Table 3.1 Ecosystem services, classiﬁed according to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2003), and their ecosystem service providers. ‘Functionalunits’ refer to the unit of study for assessing functional contributions (∫ik) of ecosystem service providers; spatial scale indicates the scale(s) of operationof the service. Assessment of the potential to apply this conceptual framework to the service is purposefully conservative and is based on the degree towhich the contributions of individual species or communities can currently be quantiﬁed (Kremen 2005). Potential to apply this conceptual Ecosystem service providers/ framework forService trophic level Functional units Spatial scale ecological studyAesthetic, cultural All biodiversity Populations, Local‐global Low species, communities, ecosystemsEcosystem goods Diverse species Populations, Local‐global Medium species, communities, ecosystemsUV protection Biogeochemical cycles, micro‐ Biogeochemical Global Low organisms, plants cycles, functional groupsPuriﬁcation Micro‐organisms, plants Biogeochemical Regional‐ Medium (plants) of air cycles, global populations, species, functional groupsFlood mitigation Vegetation Communities, Local‐regional Medium habitatsDrought mitigation Vegetation Communities, Local‐regional Medium habitatsClimate stability Vegetation Communities, Local‐global Medium habitatsPollination Insects, birds, mammals Populations, Local High species, functional groupsPest control Invertebrate parasitoids and Populations, Local High predators and vertebrate predators species, functional groupsPuriﬁcation of water Vegetation, soil micro‐organisms, Populations, Local‐regional Medium to high* aquatic micro‐organisms, aquatic species, invertebrates functional groups, communities, habitatsDetoxiﬁcation and Leaf litter and soil invertebrates, soil Populations, Local‐regional Medium decomposition of micro‐organisms, aquatic micro‐ species, wastes organisms functional groups, communities, habitatsSoil generation and Leaf litter and soil invertebrates, soil Populations, Local Medium soil fertility micro‐organisms, nitrogen‐ﬁxing species, plants, plant and animal functional production of waste products groupsSeed dispersal Ants, birds, mammals Populations, Local High species, functional groups* Waste‐water engineers ‘design’ microbial communities; in turn, wastewater treatments provide ideal replicated experimentsfor ecological work (Graham and Smith 2004 in Kremen 2005).
Sodhi and Ehrlich: Conservation Biology for All. http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199554249.do92 CONSERVATION BIOLOGY FOR ALLfragments accumulate across the landscape. 5.3 Effects of landscape change on speciesChanges to biophysical processes such as hydro- Species show many kinds of responses to habitatlogical regimes can also affect entire landscapes. fragmentation: some are advantaged and in-In the Western Australian wheatbelt (Figure 5.2), crease in abundance, while others decline andmassive loss of native vegetation has resulted in a become locally extinct (see Chapter 10). Under-rise in the level of groundwater, bringing stored standing these diverse patterns, and the processessalt (NaCl) to the surface where it accumulates underlying them, is an essential foundation forand reduces agricultural productivity and trans- conservation. Those managing fragmentedforms native vegetation (Hobbs 1993). Box 5.1 Time lags and extinction debt in fragmented landscapes Andrew F. Bennett and Denis A. Saunders Habitat destruction and fragmentation result 7 in immediately visible and striking changes to the pattern of habitat in the landscape. 6 However, the effects of these changes on the Species richness 5 biota take many years to be expressed: there is a time‐lag in experiencing the full 4 consequences of such habitat changes. Long‐ lived organisms such as trees may persist for 3 many decades before disappearing without 2 replacement; small local populations of animals gradually decline before being lost; and 1 ecological processes in fragments are sensitive 0 to long‐term changes in the surroundings. 1 10 100 1000 Conservation managers cannot assume that Area (ha) species currently present in fragmented landscapes will persist there. Many fragments Box 5.1 Figure A change in the species‐area relationship for and landscapes face impending extinctions, mammals in rainforest fragments in Queensland, Australia, between 1986 (ﬁlled circles) and 2006 (open circles) illustrates a time‐lag in even though there may be no further change in the loss of species following fragmentation. Data from Laurance fragment size or the amount of habitat in the et al. (2008). landscape. We are still to pay the ‘extinction debt’ for the consequences of past actions. declined further (see Box 5.1 Figure), with most Identifying the duration of time‐lags and declines in t