Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Small Organisms (small + organism)
Selected AbstractsConverting visual census data into absolute abundance estimates: a method for calibrating timed counts of a sedentary insect populationECOLOGICAL ENTOMOLOGY, Issue 4 2003Ho Jung S. Yoo Abstract., 1.,Visual surveys for small organisms on complex substrates often yield serious underestimates of true counts. When both visual counts (relative estimates of abundance) and absolute counts can be obtained from the same sample, however, the visual counts can be calibrated such that absolute estimates can be obtained in the future from visual surveys alone. 2.,A method is presented for converting quick, timed, visual counts of a sedentary insect on a shrub into absolute estimates of abundance. 3.,Analogies were drawn from simple, well-known predation theories to develop a two-parameter non-linear model. Parameter estimates were obtained by both inverse prediction and direct estimation methods; the latter were found to yield more accurate predictions of absolute abundance. 4.,The calibration model is mechanistic in its approach, and thus has potential for application in other systems in which all individuals are visible, but able to be missed during timed counts. [source] PERSPECTIVE: THE SIZE-COMPLEXITY RULEEVOLUTION, Issue 9 2004J. T. Bonner Abstract It is widely accepted that bigger entities have a greater division of labor than smaller ones and this is reflected in the fact that larger multicellular organisms have a corresponding increase in the number of their cell types. This rule is examined in some detail from very small organisms to large animals, and plants, and societies. Compared to other size-related rules, the size-complexity rule is relatively rough and approximate, yet clearly it holds throughout the whole range of living organisms, as well as for societies. The relationship between size and complexity is analyzed by examining the effects of size increase and decrease: size increase requires an increase in complexity, whereas size decrease permits, and sometimes requires, a decrease in complexity. Conversely, an increase or decrease in complexity permits, but does not require changes in size. An especially compelling argument for the close relation between size and complexity can be found in size quorum sensing in very small multicellular organisms. [source] Existing in plenty: abundance, biomass and diversity of ciliates and meiofauna in small streamsFRESHWATER BIOLOGY, Issue 4 2008JULIA REISS Summary 1. The ciliate and metazoan meiofaunal assemblages of two contrasting lowland streams in south-east England were examined over the period of a year, using a high taxonomic resolution. Monthly samples were taken from an oligotrophic, acid stream (Lone Oak) and a circumneutral, nutrient-rich stream (Pant) between March 2003 and February 2004. 2. We assessed the relative importance of ciliates and rotifers within the small-sized benthic assemblage with respect to their abundance, biomass and species richness. In addition, we examined the influence of abiotic and biotic parameters and season on the assemblage composition at two levels of taxonomic resolution (species and groups). 3. Ciliates dominated the assemblages numerically, with maximum densities of over 900 000 and 6 000 000 ind. m,2 in Lone Oak and Pant respectively. Rotifers and nematodes dominated meiofaunal densities, although their contribution to total meiofaunal biomass (maxima of 71.9 mgC m,2 in Lone Oak and of 646.8 mgC m,2 in the Pant) was low and rotifer biomass equalled that of ciliates. 4. Although the two streams differed in terms of total abundance of ciliates and meiofauna and shared only 7% of species, the relative proportion of groups was similar. Sediment grain size distribution (the percentile representing the 0.5,1 mm fraction) was correlated with assemblage structure at the species level, revealing the tight coupling between these small organisms and their physical environment. Seasonal changes in the relative abundance of groups followed similar patterns in both streams, and were correlated with the abundance of cyclopoid copepods and temperature. 5. Information on these highly abundant but often overlooked faunal groups is essential for estimates of overall abundance, biomass, species richness and productivity in the benthos, and as such has important implications for several areas of aquatic research, e.g. for those dealing with trophic dynamics. [source] Biodiversity and ecosystem function in soilFUNCTIONAL ECOLOGY, Issue 3 2005A. H. FITTER Summary 1Soils are one of the last great frontiers for biodiversity research and are home to an extraordinary range of microbial and animal groups. Biological activities in soils drive many of the key ecosystem processes that govern the global system, especially in the cycling of elements such as carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus. 2We cannot currently make firm statements about the scale of biodiversity in soils, or about the roles played by soil organisms in the transformations of organic materials that underlie those cycles. The recent UK Soil Biodiversity Programme (SBP) has brought a unique concentration of researchers to bear on a single soil in Scotland, and has generated a large amount of data concerning biodiversity, carbon flux and resilience in the soil ecosystem. 3One of the key discoveries of the SBP was the extreme diversity of small organisms: researchers in the programme identified over 100 species of bacteria, 350 protozoa, 140 nematodes and 24 distinct types of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Statistical analysis of these results suggests a much greater ,hidden diversity'. In contrast, there was no unusual richness in other organisms, such as higher fungi, mites, collembola and annelids. 4Stable-isotope (13C) technology was used to measure carbon fluxes and map the path of carbon through the food web. A novel finding was the rapidity with which carbon moves through the soil biota, revealing an extraordinarily dynamic soil ecosystem. 5The combination of taxonomic diversity and rapid carbon flux makes the soil ecosystem highly resistant to perturbation through either changing soil structure or removing selected groups of organisms. [source] Does size matter for dispersal distance?GLOBAL ECOLOGY, Issue 4 2007David G. Jenkins ABSTRACT Aim, The aim of this study is to answer the questions: (1) do small organisms disperse farther than large, or vice versa; and (2) does the observed pattern differ for passive and active dispersers? These questions are central to several themes in biogeography (including microbial biogeography), macroecology, metacommunity ecology and conservation biology. Location, The meta-analysis was conducted using published data collected worldwide. Methods, We collected and analysed 795 data values in the peer-reviewed literature for direct observations of both maximal dispersal distance and mass of the dispersing organisms (e.g. seeds, not trees). Analysed taxa ranged in size from bacteria to whales. We applied macroecology analyses based on null models (using Monte Carlo randomizations) to test patterns relative to specific hypotheses. Results, Collected dispersal distance and mass data spanned 9 and 21 orders of magnitude, respectively. Active dispersers dispersed significantly farther (P < 0.001) and were significantly greater in mass (P < 0.001) than passive dispersers. Overall, size matters: larger active dispersers attained greater maximum observed dispersal distances than smaller active dispersers. In contrast, passive-disperser distances were random with respect to propagule mass, but not uniformly random, in part due to sparse data available for tiny propagules. Conclusions, Size is important to maximal dispersal distance for active dispersers, but not for passive dispersers. Claims that microbes disperse widely cannot be tested by current data based on direct observations of dispersal: indirect approaches will need to be applied. Distance,mass relationships should contribute to a resolution of neutral and niche-based metacommunity theories by helping scale expectations for dispersal limitation. Also, distance,mass relationships should inform analyses of latitudinal species richness and conservation biology topics such as fragmentation, umbrella species and taxonomic homogenization. [source] Impacts of traditional land uses on biodiversity outside conservation areas: effects on dung beetle communities of Vaalbos National ParkAFRICAN JOURNAL OF ECOLOGY, Issue 2 2010Thokozani S. Simelane Abstract Grazing is one of the key processes in terrestrial ecosystems and this can be provided by both indigenous and domestic ungulates. However, a question remains whether or not traditional forms of land use such as the grazing of domestic animals support the maintenance of biodiversity. If it does not, then the second question becomes to what extent does grazing of domestic animals alter the systems and processes that support biodiversity? This study demonstrates that in attempting to answer this question, small organisms like dung beetles are ideal indicators that can be used to express significant differences between conserved (indigenous) and non-conserved (domestic) land. As a general trend, studies that investigated these differences displayed differences through analysis of the diversity indices. This method has in most cases demonstrated a lack of contrast between conserved and non-conserved land. In the existence of such uncertainty this study has demonstrated that in such cases, where the analysis of biodiversity indices fail to demonstrate significant differences a closer examination of actual species such as guilds and functional groups could confirm significant differences between conserved and non-conserved land. These apparently conflicting findings reflect the need to consider the actual elements of biodiversity (e.g. species) when assessing conservation issues rather than just the statistical measures of biodiversity. Résumé Le pâturage est un des processus clés dans les écosystèmes terrestres, et il est le fait d'ongulés aussi bien indigènes que domestiques. Pourtant, la question subsiste de savoir si oui ou non des formes traditionnelles d'utilisation des terres telles que le pâturage des animaux domestiques favorisent le maintien de la biodiversité. Si la réponse est non, la seconde question consiste à se demander dans quelle mesure le pâturage des animaux domestiques modifie les systèmes et les processus qui sous-tendent la biodiversité. Cette étude montre que, pour essayer de répondre à cette question, de petits organismes comme les bousiers sont des indicateurs idéaux que l'on peut utiliser pour exprimer des différences significatives entre les terres protégées (animaux indigènes) et non protégées (animaux domestiques). Selon une tendance générale, les études qui ont recherché ces différences exprimaient des différences par l'analyse des indices de biodiversité. Dans la plupart des cas, cette méthode montrait un manque de contraste entre terres conservées et non conservées. Lorsqu'une telle incertitude subsiste, cette étude a pu montrer que, lorsque l'analyse des indices de biodiversité n'arrive pas à prouver de différences significatives, un examen plus approfondi d'espèces réelles, comme des guildes ou des groupes fonctionnels, peut confirmer des différences significatives entre les terres préservées et non préservées. Ces résultats apparemment contradictoires montrent bien qu'il est nécessaire de considérer les éléments réels de la biodiversité (ex. des espèces) lorsque l'on évalue des questions de conservation, au lieu de se contenter de mesures statistiques de la biodiversité. [source] Darkness visible: reflections on underground ecologyJOURNAL OF ECOLOGY, Issue 2 2005A. H. FITTER Summary 1Soil science and ecology have developed independently, making it difficult for ecologists to contribute to urgent current debates on the destruction of the global soil resource and its key role in the global carbon cycle. Soils are believed to be exceptionally biodiverse parts of ecosystems, a view confirmed by recent data from the UK Soil Biodiversity Programme at Sourhope, Scotland, where high diversity was a characteristic of small organisms, but not of larger ones. Explaining this difference requires knowledge that we currently lack about the basic biology and biogeography of micro-organisms. 2It seems inherently plausible that the high levels of biological diversity in soil play some part in determining the ability of soils to undertake ecosystem-level processes, such as carbon and mineral cycling. However, we lack conceptual models to address this issue, and debate about the role of biodiversity in ecosystem processes has centred around the concept of functional redundancy, and has consequently been largely semantic. More precise construction of our experimental questions is needed to advance understanding. 3These issues are well illustrated by the fungi that form arbuscular mycorrhizas, the Glomeromycota. This ancient symbiosis of plants and fungi is responsible for phosphate uptake in most land plants, and the phylum is generally held to be species-poor and non-specific, with most members readily colonizing any plant species. Molecular techniques have shown both those assumptions to be unsafe, raising questions about what factors have promoted diversification in these fungi. One source of this genetic diversity may be functional diversity. 4Specificity of the mycorrhizal interaction between plants and fungi would have important ecosystem consequences. One example would be in the control of invasiveness in introduced plant species: surprisingly, naturalized plant species in Britain are disproportionately from mycorrhizal families, suggesting that these fungi may play a role in assisting invasion. 5What emerges from an attempt to relate biodiversity and ecosystem processes in soil is our extraordinary ignorance about the organisms involved. There are fundamental questions that are now answerable with new techniques and sufficient will, such as how biodiverse are natural soils? Do microbes have biogeography? Are there rare or even endangered microbes? [source] Bärtierchen und die Kunst des Überlebens.BIOLOGIE IN UNSERER ZEIT (BIUZ), Issue 4 2010Von Biodiversität bis Biotechnologie Abstract Viele kleine Tiere sind häufigen Veränderungen des Mikroklimas ausgesetzt, die ihr Überleben direkt beeinflussen. Solche Veränderungen, wie die De- und Rehydrierung oder das Gefrieren und Wiederauftauen, können mehrmals regelmäßig im Tagesverlauf auftreten oder auch nur gelegentlich im Abstand von Wochen oder Monaten. Als Tönnchen sind Bärtierchen in der Lage, einen langen Zeitraum zu überdauern. Mit zunehmender Zeit in Anhydrobiose nehmen jedoch DNA-Schäden zu, daher kann davon ausgegangen werden, dass aufgrund zellulärer Schädigungen kein unbegrenztes Überdauern möglich ist. Bislang sind die zugrundeliegenden Mechanismen noch weitgehend unklar. Für die Biotechnologie sind Bärtierchen daher ein lohnendes Forschungsfeld, denn für eine Langzeitkonservierung biologischer Materialien gibt es zahlreiche Anwendungsmöglichkeiten. From Biodiversity to Biotechnology: Water bears and the art of survival Many small organisms are frequently exposed to microclimate changes, which directly affect their survival. Such changes, for example dehydration and rehydration or freezing and thawing, can occur several times during a day or at intervals of weeks or months. As a tun, water bears are able to survive long periods of time, however, with increasing time in the anhydrobiotic state DNA damage increases. Therefore, we assume that unlimited survival is not possible, due to cellular damage. Currently the basic mechanisms of this phenomenon are to a large extent unknown. Water bears are an interesting field of research in biotechnology, as many applications for long-term preservation of biological material can be envisaged. [source] | ||||||||||