Literature DB >> 16519227

All wet or dried up? Real differences between aquatic and terrestrial food webs.

Jonathan B Shurin1, Daniel S Gruner, Helmut Hillebrand.   

Abstract

Ecologists have greatly advanced our understanding of the processes that regulate trophic structure and dynamics in ecosystems. However, the causes of systematic variation among ecosystems remain controversial and poorly elucidated. Contrasts between aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems in particular have inspired much speculation, but only recent empirical quantification. Here, we review evidence for systematic differences in energy flow and biomass partitioning between producers and herbivores, detritus and decomposers, and higher trophic levels. The magnitudes of different trophic pathways vary considerably, with less herbivory, more decomposers and more detrital accumulation on land. Aquatic-terrestrial differences are consistent across the global range of primary productivity, indicating that structural contrasts between the two systems are preserved despite large variation in energy input. We argue that variable selective forces drive differences in plant allocation patterns in aquatic and terrestrial environments that propagate upward to shape food webs. The small size and lack of structural tissues in phytoplankton mean that aquatic primary producers achieve faster growth rates and are more nutritious to heterotrophs than their terrestrial counterparts. Plankton food webs are also strongly size-structured, while size and trophic position are less strongly correlated in most terrestrial (and many benthic) habitats. The available data indicate that contrasts between aquatic and terrestrial food webs are driven primarily by the growth rate, size and nutritional quality of autotrophs. Differences in food-web architecture (food chain length, the prevalence of omnivory, specialization or anti-predator defences) may arise as a consequence of systematic variation in the character of the producer community.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16519227      PMCID: PMC1560001          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2005.3377

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  27 in total

1.  Spatial scaling laws yield a synthetic theory of biodiversity.

Authors:  M E Ritchie; H Olff
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1999-08-05       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Patterns in the Fate of Production in Plant Communities.

Authors:  Just Cebrian
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 3.926

3.  A global budget for fine root biomass, surface area, and nutrient contents.

Authors:  R B Jackson; H A Mooney; E D Schulze
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1997-07-08       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Meta-analysis of trade-offs among plant antiherbivore defenses: are plants jacks-of-all-trades, masters of all?

Authors:  Julia Koricheva; Heli Nykänen; Ernesto Gianoli
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2004-02-23       Impact factor: 3.926

5.  Predator diversity dampens trophic cascades.

Authors:  Deborah L Finke; Robert F Denno
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2004-05-27       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  On the generality of the latitudinal diversity gradient.

Authors:  Helmut Hillebrand
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2004-01-15       Impact factor: 3.926

7.  The imprint of the geographical, evolutionary and ecological context on species-area relationships.

Authors:  Stina Drakare; Jack J Lennon; Helmut Hillebrand
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 9.492

8.  Trophic levels and trophic tangles: the prevalence of omnivory in real food webs.

Authors:  Ross M Thompson; Martin Hemberg; Brian M Starzomski; Jonathan B Shurin
Journal:  Ecology       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 5.499

9.  Resource availability and plant antiherbivore defense.

Authors:  P D Coley; J P Bryant; F S Chapin
Journal:  Science       Date:  1985-11-22       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  The dynamics of spatially coupled food webs.

Authors:  K S McCann; J B Rasmussen; J Umbanhowar
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 9.492

View more
  58 in total

1.  The relationship between species richness and evenness: a meta-analysis of studies across aquatic ecosystems.

Authors:  Janne Soininen; Sophia Passy; Helmut Hillebrand
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2011-12-31       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Warming alters community size structure and ecosystem functioning.

Authors:  Matteo Dossena; Gabriel Yvon-Durocher; Jonathan Grey; José M Montoya; Daniel M Perkins; Mark Trimmer; Guy Woodward
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-04-11       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Dimensionality of consumer search space drives trophic interaction strengths.

Authors:  Samraat Pawar; Anthony I Dell; Van M Savage
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2012-06-28       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  Interactions among predators and the cascading effects of vertebrate insectivores on arthropod communities and plants.

Authors:  Kailen A Mooney; Daniel S Gruner; Nicholas A Barber; Sunshine A Van Bael; Stacy M Philpott; Russell Greenberg
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-04-05       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Do extrafloral nectar resources, species abundances, and body sizes contribute to the structure of ant-plant mutualistic networks?

Authors:  Scott A Chamberlain; Jeffrey R Kilpatrick; J Nathaniel Holland
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2010-06-06       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  Latitudinal gradients in biotic niche breadth vary across ecosystem types.

Authors:  Alyssa R Cirtwill; Daniel B Stouffer; Tamara N Romanuk
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2015-11-22       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  Ratio-dependent response of a temperate Australian estuarine system to sustained nitrogen loading.

Authors:  Melanie J Bishop; Brendan P Kelaher; Marcus P Lincoln Smith; Paul H York; David J Booth
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2006-07-15       Impact factor: 3.225

8.  Consumer versus resource control of producer diversity depends on ecosystem type and producer community structure.

Authors:  Helmut Hillebrand; Daniel S Gruner; Elizabeth T Borer; Matthew E S Bracken; Elsa E Cleland; James J Elser; W Stanley Harpole; Jacqueline T Ngai; Eric W Seabloom; Jonathan B Shurin; Jennifer E Smith
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2007-06-20       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 9.  The more food webs change, the more they stay the same.

Authors:  Kevin Shear McCann; Neil Rooney
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2009-06-27       Impact factor: 6.237

10.  When microbes and consumers determine the limiting nutrient of autotrophs: a theoretical analysis.

Authors:  Mehdi Cherif; Michel Loreau
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-02-07       Impact factor: 5.349

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.