The article below appeared in a newsgroup that I read, which is dedicated to the people living on Tristan da Cunha, one of the most remote islands in the world that supports a human population. I thought there might be some here who would appreciate seeing it.Herring405____________________________________________
Public release date: 26-Aug-2008
Contact: George Foulsham
[email protected]University of California - Santa Barbara
Study of islands reveals surprising extinction results
Steve Gaines.(Santa Barbara, Calif.) – It's no secret that humans are having a huge
impact on the life cycles of plants and animals. UC Santa Barbara's
Steven D. Gaines and fellow researcher Dov Sax decided to test that
theory by studying the world's far-flung islands.Their research, published this month in the Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, sheds surprising light on the subject of
extinction rates of species on islands. The paper, "Species Invasions
and Extinction: The Future of Native Biodiversity on Islands," is one
in a series of reports by this team studying how humans have altered
the ecosystems of the planet.Gaines and Sax started the project with a question: What effect are
humans really having on biological diversity? "The presumption at the
time was that we are driving biodiversity to lower levels," said
Gaines, who directs UCSB's Marine Science Institute. "Certainly, if
you think about it at the global level, this is true because humans
have done a lot of things that have driven species extinct."However, when studied on the smaller scale of islands, the findings
showed something completely different. Diversity is on the rise –
markedly so in some instances. Diversity has gone up so dramatically
that it might cause some to wonder if the health of the ecosystems
might not be better because the number of species is twice as high as
it used to be. But it's not that simple, Gaines said."What Dov and I worked on a few years ago is the fact that the vast
majority of introductions (of species) don't have large negative
effects," Gaines said. "Indeed, most species that get introduced don't
have much effect at all. It doesn't mean that they're not altering the
ecosystem, but they're not driving things extinct like some of the big
poster-child stories we've been hearing about."Still, the study showed that human colonization has had a massive
impact on ecosystems of islands, with the introduction of new, exotic
plants and animals. In New Zealand, for example, there were about
2,000 native species of plants. Since colonization, about 2,000 new
plant species have become naturalized. Over the same period, there
have been few plant extinctions, so the net effect is that humans have
transformed New Zealand's landscape by bringing in so many new species.Sax, a former postdoctoral researcher at UCSB who is now assistant
professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at Brown University, did
much of the fact-finding for this report by painstakingly digging
through data that had been collected over hundreds of years on islands
around the world. "This is Dov's specialty," Gaines said. "Finding
really old data sets that are very interesting.""The dramatic increase in the number of species has changed how the
system functions," Sax said. "Changing the abundance of natives versus
exotics affects all of the other species that used to depend on the
natives for food or shelter. So, it's not in any way to say that
increasing biodiversity is a good thing."With birds, it's a different story. The number of bird species on
islands today is almost exactly the same as it was prior to human
colonization, but the species of birds on the islands are very
different. About 40 percent of the species of birds that you find on
islands today are introduced species, Sax said, which means that a
comparable number of birds has gone extinct. "In the case of birds,"
he said, "lots of extinctions, no change in total biodiversity."All of this caused Gaines and Sax to ask new questions:* Are the islands undersaturated? Can you still keep throwing
species in there, with the result that nothing is going to happen?* Are they now oversaturated? Are there limits in how many species
an ecosystem can hold?* Are we building an extinction debt? "Which means," Gaines said,
"that by going in and mucking up the system, we may have already
created the setting where too many species have been packed in, and we
just haven't waited long enough to see these extinctions start to happen."The whole point of this study was to start looking down the path to
see which of these wildly different scenarios might be right," Gaines
added. "We haven't nailed the answer yet, but we've set the stage for
answering whether islands are now saturated or not."What made the research possible was that many of the explorers who
colonized the islands included naturalists on their boats. From the
time they landed on the islands, the naturalists were busy cataloging
and documenting the plants and animals of each colony."It was very surprising to find such a strong correlation between the
number of native and exotic plant species on islands around the
world," Sax said. "In ecological research, a 'strong' correlation
often explains 50 percent of the variation. Here, the correlation
between native and exotics explains almost 100 percent of the
variation. In other words, if you know how many native plants are on
an oceanic island then you can predict almost perfectly how many
exotic plants are there."The study, which took a year and a half, included islands such as Lord
Howe Island east of Australia and Tristan da Cunha, a group of remote
volcanic islands in the south Atlantic Ocean, among others."These were all oceanic islands," Gaines said, "which means islands
that are far enough away from a continent that they're not getting
regular exchanges with the mainland."###
H
Herring405
(view)
The article below appeared in a newsgroup that I read, which is dedicated to the people living on Tristan da Cunha, one of the most remote islands in the world that supports a human population. I thought there might be some here who would appreciate seeing it.Herring405____________________________________________
Public release date: 26-Aug-2008
Contact: George Foulsham
[email protected]University of California - Santa Barbara
Study of islands reveals surprising extinction results
Steve Gaines.(Santa Barbara, Calif.) – It's no secret that humans are having a huge
impact on the life cycles of plants and animals. UC Santa Barbara's
Steven D. Gaines and fellow researcher Dov Sax decided to test that
theory by studying the world's far-flung islands.Their research, published this month in the Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, sheds surprising light on the subject of
extinction rates of species on islands. The paper, "Species Invasions
and Extinction: The Future of Native Biodiversity on Islands," is one
in a series of reports by this team studying how humans have altered
the ecosystems of the planet.Gaines and Sax started the project with a question: What effect are
humans really having on biological diversity? "The presumption at the
time was that we are driving biodiversity to lower levels," said
Gaines, who directs UCSB's Marine Science Institute. "Certainly, if
you think about it at the global level, this is true because humans
have done a lot of things that have driven species extinct."However, when studied on the smaller scale of islands, the findings
showed something completely different. Diversity is on the rise –
markedly so in some instances. Diversity has gone up so dramatically
that it might cause some to wonder if the health of the ecosystems
might not be better because the number of species is twice as high as
it used to be. But it's not that simple, Gaines said."What Dov and I worked on a few years ago is the fact that the vast
majority of introductions (of species) don't have large negative
effects," Gaines said. "Indeed, most species that get introduced don't
have much effect at all. It doesn't mean that they're not altering the
ecosystem, but they're not driving things extinct like some of the big
poster-child stories we've been hearing about."Still, the study showed that human colonization has had a massive
impact on ecosystems of islands, with the introduction of new, exotic
plants and animals. In New Zealand, for example, there were about
2,000 native species of plants. Since colonization, about 2,000 new
plant species have become naturalized. Over the same period, there
have been few plant extinctions, so the net effect is that humans have
transformed New Zealand's landscape by bringing in so many new species.Sax, a former postdoctoral researcher at UCSB who is now assistant
professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at Brown University, did
much of the fact-finding for this report by painstakingly digging
through data that had been collected over hundreds of years on islands
around the world. "This is Dov's specialty," Gaines said. "Finding
really old data sets that are very interesting.""The dramatic increase in the number of species has changed how the
system functions," Sax said. "Changing the abundance of natives versus
exotics affects all of the other species that used to depend on the
natives for food or shelter. So, it's not in any way to say that
increasing biodiversity is a good thing."With birds, it's a different story. The number of bird species on
islands today is almost exactly the same as it was prior to human
colonization, but the species of birds on the islands are very
different. About 40 percent of the species of birds that you find on
islands today are introduced species, Sax said, which means that a
comparable number of birds has gone extinct. "In the case of birds,"
he said, "lots of extinctions, no change in total biodiversity."All of this caused Gaines and Sax to ask new questions:* Are the islands undersaturated? Can you still keep throwing
species in there, with the result that nothing is going to happen?* Are they now oversaturated? Are there limits in how many species
an ecosystem can hold?* Are we building an extinction debt? "Which means," Gaines said,
"that by going in and mucking up the system, we may have already
created the setting where too many species have been packed in, and we
just haven't waited long enough to see these extinctions start to happen."The whole point of this study was to start looking down the path to
see which of these wildly different scenarios might be right," Gaines
added. "We haven't nailed the answer yet, but we've set the stage for
answering whether islands are now saturated or not."What made the research possible was that many of the explorers who
colonized the islands included naturalists on their boats. From the
time they landed on the islands, the naturalists were busy cataloging
and documenting the plants and animals of each colony."It was very surprising to find such a strong correlation between the
number of native and exotic plant species on islands around the
world," Sax said. "In ecological research, a 'strong' correlation
often explains 50 percent of the variation. Here, the correlation
between native and exotics explains almost 100 percent of the
variation. In other words, if you know how many native plants are on
an oceanic island then you can predict almost perfectly how many
exotic plants are there."The study, which took a year and a half, included islands such as Lord
Howe Island east of Australia and Tristan da Cunha, a group of remote
volcanic islands in the south Atlantic Ocean, among others."These were all oceanic islands," Gaines said, "which means islands
that are far enough away from a continent that they're not getting
regular exchanges with the mainland."###
