Next-Generation Individual-Based Models Integrate Biodiversity and Ecosystems: Yes We Can, and Yes We Must
- 2.6k Downloads
Ecosystem and community ecology have evolved along different pathways, with little overlap. However, to meet societal demands for predicting changes in ecosystem services, the functional and structural view dominating these two branches of ecology, respectively, must be integrated. Biodiversity–ecosystem function research has addressed this integration for two decades, but full integration that makes predictions relevant to practical problems is still lacking. We argue that full integration requires going, in both branches, deeper by taking into account individual organisms and the evolutionary and physico-chemical principles that drive their behavior. Individual-based models are a major tool for this integration. They have matured by using individual-level mechanism to replace the demographic thinking which dominates classical theoretical ecology. Existing individual-based ecosystem models already have proven useful both for theory and application. Still, next-generation individual-based models will increasingly use standardized and re-usable submodels to represent behaviors and mechanisms such as growth, uptake of nutrients, foraging, and home range behavior. The strategy of pattern-oriented modeling then helps make such ecosystem models structurally realistic by developing theory for individual behaviors just detailed enough to reproduce and explain patterns observed at the system level. Next-generation ecosystem scientists should include the individual-based approach in their toolkit and focus on addressing real systems because theory development and solving applied problems go hand-in-hand in individual-based ecology.
Keywordsbiodiversity research emergence first principles individual-based ecology individual-based modeling pattern-oriented modeling predictions structural realism theory development
We thank Monica Turner and Steve Carpenter for their invitation to contribute to this special feature of Ecosystems and for their comments on an earlier draft.
- DeAngelis DL, Grimm V. 2014. Individual-based models after four decades. F1000Prime Reports 6(39):6.Google Scholar
- Evans MR, Bithell M, Cornell S, Dall SRX, Diaz S, Emmott S, Ernande B, Grimm V, Hodgson DJ, Lewis SL, Mace GM, Morecroft M, Moustakas A, Murphy E, Newbold T, Petchey O, Smith M, Travis JMJ, Benton TG. 2013a. Predictive systems ecology. Proc R Soc B 280:20131452.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Fischer R, Bohn F, Dantas de Paula M, Dislich C, Groeneveld J, Gutiérrez AG, Kazmierczak M, Knapp N, Lehmann S, Paulick S, Pütz S, Roedig E, Taubert F, Köhler P, Huth A. 2016. Lessons learned from applying a gap model to complex forests and their carbon dynamics. Ecol Model 326:124–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kooijman SALM. 2010. dynamic energy budget theory for metabolic organisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Moya-Laraño J, Bilbao-Castro JR, Barrionuevo G, Ruiz-Lupión D, Casado LG, Montserrat M, Melián CJ, Magalhães S. 2014. Eco-evolutionary spatial dynamics: rapid evolution and isolation explain food web persistence. In: Moya-Laraño J, Rowntree J, Woodward G, Eds. Advances in ecological research, Vol. 50. Oxford: Academic Press. p 75–143.Google Scholar
- Pastor J, Dewey B, Moen R, Mladenoff DJ, White M, Cohen Y. 1998. Spatial patterns in the moose–forest–soil ecosystem on Isle Royale, Michigan, USA. Ecol Appl 8:411–24.Google Scholar
- Railsback S, Harvey B. 2002. Analysis of habitat selection rules using an individual-based model. Ecology 83:1817–30.Google Scholar
- Rose KA, Allen JI, Artioli Y, Barange M, Blackford J, Carlotti F, Cropp R, Daewel U, Edwards K, Flynn K, Hill S, Hille Ris Lambers R, Huse G, Mackinson S, Megrey BA, Moll A, Rivkin R, Salihoglu B, Schrum C, Shannon L, Shin Y, Smith SL, Smith C, Solidoro C, St John M, Zhou M. 2010. End-to-end models for the analysis of marine ecosystems: challenges, issues, and next steps. Mar Coast Fish 2:115–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Schulze ED, Mooney HA, Eds. 1993. Biodiversity and ecosystem function Berlin. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Tilman D. 1999. The ecological consequences of changes in biodiversity: a search for general principles. Ecology 80:1455–74.Google Scholar