Plenary speaker abstracts

Dr. Michael J Vanni

Nutrient cycling by animals in aquatic ecosystems: from individuals to ecosystems

Animals can affect the fluxes of nutrients such as nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) in many ways and in many biomes. For example, all animals release N and P as waste products, and some animals can move transport great distances via their movements. In addition, animals can have strong indirect effects of nutrient cycling by regulating populations of plants and microbes, and by modifying physical habitats. While the importance of animals has been demonstrated in many situations, there has not been a synthesis of the role of animals in nutrient cycling. This talk will attempt to synthesize information on the roles of animals in mediating biogeochemical cycles, from individuals to biomes, and is structured in three parts. First, data from freshwater and marine taxa were compiled to assess the extent to which body size, temperature and animal body nutrient content can predict excretion rates of animals in the field. This synthesis of over 8000 observations shows that body size alone is an excellent predictor of both N and P excretion rates, but also that temperature and body nutrients are significantly related to excretion rates and the N:P ratio excreted. Metabolic scaling coefficients relating body size and excretion rates show negative allometry, but usually are different from 0.75 (the coefficient predicted by metabolic ecology theory). Temperature has a greater effect on N excretion than on P excretion, and excretion N:P is negatively related to body N:P, as predicted by ecological stoichiometry theory. The second part of the talk presents case studies on the role of animals (mostly fish) in nutrient cycling in lakes. These studies show that nutrient excretion by fish can exceed nutrient supply from other sources known to be important (e.g., watersheds) and can support a significant fraction of ecosystem nutrient demand. However, the importance of fish varies considerably both spatially and temporally, even within a single ecosystem. The third part of the talk provides predictions regarding the roles of animals in nutrient cycling across aquatic and terrestrial biomes. Based on energy flow and other ecosystem properties, direct fluxes of nutrients through animals are predicted to be most important in pelagic ecosystems, least important in forests and of intermediate importance in grasslands. In contrast, the importance of indirect effects of animals in mediating nutrient cycling (via trophic cascades, selective feeding, ecosystem engineering) relative to direct effects (direct flux through excretion) is predicted to be greatest in forests and least in pelagic systems. General conclusions are that animals are under-appreciated in terms of their importance in nutrient cycling and have not been adequately integrated into conceptual models of biogeochemical cycling. A major challenge is predicting and testing for variation across ecosystems and over various scales.

Dr. Rowan Barrett

Climate change and other anthropogenic disturbances are forcing many natural populations to adapt to new environmental pressures, but the role of selection in shaping genome evolution is not fully understood. What factors explain variability in how far and fast adaptation proceeds? Two fundamental challenges are identifying the molecular basis of adaptive phenotypic variation and elucidating the evolutionary processes acting on this variation. We would like to know which genes and, in particular, which alleles produce diversity, and how natural selection acts on this variation. In natural populations, putatively adaptive loci often have been identified using genome scans, which detect outlier loci with variation significantly different from neutral expectations. Yet, this approach has some limitations; for example, it cannot inform us about the mechanistic basis of selection, recombination can obscure signals of past selection, and it can be difficult to distinguish between patterns created by demographic versus selective forces. Experimental studies help clarify the genetics of adaptation by documenting the mechanisms and targets of selection that drive changes in allele frequency (the process) in ways that are not possible when investigating historical signatures of selection (the outcome). Here, I will describe some examples of my work with threespine stickleback fish and deer mice that use manipulative experiments to directly estimate how selection impacts the genome as populations adapt to new environments. The results shed light on the pace of adaptive evolution in nature and improve our understanding of the functional connections between genotype, phenotype, and fitness.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s