Volume
85, Number 3, July 2004
Volume
85, Number 3, July 2004
Cover
Photo: Temperate deciduous forests of the northeastern United States are believed
to be undergoing a shift from mixed-oak (Quercus sp.) to red maple (Acer
rubrum) domination. As temporary ponds are common in the forests of the
Northeast, and rely upon inputs of leaf litter as the primary source of energy
for their food webs, this system may be susceptible to changes in the composition
of the forest. The larger wood frog (Rana sylvatica) in the picture spent
its larval period in a mesocosm with oak leaves as the primary energy input,
while the wood frog on the right developed in a mesocosm with red maple leaves
as the primary energy input. These results suggest that litter composition can
impact consumer performance by altering the processing of energy in this system.
Therefore, “subtle” compositional shifts in the forest have the potential
to influence species populations and the communities that rely upon leaf-litter
inputs as a primary source of energy. The photograph, by J. M. Kiesecker, taken
in central Pennsylvania, is from the paper, “Leaf-litter composition and
community structure: translating regional species changes into local dynamics,”
by M. J. Rubbo and J. M. Kiesecker, to be published in the September 2004 issue
of Ecology 85(9).
Table of Contents
(click on a title to view that section)
Governing
Board
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Society Notices Updated
August 18, 2004
Candidates for ESA Offices 2005
SEEDS News of Note
Resolution of Respect: Stanley
I. Auerbach
Society Section and Chapter News
Applied Ecology Section Newsletter
Southeastern Chapter Newsletter
Other Notices
Urban Habitats Electronic Journal
Launched
2004 Wildlife Population Assessment Training Workshops
Forest Biodiversity: Lessons from History for Conservation
Biobased Products: the Sustainability Solution
DEPARTMENTS
Technological Tools
A New Means of Presenting the Results of Logistic Regression.
J. Smart, W. J. Sutherland, A. R. Watkinson, and J. A. Gill
WinSSS: Stochastic Spatial Simulator. Y. Guan and S. M.
Krone
Homebrew Camera Traps. D. Inouye
MEETINGS
Meeting Reviews
Plant Invasions and Vegetation Succession: Closing the Gap. P. Pyšek,
M. A. Davis, C. C. Daehler, and K. Thompson
CONTRIBUTIONS
Commentary
A History of the Ecological Sciences, Part 13: Broadening Science
in Italy and England, 1600– 1650. F. E. Egerton
Nature’s Surprises. B. Zeide
The BULLETIN OF THE ECOLOGICAL
SOCIETY OF AMERICA (ISSN 0012-9623)
is published quarterly by the
Ecological Society of America, 1707 H Street, NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC
20006.
It is available online only, free of charge, at <http://www.esapubs.org/bulletin/current/current.htm>.
Issues published prior to January 2004 are available through
<http://www.esapubs.org/esapubs/journals/bulletin_main.htm>
Bulletin
of the Ecological Society of America, 1707 H Street, NW, Washington DC 20006
(541) 754-4772, Fax: (541) 754-4799,
E-mail: bulletin@esa.org
| Associate
Editor David A. Gooding ESA Publications Office, 127 W. State Street, Suite 301, Ithaca, NY 14850-5427 E-mail: dag25@cornell.edu Production Editor Regina Przygocki ESA Publications Office, 127 W. State Street, Suite 301, Ithaca, NY 14850-5427 E-mail: esa_journals@cornell.edu |
Section
Editor, Technological Tools D. W. Inouye Department of Zoology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 E-mail: di5@umail.umd.edu Section Editor, Ecology 101 H. Ornes College of Sciences, SB310A, Southern Utah University Cedar City, UT 84720 E-mail: ornes@ssu.edu Section Editor, Public Affairs Perspective N. Lymn Director for Public Affairs, ESA Headquarters, 1707 H Street, NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC 20036 E-mail: nadine@esa.org |
| Regular member: | Income level | Dues |
| <$40,000 | $50.00 | |
| $40,000—60,000 | $75.00 | |
| >$60,000 | $95.00 | |
|
Student member:
|
$25.00 | |
| Emeritus member: | Free | |
|
Life
member:
|
Contact Member and Subscriber Services (see below) |
Ecological
Applications $50.00 $40.00
Frontiers in Ecology Free to members
Ecological Archives Free
ANNOUNCEMENTS| Candidates
for ESA Offices 2005
The ESA Nominations Committee (Chair Ann Bartuska, Jim Ehleringer, Ed Johnson, Jianguo Liu, Margaret Palmer, Osvaldo Sala, Monica Turner) has submitted the following slate of nominees for ESA offices for 2005. Additional nominations may be made in writing by 25 members eligible to hold office in the Society. They should be forwarded to reach the Secretary (David Inouye) no later than 1 September 2004. President-Elect (2005–2006) Alan Covich Bill Murdoch Vice President for Public Affairs (three-year term, 2005–2008) Rich Pouyat
|
Paul Ringold Vice President for Finance (three-year term, 2005–2008) William Parton Thomas Swetnam Member-at-Large (two-year term, 2005–2006) Peter Groffman Dennis Ojima |
Board of Professional Certification (two to be elected, three calendar year term, 1 January 2005–31 December 2007) Kevin L. Erwin Geoffrey M. Henebry William Michener Rebecca R. Sharitz |
SEEDS News of Note
The SEEDS program is pleased to announce the six recipients
of the 2004–2005 SEEDS Undergraduate Research Fellowship: Stevland Charles,
Howard University; Ricardo Colón, University of Puerto Rico; Julie
James, Haskell Indian Nations University; Bruce Machona, Wiley College; Thalia
Tooke, University of Kansas; Lucero Vasquez-Radonic, University of Texas,
El Paso. The six selected students display great promise in successfully
pursuing a career in the profession of ecology, and the SEEDS Fellowship will
be an excellent opportunity to help these students fulfill their goals.
The SEEDS Advisory Board met in late February to provide input
into the next funding proposal to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. A proposal
was submitted in early April for the second phase of funding for the next
two years.
The SEEDS Program is also busy planning a student field trip to the University of Calgary Kananaskis Field Stations, and coordinating student and faculty travel awards to the 2004 ESA Annual Meeting. Twenty-three students from across the country were selected to participate in the June 2004 field trip. The field trip, which will feature the research of the Kananaskis Field Stations, will focus on the theme “determining global change in wildland ecosystems.” ESA members Ed Johnson and Mike Mappin are coordinating the field trip along with ESA Education staff. A selection committee is reviewing ESA Annual Meeting travel award applications, and recipients will be announced at the end of April.
________________________________________________________________________
Back
to Table of Contents
Stanley I. Auerbach
1922–2004
|
Dr. Stanley Irving Auerbach, 82, died Saturday, 1 May
2004 in Nashville, Tennessee, following an extended illness. He was
a scientist, research administrator, educator, and professional leader.
Most of all he was devoted to his wife of 50 years and their four children.
He was a mentor and colleague to many at Oak Ridge National Laboratory
(ORNL) and across the country. Stan Auerbach, a founder of the science
of radioecology and always a champion of modern ecological science,
was one of those pioneers from the post-WW II era to whom we owe a great
deal for the legacy that they created. Stan grew up in Chicago, Illinois, where his parents had a movie theater in which he worked part-time. In 1942, he enlisted in the U.S. Army to serve in World War II as a second lieutenant until 1944. In 1946 he earned a bachelor’s degree in zoology, and in 1947 a master’s degree in zoology from the University of Illinois. His MS studies were carried out under the tutelage of world-famous ecologist Victor E. Shelford. Stan earned his doctorate in 1949 at Northwestern University, specializing in invertebrate ecology under Orlando Park. With this superb academic training, Stan began his career teaching zoology and ecology at Roosevelt University in Chicago, Illinois, and was also active in the Chicago Academy of Sciences. The story of how Stan came to Oak Ridge National Laboratory is humorous. Sometime in late 1954 (the Cold War was raging) he got a call from his major professor, who asked if they might have a meeting. Orlando picked him up in his car |
and they drove for a long time through Chicago with little
conversation. Finally, they arrived at a large, deserted parking lot
in an industrial area. Orlando looked all around and said in a hushed
voice, “Stanley, I have something to talk with you about that is
of the utmost secrecy.” It turned out that Orlando, a renowned
Sherlock Holmes aficionado who enjoyed intrigue, had been serving as
a consultant to ORNL’s Health Physics Division. Thus Stanley learned
for the first time about Oak Ridge National Laboratory, the Atomic Energy
Commission (AEC), and found out that Orlando had recommended him as
ORNL’s first full-time ecologist. This was the early 1950s, and the Laboratory was becoming more sensitive to its waste management and waste disposal practices. It was discovered that liquid and solid waste disposal to trenches for soil retention had serious deficiencies; radioactivity was appearing in surface waters and was being taken up by surrounding trees. More intensive study was necessary. Several years earlier, while at Northwestern University pursuing advanced study, Ed Struxness, himself a pioneer in the area of health physics, had by chance taken an ecology course (this was then a relatively new field in academia) offered by Orlando Park. So Struxness naturally turned to Professor Park for a recommendation, and Stan Auerbach’s life was forever changed. Auerbach arrived in Oak Ridge at the end of 1954. He immediately
set about conducting laboratory radiation experiments and laboratory
studies of the biological uptake of strontium. By the |
|
|
|
|
summer of 1955 a team of 10 researchers was assembled by Auerbach, consisting mostly of visiting scientists, consultants, and students. Park visited other national laboratories and found that they were experiencing similar environmental problems. Stan solicited the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) to research the environmental fate and effects of radionuclides. Auerbach and Park got the Ecological Society of America to raise awareness in the scientific community, and ESA created the Radiation Ecology study section. (Stan would eventually become ESA Secretary from 1965 to 1970 and President in 1971–1972.) As a result, the AEC established the Division of Biology and Medicine in 1955 and set up a national ecology program in Washington, D.C., under the direction of John Wolfe, an ecologist from Ohio State University. Stan leaves behind not a body of ecological knowledge for which he is primarily responsible, nor is there a legacy of graduate students whocarry on this line of research. Rather his legacy lies in his influence on government programs, such as radioecology in the Atomic Energy Commission, or the Biome Programs that presaged ecosystem studies supported by the NSF. Stan’s career epitomizes the conundrum, does man make history or does history make the man? This remains unanswered, but what we can say is that Stan took the right courses of action when presented with the events of his time. |
Two significant events shifted Stan’s career and his eventual ecological legacy in the mid-1950s. In early 1956, John Wolfe made his first visit to Oak Ridge, and as a consequence emphasis was placed on field-oriented research in contrast to laboratory studies. In the same year, Auerbach was able to add a second full-time ecology position and redirected the research program to the waste disposal sites and the contaminated sediments of the drained White Oak Lake bed. Thus began many decades of pioneering research at ORNL. By the end of 1959, the Radiation Ecology Section was created and Auerbach, as its Chief, had assembled his initial team of early Oak Ridgers: Dan Nelson, Jerry Olson, Paul Dunaway, D. A. Crossley, John Witherspoon, Don Jacobs, and Gordon Blaylock, among others, with Gene Odum as a consultant. The scientific field of radioecology had emerged. Large-scale field studies of ecological systems were the focus. This post-Sputnik period of the late 1950s was characterized by dynamic planning at the Laboratory, and these young ecologists were encouraged to actively participate. ORNL was and is first and foremost a physical sciences laboratory. That ecology gained a foothold in this scientific environment is testimony to Stan’s doggedness. Because of the complex pathways for movement of radionuclides in the environment, ecologists were forced early on to think in terms of environmental systems. |
|
|
|
|
Staff continued research on radionuclide uptake by the vegetation and radiation effects on native mammal populations on the White Oak Lake bed, and colleagues in the Waste Disposal Section of the Health Physics Division were completing one of the first studies of the transport of low-level radionuclide discharges to the Clinch River. (A companion study was underway at Hanford on the Columbia River.) In 1964 the ecologists were conducting the first experimental “tagging” of a natural ecosystem—the Cesium-137 forest. In 1967, Walker Branch Watershed was established to study natural biogeochemical cycles, and Walker Branch continues to serve as an ecological research platform today. Under Stan’s visionary leadership, his growing cadre of young ecologists gained recognition internationally as the leading center of the emerging area of ecosystem research and systems ecology. Stan had recruited Jerry Olson, who used a Ford Foundation grant to train students at the University of Tennessee in systems ecology. Stan also recruited Bernie Patten, a University of Georgia professor, the late George Van Dyne (later to become director of the Grasslands IBP Site at Fort Collins), and later Bob O’Neill, to form the nucleus of his systems ecology group. In 1968, the |
National Science Foundation selected Auerbach
to direct its pioneering, multi-university/laboratory research program
on forest ecosystems and aquatic ecosystems of the Eastern Deciduous Forests.
This multi-biome effort was the largest and most complex interdisciplinary
ecological research program ever attempted up to that time. The new NSF
research program was part of the International Biological Programme (IBP),
and it brought ORNL to the center of ecological research, as well as bringing
ecology into the realm of big-scale, multi-institutional and multidisciplinary
science. IBP’s important legacy was a new Ecosystem Studies Program
at the National Science Foundation. Ecosystem analyses and simulation
modeling of ecological processes at ORNL moved to the cutting edge of
ecological research. Stan pressed interactions with university colleagues—a
move that at the time was new to national laboratories, which had lived
behind security fences in the Cold War era. The Environmental Sciences
Division’s program of university collaborations expanded dramatically
to become a model for the Laboratory. By 1969 Stan was working with The
University of Tennessee to establish the Graduate Program in Ecology,
now the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. |
|
|
|
|
Creation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in 1969 changed the course of environmental research in Auerbach’s program forever. The AEC directed that all aquatic research staff drop their research and immediately support the AEC in the preparation of environmental impact statements. To many directors, this directive would have elicited (and did) angst and a “woe is me” attitude, because their carefully honed scientific agenda had to be changed. Not Stan. He saw this as an opportunity to bring the still largely descriptive field of ecology to bear on an immediate societal issue. Additional scientists were hired to meet these demands, including Steve Hildebrand, who now occupies Stan’s former position. For many, it was their first employment after graduate school. In later years, when they were able to return to research, their perspectives on environmental issues were changed, as were those of their colleagues. Ecology at ORNL now became acclaimed not only for the quality and innovation of the basic research, but also for the relevance of its application to real-world problems. The first evidence of this was the creation of the ORNL thermal effects research program on aquatic biota and ecosystems, led by Chuck Coutant. About this time, Stanley began a remarkable personal |
transformation in leadership style, a transformation which
few pioneers in science have made successfully. From the very hard-driving,
authoritative, and centric leader, he became open, inclusive, and sharing
of decisions with his subordinates. He championed workplace diversity
long before it was recognized as important. He was training the next
generation of leadership, but he still retained his dogged leadership
style. His protegees occupy and have occupied important academic and
governmental leadership positions across the country as well as at ORNL.
Dave Reichle remembers the atmosphere in the research group. In the early years, Stan, who had a knack for hiring bright and creative people, was also inheriting their individualism and rebellious attitudes to authority. Stan once remarked in response to Dave’s frustrations with bureaucracy and personnel issues, “Dave, if it weren’t for these problems, we would not have jobs.” It was like herding cats, in a laboratory environment that was serious about the one and only right way to get things done. Staff got him into trouble more than a few times, but like responding to an Army drill sergeant, they knew who the boss was—they complained a lot, but they congealed as a team. |
|
|
|
|
The internationally renowned ecology program under Stan’s
leadership grew rapidly. In March 1970, the Laboratory established the
new Ecological Sciences Division, and very shortly thereafter, in 1972,
it evolved into the Environmental Sciences Division. In 1973, the AEC
became the Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA). By
the middle of the decade, the Division had a staff of 127. Eight years
later the Department of Energy was established, and Assistant Secretary
for the Environment Ruth Clusen dedicated the Oak Ridge National Environmental
Research Park on 2 October 1980. Formation of ERDA and the experience of the NSF programs provided Stan with yet another opportunity to extend the scope of environmental research at ORNL. Radionuclides were no longer to be defined as the only environmental pollutants. Natural biogeochemical cycles were seen as the basis of ecosystem functioning. A new ERDA Synfuels program introduced organic toxicants. The Environmental Sciences Division also brought a new style of research to ORNL. Instead of “secret” research inside the security fences, ORNL ecologists were moving across the country analyzing the function of different ecosystems, as the nation recognized that |
varying geographic scales were a critical part of environmental
problems. By the time the Department of Energy was created, Stan had
positioned the Environmental Sciences Division as one of the leading
research centers for studying hazardous wastes, the ecological effects
of global change, and renewable energy. New scientific fields were pioneered
by the new staff recruited to Oak Ridge in answer to Stan’s vision
and determination to keep ecological sciences at the forefront; these
included landscape ecology (notably including Bob O’Neill and later
Virginia Dale) and ecological risk analysis (with Glenn Suter and Larry
Barnthouse). Dave Reichle, Stan’s “mentoree,” who remained his close friend, remembers what it was like to work for Stan. “You always knew where you stood with Stan. Clarity in communication was not one of his weaknesses. Stan was a visionary and a builder. Stan would never ask you to do something that he wouldn’t be willing to do himself, nor would he work less hard than you. Stan did not constrain initiative, and he helped you to learn your limits. He prized good science. He always supported his staff, gave credit to others and celebrated their accomplishments, but he expected you to remember who was the boss.” |
|
|
|
| At Stan’s retirement, in 1986, he was recognized by scientists around the world. Over the course of his career he received many awards and recognitions of his service to science, federal agencies, and other organizations, including the Distinguished Service Awards from both the Department of Energy and the Ecological Society of America. Stan left behind a tremendous legacy of science, a premier research organization then consisting of over 225 staff, and a cadre of future leaders at ORNL. Most significantly, he retained the respect and affection of colleagues. The Environmental Sciences Division at ORNL and large-scale ecological research around the world remain today as a strong tribute to Stan Auerbach. | Stan and his wife, Dawn, moved to Nashville
in 1993 to be close to their two daughters, Allison and Ann. Their son
Andrew and family live in Wichita, Kansas, and their son Jonathan in Colorado.
But Stan’s heart has always remained in Oak Ridge, with his friends
and his legacy of science at ORNL. He missed Oak Ridge and the fields
and forests of the Ridge and Valley Province very much, and we who knew
and worked with him and for him will miss him even more. David E. Reichle Oak Ridge, TN and W. Franklin Harris University of Tennessee Knoxville, TN |
|
|
|
Applied Ecology Section Newsletter
|
Greetings! The Applied Ecology, Agroecology, Rangeland
Ecology, and Soil Ecology Sections are once again planning a joint mixer
for the ESA 2004 meeting in Portland, Oregon. The mixer will be held
on Wednesday, 4 August, from 6:30 to 8:00 pm, at the Oregon Convention
Center, Portland Ballroom 251. The Applied Section will hold a business
meeting toward the end of the mixer to discuss the 2004 election results.
Special thanks to Deborah Ulinski Potter for serving as Chair of the
Nominating Committee and for preparing the ballot for this year’s
election. I also thank the 2002–2004 officers, Jon Keeley, Vice
Chair, and Dan Binkley, Secretary, for their service to the Section.
I have enjoyed my tenure as Chair, and I thank the members of the Section
for giving me the opportunity to serve. The Applied Ecology Section has selected Justin Touchon, a Ph.D student in the Department of Biology at Boston University, to receive a $750 Student Travel Award to attend the 89th ESA Annual Meeting this summer. He will be presenting his research on the interactions of biotic and abiotic risks affecting eggs and larvae of the neotropical tree frog Hyla ebraccata in the symposium, “Ecological Implications of Phenotypic Plasticity.” Congratulations Justin! |
This year we are also sponsoring the symposium “Ecological
Implications of Fuel Reduction Treatments to Reduce Fire Hazards in
Forested Landscapes.” The symposium will be held Thursday, 5 August,
1:30-5:00 pm, in Oregon Ballroom 204 of the Oregon Convention Center. Many forests today are denser, contain fewer large trees,
and have higher fuel loads and greater fuel continuity, increasing the
probability of unnaturally severe wildfires. Until recently, little
data that would allow managers to evaluate the ecological comparability
of different fuel reduction treatments had been collected. This symposium
brings together researchers affiliated with several large multidisciplinary
fuel reduction and stand structure manipulation experiments nationwide.
Speakers will present findings from different study disciplines to provide
the best current understanding of the ecosystem-level impacts that fuel
reduction treatments are likely to have. Hope to see you in Portland! |
Paulette Ford, Chair
Rocky Mountain Research Station
333 Broadway SE, Suite 115
Albuquerque, NM 87102-3497 USA
(505) 766-1044
Fax: (505) 766-1046
E-mail: plford@fs.fed.us
Southeastern
Chapter Newsletter
Issue 2004–2
Chapter Officers
|
Chair: Paul Schmalzer (2002–2004) ‹Paul.Schmalzer-1@ksc.nasa.gov›
Vice-Chair: Joan Walker (2003–2005) ‹joanwalker@fs.fed.us› Secretary/Treasurer: Yetta Jager (2002–2004) ‹jagerhi@ornl.gov› Web-Master: Mark Mackenzie ‹mackenzi@forestry.auburn.edu› Chapter Homepage: ‹http://www.auburn.edu/seesa/› |
Welcome to New Officers
| We elected two new officers for the 2004–2006 term. Congratulations to James Luken, who was elected chair, and will replace Paul in August, and to Nicole Turrill Welch, who was elected Secretary/Treasurer. |
|
Spring 2004 Chapter Meeting in Memphis The minutes of our business meeting and luncheon, held at the meeting of the Association of Southeastern Biologists (ASB) in Memphis, are posted on our web site. The ESA Southeastern Chapter cohosted a symposium, “Invasive Plant Awareness and Research: Priority Status,” coordinated by Pat Parr and Jack Ranney. 2004 Odum Award We presented the 2004 Eugene P. Odum award to two student recipients: Nicole M. Hughes of Appalachian State University for her paper, “Functional role of anthocyanins in high light winter leaves of the evergreen herb, Galax urceolata,” coauthored with Howard S. Neufeld, and Christopher Winne of Savannah River Ecology Laboratory for his paper “Daily activity patterns of whiptail lizards (Squamata: Teiidae: Aspidoscelis): a proximate response to environmental conditions or an endogenous rhythm?” coauthored with Michael Keck. Membership Renewal and Award Support Please remember to renew your membership in the Southeastern
Chapter when you renew your ESA membership. Your donations to the Eugene
P. Odum Fund support the best student paper award and those to the Quarterman-Keever
Fund support the best poster award. Thanks to your donations, and two
generous contributions by Bill Martin and Joe Winstead at the business
meeting, we have reached our goal of $10,000 for the Odum Fund. Brooks-Cole
Publishers has also expressed interest in contributing to the fund. We voted on and passed a proposed bylaws amendment to establish the Quarterman-Keever Award for the best student poster at our April 2004 meeting. Apparently, the growth of the new fund will need to be quite rapid in order for ESA to maintain it. A new committee was formed to oversee the Quarterman-Keever Award consisting of Howie Neufield (chair), Andy Ash, and Cliff Hupp. |
Upcoming Meetings and Symposia ESA
2004 Meeting: The Annual Meeting of ESA will be in Portland,
Oregon on 1–6 August. The Chapter will have a brown bag lunch meeting
on Tuesday, 3 August. ASB 2005
Meeting: ASB will meet on 13–16 April 2005 in northern Alabama.
Proposals for symposia at this meeting will be due in early September
2004. The ASB standing committees request members for a list of committees.
Please see Claudia Jolls if you are interested. ESA 2005
Meeting: ESA will meet with INTECOL in Montreal, Canada on 7–12
August 2005. Proposals for symposia at this meeting will also be due
in early September 2004. SEAFWA 2004: The South Carolina Department of Natural Resources invites you to the 58th Annual Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Conference, Hilton Head, South Carolina, 30 October–3 November 2004. ‹www.dnr.state.sc.us/seafwa› Keeping in Touch Check the Chapter home page: ‹http://www.auburn.edu/seesa/› for updates and additional information. Join the Southeastern Chapter of ESA ListServer: to join the ListServer, send a message to majordomo@mail.auburn.edu with “subscribe scesa” in the body of the message. Please send news or announcements to scesa@mail.auburn.edu for distribution to the listserv, or to jagerhi@ornl.gov for inclusion in the next quarterly newsletter.
Respectfully,
|
Urban
Habitats
Electronic Journal Launched
|
The premier issue of Urban Habitats, a new electronic journal
that focuses on current research on the biology of urban areas,
is now available online. Papers cover a range of related subject
areas, including urban botany, conservation biology, wildlife and
vegetation management in urban areas, urban ecology, restoration
of urban habitats, landscape ecology and urban design, urban soils,
bioplanning in metropolitan regions, and the natural history of
cities around the world. Urban Habitats is a peer-reviewed,
fully indexed, scientific journal, written and edited for a wide
audience of researchers, restoration ecologists, park and preserve
managers, government officials, and naturalists. Dr. Steven Clemants, vice president for Science, Brooklyn Botanic
Garden, and codirector of the Center for Urban Restoration Ecology,
is a coeditor. “Urban areas are often overlooked as important
habitats for plants and wildlife. We feel there is a global need
to increase awareness and interest in urban habitats. To make this
knowledge available to science professionals, educators, policymakers,
and the general public, we have taken advantage of our long experience
in publishing and the incredible opportunities for dissemination
globally via the Web to launch Urban Habitats,” Clemants
says. The journal is published by the Center for Urban |
Restoration Ecology, a collaboration between Rutgers University and Brooklyn Botanic Garden. “We are particularly interested in featuring papers that take
advantage of the unique possibilities of the e-journal format, such
as color illustrations, animated models, video, sound, downloadable
databases, and interactive discussions,” Dr. Clemants explains.
Articles are welcomed from scientists, scholars, and practitioners
in urban habitat restoration, conservation biology, urban botany,
landscape architecture and design, and other fields related to urban
ecology. Janet Marinelli, coeditor of Urban Habitats, Director of
Publishing for the Brooklyn Botanic Garden, and member of the steering
committee for the Center for Urban Restoration Ecology, says of
the new publication, “We’re publishing studies covering
cities from Brooklyn to Beijing.” She adds, “For the first
time, more people live in cities than in rural areas worldwide,
and urban areas are growing fast. Cities are the future of this
planet. In Urban Habitats, we’re exploring their evolution
and ecological potential.” The premier issue of Urban Habitats presents “Urban Floras,” Volume 1, Number 1, December 2003. The e-journal is available free at <www.urbanhabitats.org>. |
2004
Wildlife Population Assessment Training Workshops,
St Andrews, Scotland
| The Centre for Research into Ecological and Environmental Modelling (CREEM) at the University of St Andrews, Scotland, is hosting a series of three linked training workshops on wildlife population assessment. The target audience is ecologists, wildlife managers, and conservation biologists, but the workshops will also be of interest to applied statisticians working in these fields. |
| Workshop
1: Estimating Animal Abundance, 24–28 August
This workshop will introduce participants to the most important methods of estimating animal abundance in a rigorous but accessible way. We cover plot sampling, distance sampling, mark–recapture, removal methods and, later in the course, more advanced and recently developed methods. Workshop 2: Introduction to Distance Sampling, 1–3 September Distance sampling is the most widely used method for estimating density and abundance of wildlife populations. The objective of this workshop is to give participants a solid grounding in the basic methods for design and analysis of distance sampling surveys, and the use of the software Distance.
|
Workshop 3: Advanced
Techniques and Recent Developments in Distance Sampling, This workshop will cover the latest advances in distance sampling
research and software, including the use of covariates for modeling
the detection function, double-observer methods for when detection
at the line or point is not certain, spatial modeling of density,
automated survey design, and adaptive sampling. Rhona Rodger |
Forest
Biodiversity: Lessons from History for Conservation
|
Forest Biodiversity: Lessons from History for Conservation,
edited by O. Honnay, K. Verheyen, B. Bossuyt, and M. Hermy. IUFRO
Research Series No. 10, March 2004, 320 pp., hardbound, ISBN: 085199802x.
Special discount price for ESA members: $88.00 (normal price £110.00). Suitable for researchers within the areas of forestry, ecology, conservation, and environmental history, this book focuses on the diverse impact of forest history in general, and of forest continuity, fragmentation, and past management in particular, on the diversity and distribution of species. The implications for the conservation of biodiversity in forests are also addressed. Chapters have been developed from papers presented at a conference held in Leuven in January 2003. The emphasis is on temperate forests in Europe and North America, but the information may also be applicable to other regions or biomes. As a special offer to members of the Ecological Society of America, CABI Publishing are offering a 20% discount on this title. North and Central America book orders are handled by our exclusive books distributor, Oxford University Press, 2001 Evans Road, Cary, North Carolina 27513-2009, (800) 451-7556, fax: (919) 677-1303, E-mail: orders@oup-usa.org. To obtain your discount simply quote reference L175 when placing your order by phone, fax, or e-mail, or go to ‹http://www.us.oup.com/us/catalog/general/› enter the code L175 in the “Enter Sales Promo Code” box and then select Forest Biodiversity. |
Biobased
Products: The Sustainability Solution? Insights from the Journal of Industrial
Ecology
|
Interest in the use of agricultural products and wastes for energy
and industrial materials is growing throughout the world. Optimists
foresee a new system of production that will produce a virtuous
cycle of benefits for the environment and society. Envisioning a
return to renewable raw materials in lieu of feedstocks and fuels
based on petrochemicals, they predict a reduction in demand for
fossil fuels, a decrease in greenhouse gas emissions, as well as
the mitigation of a host of other environmental threats. A more pessimistic outlook for the bioeconomy also exists, which
foresees the increased use of synthetic fertilizers, a related reduction
in water quality, and an increase in soil erosion and greenhouse
gas emissions. Articles in the special issue analyze the opportunities, processes,
and environmental impacts of biofuels, bioplastics, biolubricants,
and biosurfactants. Government initiatives to support biobased products
are summarized, and leading biobased product companies are profiled.
The special issue also features a look at the predecessor to today’s
efforts to make greater industrial use of agricultural crops |
and residues, the American chemurgy movement of the 1920s and 1930s. Research published in this issue suggests: Robert Anex, associate professor of agricultural and biosystems engineering at Iowa State University in Ames, Iowa, served as the guest editor for the special issue.
|
School of Forestry and Environmental Studies
Yale University
New Haven, CT 06511-2189
(203) 432-6949
Fax: (203) 432-5556
E-mail: indecol@yale.edu
‹http://mitpress.mit.edu/JIE›
DepartmentsA New Means of Presenting the Results of Logistic Regression
|
Introduction The use of logistic regression analysis in ecological studies has greatly increased in recent years. It is a popular and useful statistical tool for predicting the probability of occurrence of a categorical dependent variable (e.g., presence or absence, male or female) based on predictor variables. The results of logistic regression have been presented in a number of ways in the scientific literature: equations with statistics (e.g., Sydeman et al. 1991, Stewart et al. 1996, Bolger et al. 1997, Gross and Kapuscinski 1997, Morrison 1998, Wiser et al. 1998a); probability response curves (e.g., Sydeman et al. 1991, Van Sickle et al. 1996, Wiser et al. 1998a); and bar charts of the percentage deviance explained by different models (e.g., Wiser et al. 1998b). However, these traditional means of presenting the results have many limitations in the information that they provide. We propose a new method for presenting logistic regression data, describe how it can be achieved with current software, and suggest that it should be routinely incorporated in future updates of statistical packages. |
Traditional presentation Fig. 1a (see below) shows one of the commonest current
methods of presenting logistic regression output, using hypothetical
data that describe the probability of a pool being occupied by an
invertebrate in relation to pH. The two main limitations of this type
of figure are:
|
 |
Fig. 1. Fitted logistic regression curves showing that the probability of pool occupation by an invertebrate (presence and absence) is dependent on pH. Both graphs present the same hypothetical data, but (a) is the traditional method of presenting logistic regression graphs produced in SPSS using overlay scatterplots, and (b) is the new method produced using a combination of SPSS and PowerPoint, where the histograms represent the observed data and the line is the predicted probability that a pool will be occupied. |
|
New presentation Fig. 1b shows the same hypothetical data as shown in Fig. 1a, but in this case the observed data are presented in the form of frequency histograms for each category of the dependent variable, with the associated scale on the right-hand axis. These changes overcome the limitations of the traditional method, outlined above, because the frequency of the observed data at each interval along the axis is now clearly displayed. It is now easy to interpret the summed effect of these points on the logistic regression curve. For example, in Fig. 1a it is impossible to determine how many unoccupied pools have a pH of between 5 and 6. However, we can see from Fig. 1b that there are ~80 pools within this category. It is also now possible to assess the sample size from the figure alone, as the observed data points are displayed against a scale. Method for the new presentation of logistic regression graphs At present, combination graphs of this type are not available on any of the standard statistics or graphing packages of which we are aware. Although the presentation of this type of graph is therefore more time consuming, we would argue that, in terms of ease of interpretation, it is worth the extra time and effort. We are sure that there are many different methods and design packages available that could ultimately be used to produce these graphs, but as an example we describe here our step-by-step method, which uses a combination of SPSS v. 11.0 and Microsoft PowerPoint. |
SPSS 1) The data view should have three variables, (a) the
dependent variable (e.g., coded 0 and 1), (b) the observed data for
the predictor variable, and (c) the predicted probability of group
membership saved from the logistic regression analysis. Microsoft PowerPoint 1) Copy and paste the two histograms and the scatterplot
onto a PowerPoint slide. |
|
|
|
|
Future directions The new method for graphical representation of the results of logistic regression analysis presented here greatly increases the information that can be extracted from these figures, and should therefore improve the ease of interpretation of the output. However, the manual production of these figures can be time consuming. If software manufacturers incorporate this type of combination graph in future software updates, we hope that this type of figure will become a common feature of logistic regression analyses. Literature cited Bolger, D. T., A.
C. Alberts, R. M. Sauvajot, P. Potenza, C. McCalvin, D. Tran, S. Mazzoni,
and M. E. Soulé. 1997. Response of rodents to habitat fragmentation
in coastal southern California. Ecological Applications 7:552–563. |
Sydeman, W. J., H. R. Huber, S.
D. Emslie, C. A. Ribic, and N. Nur. 1991. Age-specific weaning success
of northern elephant seals in relation to previous breeding experience.
Ecology 72:2204–2217.
Jennifer Smart, William J. Sutherland, Andrew R. Watkinson,and
Jennifer A. Gill
|
WinSSS: Stochastic Spatial Simulator
|
Introduction WinSSS is a Windows-based program for simulating stochastic
spatial models that are individual-based, have discrete spatial structure,
and continuous time. This class of models is commonly referred to
as interacting particle systems or asynchronously updated
probabilistic cellular automata. It is ideally suited for developing
insight and making predictions in spatial ecology. Ecological examples
can be found in Dieckmann et al. (2000) and Durrett and Levin (1994). WinSSS features an elaborate graphical interface that allows one to choose from various models, specify parameters such as birth/death rates and interaction strengths, initialize with various starting configurations, and view spatial dynamics as well as time series and phase diagrams corresponding to spatial windows of various sizes. One can download the program freely at the URL below. This includes a ready-to-run simulator, with pre-programmed models and an HTML tutorial and help window. For those who would like to code their own models, the C++ code can also be obtained from the authors. The models in WinSSS include mechanisms for invasion of new territory and competition for resources, head-to-head competition, pathogen spread, and various types of successional dynamics. For example, one can easily run simulations of the ``Rock-Scissors-Paper” model that recently appeared in Nature (Kerr et al. 2002) describing spatial coexistence of three competing strains of bacteria. The HTML tutorial gives a brief introduction to these spatially extended individual-based models and provides some references for further reading. |
Model specification and parameters To describe the models and simulations, we begin by
noting that all the action takes place on a two-dimensional rectangular
lattice (or grid) of sites, with a number of options for the lattice
size. These changes occur in continuous time and very quickly, so when watching the simulation one typically observes sites changing all over the lattice. However, the changes are asynchronous, due to the continuous-time nature of this (Markov) process. The way to think of this is that every site has associated with it an (exponential) alarm clock whose rate depends on the state at that site and the states at neighboring sites. The site whose alarm rings first makes the appropriate change and all neighboring sites recalculate their rates. All the alarm clocks then start over and we wait for the next one to ring. (We remark that the behavior of synchronously updated cellular automata can be similar in some respects but very different in others. For example, updating all the sites at once can lead to very rigid behavior that produces patterns not typically seen in biological populations.) |
|
|
|
|
Rates and interaction neighborhoods There are two basic types of rates that allow one to build most models of interest. These are “contact” and “spontaneous” rates. Contact rates are for events that depend on the types at neighboring sites. For example, a vacant site might become occupied by an offspring from a given species at a rate that is proportional to the number of individuals of that species currently within some distance of the vacant site. Contact rates can depend linearly or nonlinearly (e.g., a threshold event) on the states at neighboring sites. There are several options for neighborhood size in the simulator. Spontaneous rates are for events that occur independently of nearby sites. For example, an individual might die or change its life stage after some random time through no effect from other individuals. Window size and time series The overall lattice size can be selected from a number of options ranging from 100 ´ 100 up to 500 ´ 500. The densities of the different species appear, color-coded, in a separate window below the main simulation. These densities are averages over a spatial window that the user chooses. They can be recorded in an accessible file and used to obtain information about spatial length scales, as in Rand and Wilson (1995). The user can also choose to watch the phase plane trajectories corresponding to any two species. All of these observations of densities under various window sizes yield perspective on the effects of randomness, correlations between sites at various distances, and comparisons with the corresponding mass-action ordinary differential equations. Implementation The models in WinSSS were developed using Visual C++.
The graphical interface employs OpenGL, the premier |
environment for developing portable, interactive two-dimensional and three-dimensional graphics applications.To run WinSSS at reasonable speeds with lattice size 250 ´ 250 and above, a Pentium III 866 with 256M RAM is recommended. WinSSS has been tested on Windows 2000 and Windows XP. Other operating systems in the Windows family (e.g., Windows 98 and Windows NT) should also work, but we have not tested them. We plan to initiate improvements and extensions based in part on user feedback. Acknowledgments Although most of the C++ code and the graphical interface for this simulator were written independently, we were inspired by the pioneering efforts of Ted Cox and Rick Durrett, who created the Unix-based simulator S3. Y. Guan and S. M. Krone were supported in part by NSF grant EPS-00-80935 and NIH grant P20 RR016448. Literature cited Dieckmann, U., R. Law, and J. A. J. Metz, editors. 2000.
The geometry of ecological interactions: simplifying spatial complexity.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
|
Yongtao Guan and Stephen M. Krone
Department of Mathematics, University of Idaho
Moscow, ID 83844-1103
E-mail: krone@uidaho.edu
Availability: ‹http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~krone›
Homebrew Camera Traps
| Subscribers to ECOLOG-L post queries a few times a year about camera traps (shutter-trip systems that automatically photograph passing wildlife), asking for recommendations about particular models, or how to find the least expensive options. During one recent exchange a reader suggested the web site below, which has complete instructions about how to build your own camera trap. In this case, the builder was able to make one for about $80. If you’re competent with a soldering iron and know a little about electronics, it looks like a relatively easy project. |
‹http://www.jesseshuntingpage.com/homebrew-cams.html›
David Inouye
University of Maryland
MeetingsPlant Invasions and Vegetation Succession: Closing the Gap
|
“Plant Invasions and Vegetation Succession: Closing the Gap,” a workshop held in eské Budjovice, Czech Republic, 26–28 November 2003. The workshop was organized by the Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Prhonice, and University of South Bohemia, eské Budjovice, Czech Republic, and was sponsored by the European Science Foundation. The recent turmoil in biological invasions research has resulted in the publication of many compendia (Drake et al. 1989, Mooney and Hobbs 2000). A solid knowledge base comprising both formal frameworks (Williamson 1996, Richardson et al. 2000b) as well as theories of species invasiveness and community invasibility (Rejmánek 1996, Tilman 1999, Davis et al. 2001) has been established. However, as pointed out recently by Davis et al. (2000), there is a gap between some of the most dynamic fields of contemporary ecology, namely, plant invasions and vegetation succession. Despite powerful development of both fields and ecological proximity between both phenomena/processes, the two fields communicate poorly. Incorporating insights from succession ecology can be expected to help invasion ecology become more quantitative and predictive (Davis et al. 2000). Moreover, both fields are contributing ideas or findings that may help solve environmental problems. Nevertheless, the field of invasion biology has been largely resistant to incorporating knowledge from successional ecology. As a step toward bringing these fields closer together, the workshop entitled „Plant invasions and vegetation succession: closing the gap“ was held with the goal of opening communication among workers and evaluating the available data to identify relationships between invasion and succession.
|
A formal framework for studies of vegetation change In his introductory talk to the first session, Mark Davis (Macalester College, Minnesota, USA) reviewed the milestones in vegetation succession and biological invasions and pointed out that the seed for the dissociation of both fields was sown by Charles Elton (1958), who focused explicitly on population outbreaks caused by invasions of foreign species. Davis stressed that reassociation of the two fields is desirable; reciprocal awareness, explicit integration, and the metaperspective are convenient tools to achieve this goal. Successional models such as that of Connell and Slatyer (1977) can be applied to all combinations of alien and native species involved in succession. Goals of this first session were to (a) develop a conceptual framework
to better integrate succession and invasion ecology, (b) identify
key research questions that should guide future research, and (c)
describe the types of studies needed to answer these questions.
The following concepts were identified, defining crucial areas of
research: (1) Interactions with other plants and other trophic levels
are central for the establishment and spread of native and introduced
plant species. (2) Vegetation dynamics depend on the spatial context
and history of the site, comprising both natural and anthropogenic
activities. (3) Global change, e.g., warming, nitrogen deposition,
and shifting precipitation, can affect patterns of species establishment
and spread. (4) The evolutionary history of the species involved
influences the establishment and spread of native and introduced
plant species. (5) Transient windows of opportunity are critical
for the establishment and spread of native and introduced plant
species.
|
|
|
|
|
To treat these issues adequately, future studies should focus on clarifying mechanisms of establishment and spread, and studying cause and effect. The same mechanisms influence the establishment and spread of both native and introduced species and the impacts of these spreading species on their new communities and ecosystems. The following categories of studies should be involved in future research linking the dynamic fields of plant invasions and succession: (a) comparative studies of distribution and abundance (phylogenetically corrected approach; geographic approach: recipient habitat vs. source habitat, gradients of latitude, altitude, climate, land use intensity); (b) for small-scale systems, manipulative experiments are needed (deletion/addition studies) focusing on effects of resident populations, communities, and ecosystems on arriving species, and of arriving species on resident populations, communities, and ecosystems; (c) for large-scale systems, observational and correlative studies of existing “natural experiments” are necessary. (d) Modeling studies of establishment and spread are needed, using knowledge gained from field data. Findings from studies based on these approaches will provide society with a greater understanding of the consequences of establishment and spread of both alien and native species on land use, biodiversity, ecosystem services, and trophic interactions. Participation of alien species in succession The second session focused on the role of alien species in successional seres worldwide. Petr Pyšek (Institute of Botany Prhonice, Academy of Sciences
|
of the Czech Republic) assembled 55 data sets documenting native and alien species numbers and cover values during primary succession; most data come from Central Europe and North America. The average proportion of alien species in a sere was 25%, ranging from 2% to 81%. Aliens are best represented in successional seres in ruderal (urban) habitats and old fields. Preliminary statistical analysis revealed the following. (a) In most seres, alien species decrease during succession (Rejmánek 1989). The rate of this decrease does not differ between species number and cover but does vary among seres. (b) Aliens contribute more in terms of species number than cover; this might reflect the fact that many of them are casuals (Richardson et al. 2000b) and are on average less abundant in the landscape than native species. (c) Residence time, i.e., how long the alien species have been present in the region, plays an important role in determining their dynamics in succession. In European seres, archaeophytes (introduced after the beginning of agriculture but before European exploration of the Western Hemisphere) and neophytes (introduced after that date) differ among habitat types, as demonstrated for old fields and dumps from coal mining, and so do successional trends: neophytes seem to be more capable of becoming dominants. Karel Prach (University of South Bohemia, eské Budjovice, Czech Republic) analyzed the pattern of succession in Central European human-made habitats; soil pH seems to be the most important factor determining the course and character of succession. In seres with a low initial pH, annual |
|
|
|
|
ruderal species prevail, while in those with high
initial pH, succession is dominated by clonal perennials. Among the best data available are long-term observations from old-field succession in Cedar Creek (reported by Johannes Knops, University of Nebraska, USA) and the Buell-Small Succession Study (reported by Scott Meiners, Eastern Illinois University, Charleston, USA). Similar data sets are available for eastern European old fields (presented by a group represented by Sandor Bartha, University of Vacrátot, Hungary); these data permit studying species behavior during succession in their native and introduced ranges, by comparing species that occur in the data as native in one region and alien in another. Such comparison is feasible on data from Europe and North America where the reciprocal exchange of species on an historical time scale has been extensive. Jan Lepš (University of South Bohemia, eské
Budjovice, Czech Republic) demonstrated how a random event can completely
change the successional pathway and pointed out the importance of
knowledge of site history when interpreting the vegetation pattern
in successional sites. The course of succession in old fields that
Lepš studied was crucially affected by |
whether willows established in the first year following abandonment, which in turn depended on the weather conditions during a rather short period of germinability of willow seed. Divergent successional pathways were still obvious after 20 years of succession. Discussions during this second session outlined factors that determine the representation of alien species in successions starting on bare ground. Availability of propagules of both alien and native species is determined by a number of related factors such as floristic history, human activities in the region, as well as at the time of initial disturbance, since modern landscapes tend to be progressively more invaded by alien species (Pysk et al. 2003). Other important factors include habitat type and landscape character, and the frequency and intensity of disturbances. Preliminary analysis with habitats classified according to the character of surrounding landscapes indicated that industrial habitats have a high proportion of aliens at the beginning, but their decrease in rate of succession is faster than in habitats located in agricultural landscapes. In natural habitats, aliens are poorly represented; hence their decrease with continuing succession is not so profound. |
|
|
|
|
Colonists and invaders: getting the traits and comparisons right The last session dealt with comparison of traits of alien and native species colonizing sites of various successional status. Ken Thompson (University of Sheffield, UK) pointed out that current analysis of traits promoting invasions is limited by the availability and quality of information on traits involved. Comparative analyses tend to employ traits on the basis of whether they are readily available or can be rapidly abstracted from floras, rather than on any assessment of their intrinsic importance. Thus we know a lot about patterns of plant height, growth form, seed mass, and (apparent) dispersal syndrome, but very little about growth rate, palatability, or seed production. Alien/native comparisons are also frequently drawn too narrowly (e.g., single pairs of species) or too broadly (e.g., whole native and introduced floras). Finally, we should beware of trying to answer ecological questions with inappropriate data from other fields, for example using economic impact as a measure of “success” of aliens, and of the dogmatic application of unproven hypotheses, e.g., the supposed trade-off between colonizing and competitive abilities. Some talks discussed rather underexplored phenomena in invasion biology: David Richardson (University of Cape Town, South Africa) stressed that to obtain a better picture of invasion patterns, mutualistic |
relationships with organisms of other trophic levels must be taken into account. Invasions are to a large extent idiosyncratic and the outcome is often determined by factors that are impossible to control in comparative analyses, e.g., the availability of dispersers, pollinators, and root symbionts (Richardson et al. 2000a). This was demonstrated in detail by Johannes Kollman (Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Copenhagen, Denmark) who concluded that invading native and alien fleshy-fruited species in temperate ecosystems use similar mutualistic interactions during dispersal and regeneration stages of succession. Discussion during this session indicated the following. Further progress in comparative studies to reveal the determinants of species invasiveness is only possible by improving the quality of input data, both by obtaining more detailed information on species traits and by clearly defining what we mean by species “success.” Since different traits may be associated with different measures of species invasiveness or “success,” we should distinguish among alien species’ (a) frequency or range size, (b) local abundance as a measure of ability to dominate vegetation locally, and (c) persistence, i.e., ability to invade seminatural vegetation. As distribution of early- and late-successional species in these three dimensions depends on different suites of traits, this approach has potential to increase understanding of the role of individual traits in plant invasions. |
|
|
|
|
Future perspectives on linking invasion and succession ecology The workshop discussions indicated that the gap between studies on plant invasions and vegetation succession is detrimental and fosters intellectual isolation, resulting in investigators paying insufficient attention to ideas and findings in related subdisciplines. This is particularly worrying since these two specialties, while focusing on different questions and patterns, are actually studying the same mechanisms. Efforts to reunify specialty areas in plant ecology have the potential to substantially enhance ecologists’ ability to discover and describe the mechanisms responsible for vegetation change. Experiments designed to link invasion and succession are urgently needed to make some progress in this area. There are numbers of successional seres with detailed, high-quality data |
available from various geographical regions and habitat
types, but they have not been systematically analyzed up to now.
Their analysis has potential to outline general patterns of alien
species participation in succession, test the hypothesis of alien
species decrease in succession (Rejmánek 1989), and permit
investigation of the variation of this process and relate it to
the underlying factors. Researchers would benefit greatly from the intellectual synergy that would inevitably result from better communication among research specialty areas. Outputs from such studies are urgently needed for a broad spectrum of professionals working in biological invasions, vegetation succession and associated applied fields (e.g., land-managers, conservationists, governmental and NGO policy-makers involved in landscape restoration and control of invasive species). |
|
|
|
|
Literature cited Connell, J. H., and R. O. Slatyer.
1977. Mechanisms of succession in natural communities and their
role in community stability and organization.
American Naturalist 111:1119–1144. |
2000a. Plant invasions—the
role of mutualisms. Biological Reviews 75:65–93. Petr Pyšek Mark A. Davis Curtis C. Daehler Ken Thompson |
ContributionsA History of the Ecological Sciences, Part 13: Broadening Science in Italy and England, 1600–1650
| The number of European scientists and their publications increased steadily during the 1500s to the point that science needed social organization beyond what universities provided. Scientists corresponded with each other (Hatch 2000), and botanical gardens and museums were founded, often connected to a university or a city (Impey and MacGregor 1985, Findlen 1994, 2000, Cooper 2000). Italy led the way. In the later 1500s, a Neapolitan nobleman and natural philosopher, Giambattista della Porta (1535–1615) established the first scientific society, Academia dei Segreti (Academia Secretorum Naturae), while still a teenager (Rienstra 1975, Eamon 2000). He was inspired by the literary academies of Naples. He and his group investigated a wide variety of science topics, such as magnetism, optics, distillation, mechanics of water and steam, making plants bloom or fruit out of season, physiognomy, and topics now called pseudo-sciences, such as physiognomy and strange cures—all of which they called natural magic. Porta was a prolific author, whose most famous work, Magia Naturalis, included results from the Academia’s investigations; it first appeared in four “books” in 1558, but grew through many later editions to 20 “books” by 1589. Besides the 12 Latin editions, there were four in Italian, seven in French, two in German, and two in English. The English translation was not published until 1658 and the second edition appeared in 1669. |
|
Fig. 1. Giambattista della Porta. Frontispiece of Porta 1608. |
|
Although Porta reported discovering small black
“seeds” in fungi in his Phytognomonica (1588:240;
quoted in English by Ainsworth 1976:14), this did not lead
him to conclude that fungi only reproduce by the “seeds”
we call spores (Porta 1658:60). One historian of science claimed
that in Phytognomonica Porta “set out the first
ecological grouping of plants according to their geographical
locale and distributions” (Price 1957), but this claim
could only be made by someone unfamiliar with the botanical
works by Theophrastos (Egerton 2001). Porta’s discussions
of physical sciences in Natural Magic is based to some extent
on actual experiments, but his accounts of the generation
of animals and production of plants is merely a repetition
of traditional beliefs (Porta 1658:27):
|
