already a subscriber?  Log in  now or  Register  for online access.

References

  1. 1.

    et al. Early-warning signals for critical transitions. Nature 461, 53–59 (2009).

  2. 2.

    et al. Early warning signals of ecological transitions: methods for spatial patterns. PLoS One 9, e92097 (2014).

  3. 3.

    , , & Global resilience of tropical forest and savanna to critical transitions. Science 334, 232–235 (2011).

  4. 4.

    Millenium Ecosystem Assessment Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Desertification Synthesis (World Resources Institute, 2005).

  5. 5.

    , , & Diversity of vegetation patterns and desertification. Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 198101 (2001).

  6. 6.

    , , & Self-organized patchiness and catastrophic shifts in ecosystems. Science 305, 1926–1929 (2004).

  7. 7.

    et al. Global desertification: building a science for dryland development. Science 316, 847–851 (2007).

  8. 8.

    , , & Positive feedbacks promote power-law clustering of Kalahari vegetation. Nature 449, 209–212 (2007).

  9. 9.

    et al. Robust scaling in ecosystems and the meltdown of patch size distributions before extinction. Ecol. Lett. 14, 29–35 (2011).

  10. 10.

    , , & Spatial vegetation patterns as early signs of desertification: a case study of a desert steppe in Inner Mongolia, China. Landscape Ecol. 25, 1519–1527 (2010).

  11. 11.

    , , & Assessing landscape structure and pattern fragmentation in semiarid ecosystems using patch-size distributions. Ecol. Appl. 21, 2793–2805 (2011).

  12. 12.

    et al. Spatial vegetation patterns and imminent desertification in Mediterranean arid ecosystems. Nature 449, 213–217 (2007).

  13. 13.

    & Facilitation, competition, and vegetation patchiness: from scale free distribution to patterns. J. Theor. Biol. 253, 838–842 (2008).

  14. 14.

    & Is the patch size distribution of vegetation a suitable indicator of desertification processes? Ecology 90, 1729–1735 (2009).

  15. 15.

    , , , & A test of critical thresholds and their indicators in a desertification-prone ecosystem: more resilience than we thought. Ecol. Lett. 16, 339–345 (2013).

  16. 16.

    , , , & Is the patch size distribution of vegetation a suitable indicator of desertification processes? Ecology 91, 3739–3742 (2010).

  17. 17.

    , , , & Early warning signals of regime shifts from cross-scale connectivity of land-cover patterns. Ecol. Indic. 45, 549–560 (2014).

  18. 18.

    et al. Towards sustainable land management in the drylands: scientific connections in monitoring and assessing dryland degradation, climate change and biodiversity. Land Degrad. Dev. 22, 248–260 (2011).

  19. 19.

    et al. Decoupling of soil nutrient cycles as a function of aridity in global drylands. Nature 502, 672–676 (2013).

  20. 20.

    et al. Plant species richness and ecosystem multifunctionality in global drylands. Science 335, 214–218 (2012).

  21. 21.

    et al. High plant diversity is needed to maintain ecosystem services. Nature 477, 199–202 (2011).

  22. 22.

    et al. Self-organization of vegetation in arid ecosystems. Am. Nat. 160, 524–530 (2002).

  23. 23.

    & Threshold models in restoration and conservation: a developing framework. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24, 271–279 (2009).

  24. 24.

    , , , & Catastrophic shifts in ecosystems. Nature 413, 591–596 (2001).

  25. 25.

    , & Alternative states and positive feedbacks in restoration ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 46–53 (2004).

  26. 26.

    Ecology of Desert Systems (Academic, 2002).

  27. 27.

    et al. Feedbacks between vegetation pattern and resource loss dramatically decrease ecosystem resilience and restoration potential in a simple dryland model. Landscape Ecol. 28, 931–942 (2013).

  28. 28.

    et al. Incorporating plant functional diversity effects in ecosystem service assessments. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 20684–20689 (2007).

  29. 29.

    & Community assembly and shifts in plant trait distributions across an environmental gradient in coastal California. Ecol. Monogr. 79, 109–126 (2009).

  30. 30.

    et al. Aridity threshold in controlling ecosystem nitrogen cycling in arid and semi-arid grasslands. Nat. Commun. 5, 4799 (2014).

  31. 31.

    & Landscape Function Analysis Manual: Procedures for Monitoring and Assessing Landscapes with Special Reference to Minesites and Rangelands (CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, 2004).

  32. 32.

    , , & A missing link between facilitation and plant species coexistence: nurses benefit generally rare species more than common ones. J. Ecol. 103, 1183–1189 (2015).

  33. 33.

    & Plant–plant interactions, environmental gradients and plant diversity: a global synthesis of community-level studies. Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 16, 154–163 (2014).

  34. 34.

    & The relative contribution of abundance and phylogeny to the structure of plant facilitation networks. Oikos 120, 1351–1356 (2011).

  35. 35.

    , , & Modern Quaternary plant lineages promote diversity through facilitation of ancient Tertiary lineages. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 16812–16817 (2006).

  36. 36.

    , , & Carbon, Land and Water: a Global Analysis of the Hydrologic Dimensions of Climate Change Mitigation through Afforestation/Reforestation Report no. 101 (International Water Management Institute, 2006).

  37. 37.

    , , , & Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Climatol. 25, 1965–1978 (2005).

  38. 38.

    , , , & Space can substitute for time in predicting climate-change effects on biodiversity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 9374–9379 (2013).

  39. 39.

    , , & Emerging horizons in biodiversity and ecosystem functioning research. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24, 505–514 (2009).

  40. 40.

    Ecosystem functioning (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2010).

  41. 41.

    & Biodiversity and ecosystem multifunctionality. Nature 448, 188–190 (2007).

  42. 42.

    , & Multiple functions increase the importance of biodiversity for overall ecosystem functioning. Ecology 89, 1223–1231 (2008).

  43. 43.

    , , & Sustaining multiple ecosystem functions in grassland communities requires higher biodiversity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 1443–1446 (2010).

  44. 44.

    et al. Linkages of plant traits to soil properties and the functioning of temperate grassland. J. Ecol. 98, 1074–1083 (2010).

  45. 45.

    et al. Do biotic interactions modulate ecosystem functioning along stress gradients? Insights from semi-arid plant and biological soil crust communities. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 365, 2057–2070 (2010).

  46. 46.

    et al. Quantifying the evidence for biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning and services. Ecol. Lett. 9, 1146–1156 (2006).

  47. 47.

    , , , & On the importance of shrub encroachment by sprouters, climate, species richness and anthropic factors for ecosystem multifunctionality in semi-arid Mediterranean ecosystems. Ecosystems 16, 1248–1261 (2013).

  48. 48.

    , , & Soil biodiversity and soil community composition determine ecosystem multifunctionality. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 5266–5270 (2014).

  49. 49.

    et al. Discontinuity in the responses of ecosystem processes and multifunctionality to altered soil community composition. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 14478–14483 (2014).

  50. 50.

    , , & Loss of rare fish species from tropical floodplain food webs affects community structure and ecosystem multifunctionality in a mesocosm experiment. PLoS ONE 9, e84568 (2014).

  51. 51.

    et al. Functional diversity enhances the resistance of ecosystem multifunctionality to aridity in Mediterranean drylands. New Phytol. 206, 660–671 (2015).

  52. 52.

    et al. Biodiversity enhances ecosystem multifunctionality across trophic levels and habitats. Nat. Commun. 6, 6936 (2015).

  53. 53.

    et al. Investigating the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem multifunctionality: challenges and solutions. Methods Ecol. Evol. 5, 111–124 (2014).

  54. 54.

    , & On estimating the exponent of power-law frequency distributions. Ecology 89, 905–912 (2008).

  55. 55.

    & Fundamentals of Digital Image Processing: A Practical Approach with Examples in Matlab (Wiley-Blackwell, 2011).

  56. 56.

    & A review on image segmentation techniques. Pattern Recogn. 26, 1277–1294 (1993).

  57. 57.

    & A survey of image classification methods and techniques for improving classification performance. Int. J. Remote Sens. 28, 823–870 (2007).

  58. 58.

    MATLAB v. 7.5.0.342 (R2007b) (The MathWorks Inc., 2007).

  59. 59.

    The Basic Practice of Statistics (Palgrave Macmillan, 2010).

  60. 60.

    , & Power-law distributions in empirical data. SIAM Rev. 51, 661–703 (2009).

  61. 61.

    Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf’s law. Contemp. Phys. 46, 323–351 (2005).

  62. 62.

    & Numerical recipes in C: the art of scientific computing. Risk Anal. 9, 415–416 (1989).

  63. 63.

    Structural Equation Modeling and Natural Systems (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2006).

  64. 64.

    , , & Plant spatial pattern predicts hillslope runoff and erosion in a semiarid Mediterranean landscape. Ecosystems 10, 987–998 (2007).

  65. 65.

    & On the origin of tiger bush. Bull. Math. Biol. 59, 263–294 (1997).

  66. 66.

    & Finite Mixture Models (Wiley, 2004).

  67. 67.

    & A modified method for detecting incipient bifurcations in a dynamical system. Geophys. Res. Lett. 34, L03712 (2007).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank D. Eldridge, E. Allan and M. Boer for comments and inputs on earlier versions of this manuscript, C. Xu for discussions during the processing of the images and all the members of the EPES-BIOCOM network for the collection of field data. This work was funded by the European Research Council under the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013) and ERC grant agreement no. 242658 (BIOCOM). M.B. was supported by a FPU fellowship from the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports (ref. AP2010-0759). F.T.M. acknowledges support from a Humboldt Research Award from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation during writing of the manuscript. S.K. received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013) under grant agreement no. 283068 (CASCADE).

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Biología y Geología, Física y Química Inorgánica, Escuela Superior de Ciencias Experimentales y Tecnología, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, C/Tulipán s/n, Móstoles 28933, Spain

    • Miguel Berdugo
    •  & Fernando T. Maestre
  2. Institut des Sciences de l’Evolution, BioDICée team, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, IRD, EPHE, CC 065, Place Eugène Bataillon, Montpellier 34095, Cedex 5, France.

    • Sonia Kéfi
  3. Institute of Plant Sciences, University of Bern, Altenbergrain 21, 3013 Bern, Switzerland

    • Santiago Soliveres

Authors

  1. Search for Miguel Berdugo in:

  2. Search for Sonia Kéfi in:

  3. Search for Santiago Soliveres in:

  4. Search for Fernando T. Maestre in:

Contributions

F.T.M. designed the study and coordinated field data acquisition. Data analyses were done by M.B., assisted by S.K. and S.S. The paper was written by M.B. and all authors substantially contributed to subsequent drafts.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miguel Berdugo.

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary information

    Supplementary Figures 1–9, Supplementary Table 1, Supplementary Methods, Supplementary References