Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

The future of urban biodiversity research: Moving beyond the ‘low-hanging fruit’

Abstract

In this era of rapidly urbanising human populations, urban practitioners are under increasing pressure to create resilient and sustainable cities and towns. Urban ecologists currently have a unique opportunity to apply solid, evidence-based research to help create biodiversity-rich and sustainable cities and towns for the future. Unfortunately, there is currently a mismatch between the questions planners, designers and decision-makers are asking urban ecologists that would allow them to improve the biodiversity outcomes in urban areas, and the questions urban ecologists must ask to contribute to the development and application of the science of urban ecology. For a number of reasons, urban ecologists over the past 25 years have primarily focused on describing the patterns of biodiversity in cities and towns using broad, aggregate predictor variables (e.g., distance to city center, land-use, percent cover of impermeable surfaces and vegetation, etc.). We refer to these results as ‘low-hanging fruit’. If the discipline of urban ecology is going to provide the necessary information to inform actions to preserve and enhance urban biodiversity, we need to move beyond place-based research, and work towards the development of confirmed generalizations regarding the relationship between the structure and function of urban ecosystems and biodiversity. We propose three essential strategies for achieving this refined understanding: 1) defining the study window to place the study into a broader global context, 2) collecting and using more explicit question-driven measures of the urban condition in order to improve our understanding of urban ecological drivers, as well as recording more detailed ecological responses to provide insights into the ecological mechanisms underlying an observed response, and 3) expanding studies to include multiple cities, regions and countries. These strategies will help to expedite the ability of urban ecology to contribute to the creation of biodiversity-rich, healthy, resilient cities and towns.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Adler PB, Seabloom EW, Borer ET et al (2011) Productivity is a poor predictor of plant species richness. Science 333:1750–1753

  2. Alberti M (2008) Advances in urban ecology: integrating humans and ecological processes in urban ecosystems. Springer, New York

  3. Allen TFH, Starr TB (1982) Hierarchy: perspectives for ecological complexity. University Chicago Press, Chicago

  4. Apostolopoulou E, Paloniemi R (2012) Frames of scale challenges in Finnish and Greek biodiversity conservation. Ecol Soc 17:9. doi:10.5751/ES-05181-170409

  5. Barber JR, Crooks KR, Fristrup KM (2010) The costs of chronic noise exposure for terrestrial organisms. Trends Ecol Evol 25:180–189

  6. Becker A, Whitfield AK, Cowley PD, Järnegren J, Næsje TF (2013) Potential effects of artificial light associated with anthropogenic infrastructure on the abundance and foraging behaviour of estuary-associated fishes. J Appl Ecol 50:43–50

  7. Bonnington C, Gaston KJ, Evan KL (2013) Fearing the feline: domestic cats reduce avian fecundity through trait-mediated indirect effects that increase nest predation by other species. J Appl Ecol 50:15–24

  8. Boone CG, Cook E, Hall SJ, Nation ML, Grimm NB, Raish CB, Finch DM, York AM (2012) A comparative gradient approach as a tool for understanding and managing urban ecosystems. Urban Ecosyst 15:795–807

  9. Cadenasso ML, Pickett STA (2008) Urban principles for ecological landscape design and management: Scientific fundamentals Cities and the Environment 1 16 pp http://digitalcommonslmuedu/cate/vol1/iss2/4/

  10. Clergeau P, Jokimäki J, Snep R (2006) Using hierarchical levels for urban ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 21:660–661

  11. Cronon W (1993) The uses of environmental history. (Presidential Address, American Society for Environmental History). Environ Hist Rev 17:1–22

  12. Cronon W (2004) Getting ready to do history. The Carnegie Foundation for fhe Advancement of Teaching.http://www.williamcronon.net/writing/Cronon_Carnegie_Essay_Getting_Ready_to_Do_History_2004.pdf

  13. Duncan RP, Clemants SE, Corlett RT, Hahs AK, McCarthy MA, McDonnell MJ, Schwartz MW, Thompson K, Vesk PA, Williams NSG (2011) Plant traits and extinction in urban areas: a meta-analysis of new world cities. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 20:509–519

  14. Faeth SH, Warren PS, Shochat E, Marussich WA (2005) Trophic dynamics in urban communities. BioScience 55:399–407

  15. Felson AJ, Pickett STA (2005) Designed experiments: new approaches tostudying urban ecosystems. Front Ecol Environ 3:549–556

  16. Francis CD, Kleist NJ, Ortega CP, Cruz A (2012) Noise pollution alters ecological services: enhanced pollination and disrupted seed dispersal. Proc R Soc B: Biol Sci 279:2727–2735

  17. Gaston KJ, Smith RM, Thompson K, Warren PH (2005) Urban domestic gardens (II): experimental tests of methods for increasing biodiversity. Biodivers Conserv 14:395–413

  18. Gaston KJ, Davies TW, Bennie J, Hopkins J (2012) Reducing the ecological consequences of night-time light pollution. Options Dev J Appl Ecol 49(6):1256–1266

  19. Gering JC, Blair RB (1999) Predation on artificial bird nests along an urban gradient: predatory risk or relaxation in urban environments? Ecography 22:532–541

  20. Grace JB, Michael Anderson T, Han O, Scheiner SM (2010) On the specification of structural equation models for ecological systems. Ecol Monogr 80:67–87

  21. Gregg JW, Jones CG, Dawson TE (2003) Urbanization effects on tree growth in the vicinity of New York City. Nature 424:183–187

  22. Grimm NB, Grove JM, Pickett STA, Redman CA (2000) Integrated approaches to long-term studies of urban ecological systems. BioScience 50:571–584

  23. Hagen JB (2008) Teaching ecology during the environmental age, 1965–1980. Environ Hist 13:704–723

  24. Hahs A, McDonnell MJ (2006) Selecting independent measures to quantify Melbourne’s urban–rural gradient. Landsc Urban Plan 78:435–448

  25. Hanski I, Von Hertzen L, Fyhrquist N, Koskinen K, Torppa K, Laatikainen T, Karisola P, Auvinen P, Paulin L, Mäkelä MJ, Vartiainen E, Kosunen TU, Alenius H, Haahtela T (2012) Environmental biodiversity, human microbiota, and allergy are interrelated. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109:8334–8339

  26. Jerzak L (2001) Synurbanization of the magpie in the Paleartic. In: Marzluff JM, Bowman R, Donnelly R (eds) Avian ecology and conservation in an urbanizing world. Kluwer Academic, Boston, pp 403–425

  27. Kaye JP, Groffman PM, Grimm NB, Baker LA, Pouyat RV (2006) A distinct urban biogeochemistry? Trends Ecol Evol 21:192–199

  28. Kendal D, Williams KJH, Williams NSG (2012) Plant traits link people’s plant preferences to the composition. Landsc Urban Plan 105:34–42

  29. Knapp S, Kühn I, Bakker JP, Kleyer M, Klotz S, Ozinga WA, Poschlod P, Thompson K, Thuiller W, Römermann C (2009) How species traits and affinity to urban land use control large-scale species frequency. Divers Distrib 15:533–546

  30. Körner C (2003) Alpine plant life, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg

  31. Likens GE (1992) The ecosystem approach: its use and abuse. In: Kinne O (ed) Excellence in ecology, book 3. International Ecology Institute, Oldendorf/Luhe

  32. Longcore T, Rich C (2004) Ecological light pollution. Front Ecol Environ 2:191–198

  33. Louv R (2005) Last child in the woods: saving our children from nature deficit disorder. Algonquin of Chapel Hill, North Carolina

  34. Luck GW (2007) A review of the relationships between human population density and biodiversity. Biol Rev 82:607–645

  35. Mac Nally R (2000) Regression and model-building in conservation biology, biogeography and ecology: the distinction between - and reconciliation of - ‘predictive’ and ‘explanatory’ models. Biodivers Conserv 9:655–671

  36. Marzluff JM, Bowman R, Donnelly R (2001) A historical perspective on urban bird research: trends, terms and approaches. In: Marzluff JM, Bowman R, Donnelly R (eds) Avian ecology and conservation in an urbanizing world. Kluwer Academic, Boston, pp 403–425

  37. McDonald RI, Kareiva P, Forman RTT (2008) The implications of current and future urbanization for global protected areas and biodiversity conservation. Biol Conserv 141:1695–1703

  38. McDonald RI, Forman RTT, Kareiva P (2010) Open space loss and land inequality in United States’ cities, 1990–2000. PLoSONE 5:e9509

  39. McDonald RI, Green PA, Balk D, Fekete B, Revenga C, Todd M, Montgomery M (2011) Urban growth, climate change, and freshwater availability. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108:6312–6317

  40. McDonnell MJ (2011) The history of urban ecology. In: Niemelä J, Breuste JH, Guntenspergen G, McIntyre NE, Elmqvist T and James P (eds) Urban ecology: patterns, processes, and applications. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  41. McDonnell MJ, Hahs AK (2008) The use of gradient analysis studies in advancing our understanding of the ecology of urbanising landscapes: current status and future directions. Landsc Ecol 23:1143–1155

  42. McDonnell MJ, Hahs AK (2009) Comparative ecology of cities and towns: past, present and future. In: McDonnell MJ, Hahs AK, Breuste JH (eds) Ecology of cities and towns: a comparative approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  43. McDonnell MJ, Pickett STA, Pouyat RV (1993) The application of the ecological gradient paradigm to the study of urban effects. In: McDonnell MJ, Pickett STA (eds) Humans as components of ecosystems. Springer, New York

  44. McDonnell MJ, Hahs AK, Breuste J (eds) (2009) Ecology of cities and towns: a comparative approach. Cambridge University Press, Oxford, 664 pp

  45. McDonnell MJ, Hahs AK, Pickett STA (2012) Exposing an urban ecology straw man: Critique of Ramalho and Hobbs. Trends Ecol Evol 27:255–256

  46. McIntyre NE, Knowles-Yanez K, Hope D (2000) Urban ecology as an interdisciplinary field: differences in the use of “urban” between the social and natural sciences. Urban Ecosyst 4:5–24

  47. McKinney ML (2006) Urbanization as a major cause of biotic homogenization. Biol Cons 127:247–260

  48. Miller JR, Hobbs RJ (2002) Conservation where people live and work. Conserv Biol 16:330–337

  49. Mϋller N (2011) Conclusion. In: Kelcey JG, Müller N (eds) Plants and habitats of European cities. Springer, New York

  50. Mϋller N, Werner P (2010) Urban biodiversity and the case for implementing the convention on biological diversity in towns and cities. In: Müller N, Werner P, Kelcey JG (eds) Urban biodiversity and design. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford

  51. Nassauer JI, Opdam P (2008) Design in science: extending the landscape paradigm. Landsc Ecol 25:633–644

  52. Niemelä J, Kotze DJ, Venn S, Penev L, Stoyanov I, Spence J, Hartley D, de Oca M (2002) Carabid beetle assemblages (Coleoptera, Caribidae) across urban–rural gradients: an international comparison. Landsc Ecol 17:387–401

  53. O’Neill RV, DeAngelis D, Waide J, Allen TFH (1986) A hierarchical concept of ecosystems. Princeton University Press, Princeton

  54. Pickett STA, Burch WR Jr, Dalton SE, Foresman TW, Grove JM, Rowntree R (1997) A conceptual framework for the study of human ecosystems in urban areas. Urban Ecosyst 1:185–199

  55. Pickett STA, Buckley GL, Kaushal SS, Williams Y (2011) Social-ecological science in the humane metropolis. Urban Ecosyst 14:319–339

  56. Pickett STA, Cadenasso ML, McGrath B (2013) Resilence in ecology and urban design: linking theory and practice for sustainable cities. Springer, Netherlands

  57. Pouyat PV, Carreiro MM (2003) Controls on mass loss and nitrogen dynamics of oak leaf litter along an urban–rural land-use gradient. Oecologia 135:288–298

  58. Rich C, Longcore T (2006) Ecological consequences of artificial night lighting. Island Press, Washington, DC

  59. Ricotta C, La Sorte FA, Pyšek P, Rapson GL, Celesti-Grapow L, Thompson K (2009) Phyloecology of urban alien floras. J Ecol 97:1243–1251

  60. Rose KA, Morgan IG, Ip J, Kifley A, Huynh S, Smith W, Mitchell P (2008) Outdoor activity reduces the prevalence of Myopia in children. Ophthalmology 115:1279–1285

  61. Schwartz MW, Thorne JH, Viers JH (2006) Biotic homogenization of the California flora in urban and urbanizing regions. Biol Conserv 127:282–291

  62. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2012) Cities and biodiversity outlook. A global assessment of the links between action and policy: Urbanization, biodiversity, and ecosystem services. Montreal, 64 pp

  63. Shochat E, Stefanov WL, Whitehouse MEA, Faeth SH (2004) Urbanization and spider diversity: influences of human modification of habitat structure and productivity. Ecol Appl 14:268–280

  64. Shochat E, Warren PS, Faeth SH, McIntyre NE, Hope D (2006) From patterns to emerging processes in mechanistic urban ecology. Ecol Evol 21:186–191

  65. Steiner FR (2002) Human ecology: following nature’s lead. Island Press, Washington, DC, 237 pp

  66. Steiner FR (2011) Design for a vulnerable planet. University of Texas Press, Austin

  67. Stout WE, Rosenfield RN, Holton WG, Bielefeldt J (2007) Nesting biology of urban Cooper’s hawks in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. J Wildlife Manage 71:366–375

  68. Theobald DM (2004) Placing exurban land-use change in a human modification framework. Front Ecol Environ 2:139–144

  69. Thompson GF, Steiner FR (1997) Ecological design and planning. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 348 pp

  70. Townsend M (2006) Feel blue? Touch green! Participation in forest/woodland management as a treatment for depression. Urban Urban Gree 5:111–120

  71. Van der Ree R, McDonnell MJ, Temby ID, Nelson J, Whittingham E (2005) The establishment and dynamics of a recently established camp of flying-foxes (Pteropus poliocaphalus) outside their geographic range. J Zool 268:177–185

  72. Walters CJ, Holling CS (1990) Large-scale management experiments and learning by doing. Ecology 71:2060–2068

  73. Ward K (2010) Towards a relational comparative approach to the study of cities. Prog Hum Geog 34:471–487

  74. Williams NM, Winfree R (2013) Local habitat characteristics but not landscape urbanization drive pollinator visitation and native plant pollination in forest remnants. Biol Conserv 160:10–18

  75. Williams NSG, McDonnell MJ, Phelan GK, Keim L, van der Ree R (2006) Range expansion due to urbanisation: increased food resources attract grey-headed flying-foxes (Pteropus poliocephalus) to Melbourne. Austral Ecol 31:190–198

Download references

Acknowledgments

This manuscript was significantly improved by comments from Norbert Mϋller, Glenn Guntenspergen, Rodney van der Ree, Dave Kendal, Julia Stammers and Zoe Metherell. The Baker Foundation provided generous support for this research.

Author information

Correspondence to Mark J. McDonnell.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McDonnell, M.J., Hahs, A.K. The future of urban biodiversity research: Moving beyond the ‘low-hanging fruit’. Urban Ecosyst 16, 397–409 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-013-0315-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Comparative ecology
  • Actionable science
  • Urban biodiversity
  • Aggregate variables
  • Specific variables
  • Mechanistic understanding
  • Urban predictor variables
  • Urban response variables
  • Confirmed generalisations