A global meta-analysis of the impacts of forest fragmentation on biotic mutualisms and antagonisms

IF 5.2 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Conservation Biology Pub Date : 2023-10-19 DOI:10.1111/cobi.14206
Tovah Siegel, Ainhoa Magrach, William F. Laurance, David Luther
{"title":"A global meta-analysis of the impacts of forest fragmentation on biotic mutualisms and antagonisms","authors":"Tovah Siegel,&nbsp;Ainhoa Magrach,&nbsp;William F. Laurance,&nbsp;David Luther","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Forest fragmentation is a grave threat to biodiversity. Forests are becoming increasingly fragmented with more than 70% now &lt; 1 km from forest edge. Although much is known about the effects of forest fragmentation on individual species, much less is understood about its effects on species interactions (i.e., mutualisms, antagonisms, etc.). In 2014, a previous meta-analysis assessed the impacts of forest fragmentation on different species interactions, across 82 studies. We pooled the previous data with data published in the last 10 years (combined total 104 studies and 168 effect sizes). We compared the new set of publications (22 studies and 32 effect sizes) with the old set to evaluate potential changes in species interactions over time given the global increase in fragmentation rates. Mutualisms were more negatively affected by forest fragmentation than antagonisms (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.0001). Edge effects, fragment size, and degradation negatively affected mutualisms, but not antagonisms, a different finding from the original meta-analysis. Parasitic interactions increased as fragment size decreased (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.0001)—an intriguing result at variance with earlier studies. New publications showed a more negative mean effect size of forest fragmentation on mutualisms than old publications. Although research is still limited for some interactions, we identified an important scientific trend: current research tends to focus on antagonisms. We concluded that forest fragmentation disrupts important species interactions and that this disruption has increased over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":"38 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cobi.14206","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Biology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cobi.14206","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Forest fragmentation is a grave threat to biodiversity. Forests are becoming increasingly fragmented with more than 70% now < 1 km from forest edge. Although much is known about the effects of forest fragmentation on individual species, much less is understood about its effects on species interactions (i.e., mutualisms, antagonisms, etc.). In 2014, a previous meta-analysis assessed the impacts of forest fragmentation on different species interactions, across 82 studies. We pooled the previous data with data published in the last 10 years (combined total 104 studies and 168 effect sizes). We compared the new set of publications (22 studies and 32 effect sizes) with the old set to evaluate potential changes in species interactions over time given the global increase in fragmentation rates. Mutualisms were more negatively affected by forest fragmentation than antagonisms (p < 0.0001). Edge effects, fragment size, and degradation negatively affected mutualisms, but not antagonisms, a different finding from the original meta-analysis. Parasitic interactions increased as fragment size decreased (p < 0.0001)—an intriguing result at variance with earlier studies. New publications showed a more negative mean effect size of forest fragmentation on mutualisms than old publications. Although research is still limited for some interactions, we identified an important scientific trend: current research tends to focus on antagonisms. We concluded that forest fragmentation disrupts important species interactions and that this disruption has increased over time.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
森林破碎化对生物相互作用和拮抗作用影响的全球元分析。
森林破碎化是对生物多样性的严重威胁。森林正变得越来越分散,现在70%以上的森林距离森林边缘不到1公里。虽然人们对森林破碎化对单个物种的影响知之甚少,但对其对物种相互作用的影响却知之甚少。2014年,Magrach等人。通过82项研究评估了森林破碎化对不同物种相互作用的影响。我们通过将他们的原始数据与过去10年中发表的新数据相结合,扩展了他们的发现,产生了104项研究和168个效应大小。我们还将新的出版物集与旧的出版物集进行了比较,以评估在全球碎片化率增加的情况下物种相互作用随时间的潜在变化。我们的研究结果证实了最初的发现,即森林破碎化对相互作用的负面影响比拮抗剂更大(p<0.0001)。此外,我们发现边缘效应、碎片大小和降解对相互作用产生负面影响,但对拮抗剂没有负面影响;与最初的荟萃分析结果不同。我们确定,随着碎片大小的减小,寄生相互作用更强(p<0.0001)——这是一个有趣的结果,与早期的研究不同。当比较新旧出版物的数据时,我们发现森林破碎化对互惠关系的平均效应大小更为负面。虽然对某些相互作用的研究仍然有限,但我们发现了一个重要的科学趋势:当前的研究更多地关注对抗。我们得出的结论是,森林破碎化破坏了重要的物种相互作用,而且这种破坏随着时间的推移而增加。这篇文章受版权保护。保留所有权利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Conservation Biology
Conservation Biology 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
3.20%
发文量
175
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Conservation Biology welcomes submissions that address the science and practice of conserving Earth's biological diversity. We encourage submissions that emphasize issues germane to any of Earth''s ecosystems or geographic regions and that apply diverse approaches to analyses and problem solving. Nevertheless, manuscripts with relevance to conservation that transcend the particular ecosystem, species, or situation described will be prioritized for publication.
期刊最新文献
Effects of deforestation on multitaxa community similarity in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Advancing at-risk species recovery planning in an era of rapid ecological change with a transparent, flexible, and expert-engaged approach. Assessing disturbances in surviving primary forests of Europe. Lessons from a Rubik's Cube to solve the biodiversity crisis. Effectiveness of protected areas in the Caucasus Mountains in preventing rangeland degradation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1