Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Wissenschaftlicher Artikel (Fachzeitschriften) (7) (entfernen)
Sprache
- Englisch (7) (entfernen)
Volltext vorhanden
- ja (7)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- nein (7)
Schlagworte
- Biodiversität (5)
- Biomonitoring (3)
- Europa (2)
- Insekten (2)
- Klimaänderung (2)
- LTER (2)
- biodiversity (2)
- insect monitoring (2)
- Aquatisches Ökosystem (1)
- Art (1)
Institut
1. Recent reports on insect decline have highlighted the need for long-term data on insect communities towards identifying their trends and drivers.
2. With the launch of many new insect monitoring schemes to investigate insect communities over large spatial and temporal scales, Malaise traps have become one of the most important tools due to the broad spectrum of species collected and reduced capture bias through passive sampling of insects day and night. However, Malaise traps can vary in size, shape, and colour, and it is unknown how these differences affect biomass, species richness, and composition of trap catch, making it difficult to compare results between studies.
3. We compared five Malaise trap types (three variations of the Townes and two variations of the Bartak Malaise trap) to determine their effects on biomass and species richness as identified by metabarcoding.
4. Insect biomass varied by 20%–55%, not strictly following trap size but varying with trap type. Total species richness was 20%–38% higher in the three Townes trap models compared to the Bartak traps. Bartak traps captured lower richness of highly mobile taxa but increased richness of ground-dwelling taxa. The white roofed Townes trap captured a higher richness of pollinators.
5. We find that biomass, total richness, and taxa group specific richness are all sensitive to Malaise trap type. Trap type should be carefully considered and aligned to match monitoring and research questions. Additionally, our estimates of trap type effects can be used to adjust results to facilitate comparisons across studies.
Research in global change ecology relies heavily on global climatic grids derived from estimates of air temperature in open areas at around 2 m above the ground. These climatic grids do not reflect conditions below vegetation canopies and near the ground surface, where critical ecosystem functions occur and most terrestrial species reside. Here, we provide global maps of soil temperature and bioclimatic variables at a 1-km2 resolution for 0–5 and 5–15 cm soil depth. These maps were created by calculating the difference (i.e. offset) between in situ soil temperature measurements, based on time series from over 1200 1-km2 pixels (summarized from 8519 unique temperature sensors) across all the world's major terrestrial biomes, and coarse-grained air temperature estimates from ERA5-Land (an atmospheric reanalysis by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts). We show that mean annual soil temperature differs markedly from the corresponding gridded air temperature, by up to 10°C (mean = 3.0 ± 2.1°C), with substantial variation across biomes and seasons. Over the year, soils in cold and/or dry biomes are substantially warmer (+3.6 ± 2.3°C) than gridded air temperature, whereas soils in warm and humid environments are on average slightly cooler (−0.7 ± 2.3°C). The observed substantial and biome-specific offsets emphasize that the projected impacts of climate and climate change on near-surface biodiversity and ecosystem functioning are inaccurately assessed when air rather than soil temperature is used, especially in cold environments. The global soil-related bioclimatic variables provided here are an important step forward for any application in ecology and related disciplines. Nevertheless, we highlight the need to fill remaining geographic gaps by collecting more in situ measurements of microclimate conditions to further enhance the spatiotemporal resolution of global soil temperature products for ecological applications.
Local biodiversity trends over time are likely to be decoupled from global trends, as local processes may compensate or counteract global change. We analyze 161 long-term biological time series (15–91 years) collected across Europe, using a comprehensive dataset comprising ~6,200 marine, freshwater and terrestrial taxa. We test whether (i) local long-term biodiversity trends are consistent among biogeoregions, realms and taxonomic groups, and (ii) changes in biodiversity correlate with regional climate and local conditions. Our results reveal that local trends of abundance, richness and diversity differ among biogeoregions, realms and taxonomic groups, demonstrating that biodiversity changes at local scale are often complex and cannot be easily generalized. However, we find increases in richness and abundance with increasing temperature and naturalness as well as a clear spatial pattern in changes in community composition (i.e. temporal taxonomic turnover) in most biogeoregions of Northern and Eastern Europe.
Species distribution models (SDMs) are key tools in biodiversity and conservation, but assessing their reliability in unsampled locations is difficult, especially where there are sampling biases. We present a spatially-explicit sensitivity analysis for SDMs – SDM profiling – which assesses the leverage that unsampled locations have on the overall model by exploring the interaction between the effect on the variable response curves and the prevalence of the affected environmental conditions. The method adds a ‘pseudo-presence’ and ‘pseudo-absence’ to unsampled locations, re-running the SDM for each, and measuring the difference between the probability surfaces of the original and new SDMs. When the standardised difference values are plotted against each other (a ‘profile plot’), each point's location can be summarized by four leverage measures, calculated as the distances to each corner. We explore several applications: visualization of model certainty; identification of optimal new sampling locations and redundant existing locations; and flagging potentially erroneous occurrence records.
1. Among the many concerns for biodiversity in the Anthropocene, recent reports of flying insect loss are particularly alarming, given their importance as pollinators, pest control agents, and as a food source. Few insect monitoring programmes cover the large spatial scales required to provide more generalizable estimates of insect responses to global change drivers.
2. We ask how climate and surrounding habitat affect flying insect biomass using data from the first year of a new monitoring network at 84 locations across Germany comprising a spatial gradient of land cover types from protected to urban and crop areas.
3. Flying insect biomass increased linearly with temperature across Germany. However, the effect of temperature on flying insect biomass flipped to negative in the hot months of June and July when local temperatures most exceeded long-term averages.
4. Land cover explained little variation in insect biomass, but biomass was lowest in forests. Grasslands, pastures, and orchards harboured the highest insect biomass. The date of peak biomass was primarily driven by surrounding land cover, with grasslands especially having earlier insect biomass phenologies.
5. Standardised, large-scale monitoring provides key insights into the underlying processes of insect decline and is pivotal for the development of climate-adapted strategies to promote insect diversity. In a temperate climate region, we find that the positive effects of temperature on flying insect biomass diminish in a German summer at locations where temperatures most exceeded long-term averages. Our results highlight the importance of local adaptation in climate change-driven impacts on insect communities.
Global change effects on biodiversity and human wellbeing call for improved long-term environmental data as a basis for science, policy and decision making, including increased interoperability, multifunctionality, and harmonization. Based on the example of two global initiatives, the International Long-Term Ecological Research (ILTER) network and the Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO BON), we propose merging the frameworks behind these initiatives, namely ecosystem integrity and essential biodiversity variables, to serve as an improved guideline for future site-based long-term research and monitoring in terrestrial, freshwater and coastal ecosystems. We derive a list of specific recommendations of what and how to measure at a monitoring site and call for an integration of sites into co-located site networks across individual monitoring initiatives, and centered on ecosystems. This facilitates the generation of linked comprehensive ecosystem monitoring data, supports synergies in the use of costly infrastructures, fosters cross-initiative research and provides a template for collaboration beyond the ILTER and GEO BON communities.
Owing to a long history of anthropogenic pressures, freshwater ecosystems are among the most vulnerable to biodiversity loss1. Mitigation measures, including wastewater treatment and hydromorphological restoration, have aimed to improve environmental quality and foster the recovery of freshwater biodiversity2. Here, using 1,816 time series of freshwater invertebrate communities collected across 22 European countries between 1968 and 2020, we quantified temporal trends in taxonomic and functional diversity and their responses to environmental pressures and gradients. We observed overall increases in taxon richness (0.73% per year), functional richness (2.4% per year) and abundance (1.17% per year). However, these increases primarily occurred before the 2010s, and have since plateaued. Freshwater communities downstream of dams, urban areas and cropland were less likely to experience recovery. Communities at sites with faster rates of warming had fewer gains in taxon richness, functional richness and abundance. Although biodiversity gains in the 1990s and 2000s probably reflect the effectiveness of water-quality improvements and restoration projects, the decelerating trajectory in the 2010s suggests that the current measures offer diminishing returns. Given new and persistent pressures on freshwater ecosystems, including emerging pollutants, climate change and the spread of invasive species, we call for additional mitigation to revive the recovery of freshwater biodiversity.