海带林与海胆荒地:两种稳定的海洋生境所提供的生态系统功能和服务比较。

IF 3.8 1区 生物学 Q1 BIOLOGY Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-06 DOI:10.1098/rspb.2024.1539
Aaron M Eger, Caitlin O Blain, Amelia L Brown, Sharon S W Chan, Kelsey I Miller, Adriana Vergés
{"title":"海带林与海胆荒地:两种稳定的海洋生境所提供的生态系统功能和服务比较。","authors":"Aaron M Eger, Caitlin O Blain, Amelia L Brown, Sharon S W Chan, Kelsey I Miller, Adriana Vergés","doi":"10.1098/rspb.2024.1539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Kelp forests and urchin barrens are two stable states in rocky reef ecosystems, each providing unique ecosystem functions like habitat for marine species and primary production. While studies frequently show that kelp forests support higher levels of some ecosystem functions than urchin barren habitats, no research has yet compared average differences. To address this gap, we first conducted a meta-analysis of studies that directly compared the ecosystem functions, services and general attributes provided by each habitat. We also compiled individual studies on ecosystem properties from both habitats and qualitatively assessed the benefits provided. The meta-analysis included 388 observations from 55 studies across 14 countries. We found that kelp forests consistently delivered higher levels of ecosystem properties such as biodiversity, species richness, abalone abundance and sea urchin roe quality. Urchin barrens supported higher urchin density and crustose coralline algae cover. The qualitative review further supported these findings, showing that kelp forests ranked higher in 11 out of 15 ecosystem properties. These findings can help guide decisions on managing rocky reef habitats and demonstrate the benefits of preserving or expanding kelp forests.</p>","PeriodicalId":20589,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences","volume":"291 2034","pages":"20241539"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11538989/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Kelp forests versus urchin barrens: a comparison of ecosystem functions and services provided by two alternative stable marine habitats.\",\"authors\":\"Aaron M Eger, Caitlin O Blain, Amelia L Brown, Sharon S W Chan, Kelsey I Miller, Adriana Vergés\",\"doi\":\"10.1098/rspb.2024.1539\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Kelp forests and urchin barrens are two stable states in rocky reef ecosystems, each providing unique ecosystem functions like habitat for marine species and primary production. While studies frequently show that kelp forests support higher levels of some ecosystem functions than urchin barren habitats, no research has yet compared average differences. To address this gap, we first conducted a meta-analysis of studies that directly compared the ecosystem functions, services and general attributes provided by each habitat. We also compiled individual studies on ecosystem properties from both habitats and qualitatively assessed the benefits provided. The meta-analysis included 388 observations from 55 studies across 14 countries. We found that kelp forests consistently delivered higher levels of ecosystem properties such as biodiversity, species richness, abalone abundance and sea urchin roe quality. Urchin barrens supported higher urchin density and crustose coralline algae cover. The qualitative review further supported these findings, showing that kelp forests ranked higher in 11 out of 15 ecosystem properties. These findings can help guide decisions on managing rocky reef habitats and demonstrate the benefits of preserving or expanding kelp forests.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20589,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences\",\"volume\":\"291 2034\",\"pages\":\"20241539\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11538989/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2024.1539\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2024.1539","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

海藻林和海胆荒地是岩礁生态系统中的两种稳定状态,每种状态都能提供独特的生态系统功能,如海洋物种的栖息地和初级生产。虽然经常有研究表明,海藻林比海胆荒芜栖息地支持更高水平的某些生态系统功能,但还没有研究对平均差异进行过比较。为了填补这一空白,我们首先对直接比较每种生境所提供的生态系统功能、服务和一般属性的研究进行了荟萃分析。我们还汇编了有关两种栖息地生态系统属性的单项研究,并对其提供的益处进行了定性评估。荟萃分析包括来自 14 个国家 55 项研究的 388 项观察结果。我们发现,海藻林始终提供较高水平的生态系统属性,如生物多样性、物种丰富度、鲍鱼丰度和海胆子质量。海胆荒地支持更高的海胆密度和甲壳珊瑚藻覆盖率。定性审查进一步支持了这些发现,显示海藻林在 15 个生态系统属性中的 11 个属性中排名较高。这些发现有助于指导岩礁栖息地的管理决策,并证明了保护或扩大海藻林的益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Kelp forests versus urchin barrens: a comparison of ecosystem functions and services provided by two alternative stable marine habitats.

Kelp forests and urchin barrens are two stable states in rocky reef ecosystems, each providing unique ecosystem functions like habitat for marine species and primary production. While studies frequently show that kelp forests support higher levels of some ecosystem functions than urchin barren habitats, no research has yet compared average differences. To address this gap, we first conducted a meta-analysis of studies that directly compared the ecosystem functions, services and general attributes provided by each habitat. We also compiled individual studies on ecosystem properties from both habitats and qualitatively assessed the benefits provided. The meta-analysis included 388 observations from 55 studies across 14 countries. We found that kelp forests consistently delivered higher levels of ecosystem properties such as biodiversity, species richness, abalone abundance and sea urchin roe quality. Urchin barrens supported higher urchin density and crustose coralline algae cover. The qualitative review further supported these findings, showing that kelp forests ranked higher in 11 out of 15 ecosystem properties. These findings can help guide decisions on managing rocky reef habitats and demonstrate the benefits of preserving or expanding kelp forests.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
4.30%
发文量
502
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Proceedings B is the Royal Society’s flagship biological research journal, accepting original articles and reviews of outstanding scientific importance and broad general interest. The main criteria for acceptance are that a study is novel, and has general significance to biologists. Articles published cover a wide range of areas within the biological sciences, many have relevance to organisms and the environments in which they live. The scope includes, but is not limited to, ecology, evolution, behavior, health and disease epidemiology, neuroscience and cognition, behavioral genetics, development, biomechanics, paleontology, comparative biology, molecular ecology and evolution, and global change biology.
期刊最新文献
Cooling down is as important as warming up for a large-bodied tropical reptile. Global analysis of acoustic frequency characteristics in birds. Greater plasticity in CTmax with increased climate variability among populations of tailed frogs. Identifying signatures of the earliest benthic bulldozers in emergent subaerial conditions during the colonization of land by animals. Inbreeding avoidance and cost in a small, isolated trout population.
×
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