Dear WT, How about cultivation of fungi by termites and ants?
Andres Vina Wayne Tyson <[email protected]> wrote: >A cornfield requires cultivation. An ecosystem requires no cultivation. > >WT > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Ricardo Rivera > To: Wayne Tyson > Cc: [email protected] > Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2013 9:41 PM > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Human-assembled ecosystem > > > Why is novel ecosystem nauseating? There seems to be a negative bias towards > this idea in this thread. As scientist that we are, this seems a bit out of > place. For most of the literature on novel ecosystems, there is evidence that > the new arrangement of species (including many "invasive") can achieve equal > or similar ecosystem function as those of primary forests. See Lugo, Hobbes, > Marin-Spiotta and others if interested. I think that the "human-assembled > ecosystem" term is misleading as even in restoration ecology, humans do a > pretty poor job in assembling an ecosystem. ' > > > Is it a "human-assembled" ecosystem or is it "just" an assemblage of > species, each of which is doing what it can, when it can, where it can? > Ah-HA! This gets us close to the nitty-gritty of what an ecosystem is--AND > WHY! And perhaps more important, what an ecosystem IS NOT! > > > Exactly, who is to say what an ecosystem is not? Are corn fields an > ecosystem? Why not? Are the forests in Ascension Island not an ecosystem why > not? > > > > On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Wayne Tyson <[email protected]> wrote: > > Some pretty damn good commentary, if a bit challenging to intelligently > comment upon--mainly due to the scattered nature of the points alluded to. > > While I, too, am looking forward to the citations, I would prefer a > separate healthy discussion on Clements and "invasion biology" from those > well-versed in both. > > "Applied folks" tend to be held in disdain by academics, and "respectable" > journals usually do not deign to publish "applied" material. This, too, is > worthy of a separate discussion. > > I'd like to hear more about the "huge social component" with respect to > "invasive" species, and would especially like to hear more about academics' > discomfort in this regard. (What makes me most "uncomfortable" with the whole > set of invasive species issues is that they seem to be a mile wide and an > inch deep--a fertile field, if you'll pardon the punny irony, for > academicians to dig deeper into. Perhaps then some of the folklore in this > area of action-with-little-study can be clarified or disposed of. This brings > us back to one of the several reasons Ascension Island might be instructive. > Is it a "human-assembled" ecosystem or is it "just" an assemblage of species, > each of which is doing what it can, when it can, where it can? Ah-HA! This > gets us close to the nitty-gritty of what an ecosystem is--AND WHY! And > perhaps more important, what an ecosystem IS NOT! > > While the concept of "novel ecosystems" does nauseate me, I'm open to > being converted--and then falling from grace, as it were, perhaps yo-yo like, > until the end of my days. What I think of it now already seems like > "blithering stupidity" to me, but I'm interested in cogent arguments to the > contrary. > > Ecological history has always fascinated me, and I hope someone will bring > it all into focus soon! There was an interesting film treatment on (the > History Channel?) what would happen after humans died out fairly recently, > and while it was a good start, it seemed high on sensation and a bit lacking > on references (well, what can we expect from show-biz?). Let's take this a > bit further into the nuts and bolts of evolution. > > WT > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Duffy" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 1:18 PM > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Human-assembled ecosystem > > > > Hi Ian, > > > "While plant ecology abandoned Clements a generation or two ago, like a > lot > of things that hasn't always trickled down to more applied areas." > > > Just out of curiosity, can you cite a few references where Clements in > still used in invasion biology, specifically in "more applied areas"? > > I admit it is annoying but applied folks tend not to publish and when > they > do, it is often in gray literature. Many academic biologists thus may > have > a relatively uninformed, Rumsfeldian knowledge of what happens on the > ground. In addition, management of invasive species has a huge social > component. Relatively few academics are familiar, much less comfortable, > with this aspect. Finally there is the problem when protecting rare > 'primary' forest that ivory tower academics serve albeit unwittingly as > effective apologists for the destruction of the same. What does it matter > if the forest goes? Super tramp species can often "provide the same > services" and look forest. My best examples are all those novel forestry > projects China has tried, like the Green Wall in its grasslands or the > evergreen forests in heavy snow belts. > > It is sort of like regional cooking versus Western fast food. Macdonalds > and Kentucky Fried Chicken can arguably provide nutrition and definitely > taste great, but these invasive aliens threaten regional foods and > indirectly local cultures. We can live in a world of Big Macs and fries, > or > we can sample baozi, feijoada, yak yogurt, gallo pinto, pachamanca/hangi, > or callalo, although, personally having tried them, I will not much > mourn > the passing of muktuk, haggis, Vegemite, and guinea pig. > > Finally there is the arrogance of the present. Much of conservation > biology > is ultimately about preserving options for our children and their > children's children. Our knowledge about "novel ecosystems" is basically > recent and primitive, as is our knowledge of invasion biology. What seems > like a good idea involving "novel ecosystems" may be seen as blithering > stupidity a century from now, as new crop pests continue to arrive (elm, > chestnut etc, etc), local diseases turn epidemic (SARS), fires rearrange > the suburbs, and watersheds dry up. Not that the US lacks for its share. > > There is a marvelous field called ecological history. Cronon, Crosby, > Pyne, > McEvoy (to mention a few of my favorites) cover invasive species as part > of a bigger picture which appears to be too often lacking in contemporary > ecology. They are worth reading. Cows, grass, bees, Europeans were all > invasive taxa that have now become part of the American landscape, > dominants in "novel ecosystems". Had one asked the Sioux or Nez Perce in > 1877 or 1890 whether cows or Europeans were invasive, well history speaks > for itself. > > > Cheers, > > David Duffy > > > On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 7:01 AM, Ian Ramjohn <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > While plant ecology abandoned Clements a generation or two ago, like a > lot > of things that hasn't always trickled down to more applied areas. > > For this stuff specifically, there's a whole literature on 'novel > ecosystems' that has developed in the last several years...Richard > Hobbs, > Ariel Lugo, Timothy Seasted, etc. Plenty by Lugo et al. on tropical > forest > systems. > > On Aug 29, 2013, at 6:49 PM, "David Duffy" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I'd suggest that before folks get too excited about challenges to > "our > > ideas regarding community assembly", they reread Gleason (1926), > Whittaker > > (1975) and Hubbell (2001), amongst others. Also isolated islands with > > depauperate faunas and floras may not be the best models for general > > ecological theory, although they have done pretty well for evolution. > > > > David Duffy > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:01 AM, Richard Boyce <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Here's a *very* interesting story on the human-assembled ecosystems > of > >> Ascension Island in the tropical South Atlantic: > >> > > http://e360.yale.edu/feature/on_a_remote_island_lessons__in_how_ecosystems_function/2683/ > >> > >> I suspect that further research here may challenge our ideas > regarding > >> community assembly. > >> > >> ================================ > >> Richard L. Boyce, Ph.D. > >> Director, Environmental Science Program > >> Professor > >> Department of Biological Sciences, SC 150 > >> Northern Kentucky University > >> Nunn Drive > >> Highland Heights, KY 41099 USA > >> > >> 859-572-1407 (tel.) > >> 859-572-5639 (fax) > >> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > >> http://www.nku.edu/~boycer/ > >> ================================= > >> > >> "One of the advantages of being disorderly is that one is constantly > >> making exciting discoveries." - A.A. Milne > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit > > Botany > > University of Hawaii > > 3190 Maile Way > > Honolulu Hawaii 96822 USA > > 1-808-956-8218 > > > > > > -- > > Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit > Botany > University of Hawaii > 3190 Maile Way > Honolulu Hawaii 96822 USA > 1-808-956-8218 > > > > > > > -- > Ricardo J. Rivera
