FUNCTIONAL DIVERSITY:Trait-based Approaches for Bioengineering      Multifunctional Agroecosystems             Fabrice DeC...
OS PhylogenyXP                                                         Upgrade:                 OS®                       ...
AgrobiodiversityAgricultural biodiversity includes all componentsof biological diversity of relevance to food andagricultu...
Loss of functional diversity under landuse intensification across multiple taxa.Ecology Letters 12:22-33 Dan Flynn, Melani...
Tilman et al 1996
Diaz and Cabido (2001)
Does land use intensification reduce functional diversity?                                     Flynn et al. Ecology Letter...
Landuse Intensity                2°Forest                                    Pasture  Forest                              ...
How is functional diversity lost with intensification?  71 Species Total        Flynn et al. Ecology Letters (2009) 12:22-...
x                x                 What is functional                 x                x                 redundancy within...
x                                           x               x                          x               x                x ...
x                                           x               x                          x               x                x ...
x                                           x                      x               x                          x           ...
Functional Diversity Decreases with landuse IntensityFlynn et al. Ecology Letters (2009) 12:22-33DeClerck NCEAS DGS
Agrobiodiversity and Human Nutrition             Fabrice DeClerck1,2, Jessica Fanzo2,3,              Cheryl Palm2 and Rose...
Econutrition: the interrelationships amongnutrition, human health, agriculture and foodproduction, environmental health, a...
Hypotheses• Biodiversity drives ecosystem functioning• Human health is an ecosystem function• Agrobiodiversity should impa...
Sauri Agrobiodiversity•   Over 146 plant species found•   39 Edible Species•   Mean of 14 edible species per farm•   Rangi...
Seven Traits1)   Protein2)   Energy3)   Vitamin A4)   Vitamin C5)   Iron6)   Zinc7)   Folates                 F. DeClerck
High ProteinHigh EnergyHigh Vitamin A                 F. DeClerck
Field species richness, and                        functional diversity are                        related: r2 0.49, p<0.0...
Farm 201201                                Species Richness = 18                                FD = 0.99FD               ...
F. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010)Farm 103801             Farm 201201             Farm 600102Species Richness = 19...
High functional agrobiodiversity decreases probability of anemia                                                          ...
Table 1. Nutrients and nutrient groups taken into account for calculation of FD metrics. Fromthe 51 required nutrients for...
ZincF. DeClerckF. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010)
ZincF. DeClerckF. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010)
ZincF. DeClerckF. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010)
ZincF. DeClerckF. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010)
F. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010)                                  0.82Contribution of BD to Nutrition           ...
Figure 2. Nutritional Functional Diversity and Species richness for 170      farms in Sauri (☐), Mwandama (Δ) and Ruhiira ...
Figure 3. Observed versus expected Nutritional Functional Diversity for 170farms in Sauri (☐), Mwandama (Δ) and Ruhiira (...
Land-use intensification reduces functional redundancy and response      diversity in plant communities. Ecology Letters 1...
Response diversity“Of increasing concern is the loss of species thathave similar ecosystem effects but differ intheir envi...
Ecological redundancy• Redundancy = number of species within a functional group• High redundancy = high resilience to envi...
Measuring response diversity• Volume of the minimum                                                          Convex hull v...
Measuring response diversity                          Convex hull volume                                 Response trait 2 ...
Functional trait              Effect   ResponseSpecific leaf area (SLA)        XWood density                    XGrowth fo...
Study Sites, Species Richness (landscapes)                                                                    QuebecPortug...
a) Species in effect trait space
a) Species in effect trait space                4     1                  5         3     2         6 b) Functional effect ...
c) Species in each land usea) Species in effect trait space                4                    Natural                   ...
c) Species in each land usea) Species in effect trait space                                  d) Functional dispersion     ...
Redundancy decreases with land use intensification      Nicaragua (Matiguas)      Australia sub-tropics 1      Nicaragua (...
Response diversity decreases as well, but less so                          Nicaragua (Matiguas)                          A...
Redundancy                                  Response diversityNicaragua (Matiguas)                                Nicaragu...
Towards Multifunctional Landscapes• Ecological Aspects  – What are the driving mechanisms behind ES     • Species richness...
Thanks!   THANKS!!!
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Icraf seminar(de clerck)

926 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Career
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
926
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
96
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
13
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Biodivrersity as the global operating system: An operating system (OS) is software, consisting of programs and data, that runs on computers and manages the computer hardware and provides common services for efficient execution of various application software.
  • the variety and variability of animals, plants and micro-organisms, at the genetic, species and ecosystem levels, which are necessary to sustain key functions of the agro-ecosystem, its structure and processes
  • Icraf seminar(de clerck)

    1. 1. FUNCTIONAL DIVERSITY:Trait-based Approaches for Bioengineering Multifunctional Agroecosystems Fabrice DeClerck (and friends)
    2. 2. OS PhylogenyXP Upgrade: OS® Now includes Provisioning, Cultural, Regulating and PhylogenyXP Support Services experience the best of the biosphere Constantly Evolving!Version 2.8 B Free support from more than 2 million species* Version 2.8 B *number of species may be greater than 100 million
    3. 3. AgrobiodiversityAgricultural biodiversity includes all componentsof biological diversity of relevance to food andagriculture, and all components of biologicaldiversity that constitute the agroecosystem. CBD definition of Agricultural Diversity
    4. 4. Loss of functional diversity under landuse intensification across multiple taxa.Ecology Letters 12:22-33 Dan Flynn, Melanie Gogol- Prokurat, Brenda Lin, Nicole Molinari, Theresa Nogeire, Bárbara Trautman Richers, Nicholas Simpson, Margie Mayfield and Fabrice DeClerck
    5. 5. Tilman et al 1996
    6. 6. Diaz and Cabido (2001)
    7. 7. Does land use intensification reduce functional diversity? Flynn et al. Ecology Letters (2009) 12:22-33 DeClerck NCEAS DGS
    8. 8. Landuse Intensity 2°Forest Pasture Forest Low tree density Live Fence Pasture High Tree Density [ ]Sanchez et al
    9. 9. How is functional diversity lost with intensification? 71 Species Total Flynn et al. Ecology Letters (2009) 12:22-33 DeClerck NCEAS DGS
    10. 10. x x What is functional x x redundancy within x x taxonomic groups with land x use change? x x x x x x x x x x x x x Flynn et al. Ecology Letters (2009) 12:22-33Forest Fragment: 25 extinct DeClerck NCEAS DGS
    11. 11. x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xForest Fragment: 25 extinct Live Fence: 41 extinct
    12. 12. x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xForest Fragment: 25 extinct Live Fence: 41 extinct
    13. 13. x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xForest Fragment: 25 extinct Live Fence: 41 extinct Pasture: 64 extinct
    14. 14. Functional Diversity Decreases with landuse IntensityFlynn et al. Ecology Letters (2009) 12:22-33DeClerck NCEAS DGS
    15. 15. Agrobiodiversity and Human Nutrition Fabrice DeClerck1,2, Jessica Fanzo2,3, Cheryl Palm2 and Roseline Remans2 1CATIE and 2The Earth Institute at Columbia University, 3 Bioversity
    16. 16. Econutrition: the interrelationships amongnutrition, human health, agriculture and foodproduction, environmental health, andeconomic production Deckelbaum, Palm, Mutuo and F. DeClerck
    17. 17. Hypotheses• Biodiversity drives ecosystem functioning• Human health is an ecosystem function• Agrobiodiversity should impact human health• The study of agrobiodiversity and human health can lead to important considerations for both sustainable development, and theoretical ecology. F. DeClerck
    18. 18. Sauri Agrobiodiversity• Over 146 plant species found• 39 Edible Species• Mean of 14 edible species per farm• Ranging from 5 - 22 edible plant species• Mean 1.5 cattle, half a sheep, a quarter goat and 7 chickens. F. DeClerck
    19. 19. Seven Traits1) Protein2) Energy3) Vitamin A4) Vitamin C5) Iron6) Zinc7) Folates F. DeClerck
    20. 20. High ProteinHigh EnergyHigh Vitamin A F. DeClerck
    21. 21. Field species richness, and functional diversity are related: r2 0.49, p<0.001FD Species Richness F. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010)
    22. 22. Farm 201201 Species Richness = 18 FD = 0.99FD Farm 103801 Species Richness = 19 FD = 0.66 Species Richness Farm 600102 Species Richness = 10 FD = 0.76 F. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010)
    23. 23. F. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010)Farm 103801 Farm 201201 Farm 600102Species Richness = 19 Species Richness = 18 Species Richness = 10FD = 0.66 FD = 0.99 FD = 0.76
    24. 24. High functional agrobiodiversity decreases probability of anemia F. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010) Species richness and anemia, R2 =0.05 Functional diversity and anemia R2= 0.13
    25. 25. Table 1. Nutrients and nutrient groups taken into account for calculation of FD metrics. Fromthe 51 required nutrients for human diets, 17 nutrients that are key for human diets and forwhich reliable plant composition data were available in the literature were selected. Becauseplants are not a proven source for Vitamin B12 and Vitamin D, these were not included. Macronutrients Minerals Vitamins Protein Calcium (Ca) Vitamin A Carbohydrates Iron (Fe) Vitamin C Dietary fibre Potassium (K) Thiamin Fat Magnesium (Mg) Riboflavin Manganese (Mn) Folate Zinc (Zn) Niacin Sulfur (S) Remans, Flynn, DeClerck et al. PloS One (2010)
    26. 26. ZincF. DeClerckF. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010)
    27. 27. ZincF. DeClerckF. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010)
    28. 28. ZincF. DeClerckF. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010)
    29. 29. ZincF. DeClerckF. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010)
    30. 30. F. DeClerck, Remans, Fanzo and Palm (2010) 0.82Contribution of BD to Nutrition 0.8 0.78 0.76 0.74 0.72 0.7 0.68 0.66 0 10 20 30 40 Number of Nutritional Functions
    31. 31. Figure 2. Nutritional Functional Diversity and Species richness for 170 farms in Sauri (☐), Mwandama (Δ) and Ruhiira () !Remans, Flynn, DeClerck et al. PloS One (2010)
    32. 32. Figure 3. Observed versus expected Nutritional Functional Diversity for 170farms in Sauri (☐), Mwandama (Δ) and Ruhiira (). Farms that have observedFD values that significantly differ from expected FD values are in bold. ! !Remans, Flynn, DeClerck et al. PloS One (2010)
    33. 33. Land-use intensification reduces functional redundancy and response diversity in plant communities. Ecology Letters 13:76-86 Etienne Laliberté, Jessie Wells, Fabrice DeClerck, Dan Metcalfe, Isabelle Aubin, Carla Catterall, Cibele Queiroz, Stephen Bonser, Yi Ding, Sean McNamara, Jen Fraterrigo, John Morgan, Peter Vesk, Margie Mayfield.
    34. 34. Response diversity“Of increasing concern is the loss of species thathave similar ecosystem effects but differ intheir environmental responses. This latter roleof diversity (…) may be one of the most importantmechanisms by which we sustain the long-termfunctioning of ecosystems and the servicesthey provide to society.”Chapin et al. 1997 Science
    35. 35. Ecological redundancy• Redundancy = number of species within a functional group• High redundancy = high resilience to environmental change• Why? compensatory responses Group 6: higher 4 redundancy 1 5 & resilience 3 2 6 Functional Group 6: lower groups 1 to 6 redundancy & resilience
    36. 36. Measuring response diversity• Volume of the minimum Convex hull volume Response trait 2convex hull formed by species 2.0within a functional group, inresponse trait space 1.5• From 2 to n response traits 1.0• Represents the range of 0.5“response strategies” foundwithin a functional group 0.0• Larger volume = higher 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0resilience Response trait 1
    37. 37. Measuring response diversity Convex hull volume Response trait 2 2.0 2.0 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Response trait 1 Response trait 1
    38. 38. Functional trait Effect ResponseSpecific leaf area (SLA) XWood density XGrowth form XHeight XLeaf phenology X XNutrient uptake strategy X XPhotosynthetic pathway X XRaunkiaer life form XClonality XDispersal mode XLeaf size XMaximum propagule longevity XPhysical defense XPollination syndrome XResprouting ability XSeed mass XLifespan X
    39. 39. Study Sites, Species Richness (landscapes) QuebecPortugual 243 (1)110 (1) China USA, NC 453 (2) 38(1) Laos 53(1) Nicaragua Australian RF 240(2) 1028 (4) Costa Rica 728(3) Australian WL New Zealand 52(1) 54(1) ± 3000 species; 17 landscapes; 17 functional traits
    40. 40. a) Species in effect trait space
    41. 41. a) Species in effect trait space 4 1 5 3 2 6 b) Functional effect groups
    42. 42. c) Species in each land usea) Species in effect trait space 4 Natural Semi-natural 1 5 Low-intensity 3 agricultural 2 6 b) Functional effect groups High-intensity agricultural
    43. 43. c) Species in each land usea) Species in effect trait space d) Functional dispersion (response diversity) for each effect group in each Natural land use e) Spearmanρbetween land Semi-natural use intensity and response diversity ρ = -0.9 Response diversity 4 1 5 Low-intensity 3 agricultural 2 6 Land use intensity b) Functional effect groups High-intensity agricultural Effect size for meta-analysis
    44. 44. Redundancy decreases with land use intensification Nicaragua (Matiguas) Australia sub-tropics 1 Nicaragua (Rivas) Australia WT (Atherton) China (Hainan lowland) USA (North Carolina) New Zealand Australia sub-tropics 2 Costa Rica (La Palma) China (Hainan montane) Australia WL (NSW) Portugal Costa Rica (Las Cruces) Laos Quebec Australia WT (Tully) Costa Rica (Puerto Jimenez) Summary r = -0.22 p = 0.0003 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 Correlation coefficient r
    45. 45. Response diversity decreases as well, but less so Nicaragua (Matiguas) Australia sub-tropics 1 Nicaragua (Rivas) Australia WT (Atherton) China (Hainan lowland) USA (North Carolina) New Zealand Australia sub-tropics 2 Costa Rica (La Palma) China (Hainan montane) Australia WL (NSW) Portugal Costa Rica (Las Cruces) Laos Quebec Australia WT (Tully) Costa Rica (Puerto Jimenez) Summary r = -0.091 p = 0.048 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 Correlation coefficientr
    46. 46. Redundancy Response diversityNicaragua (Matiguas) Nicaragua (Matiguas)Australia sub-tropics 1 Australia sub-tropics 1Nicaragua (Rivas) Nicaragua (Rivas)Australia WT (Atherton) Australia WT (Atherton)China (Hainan lowland) China (Hainan lowland)USA (North Carolina) USA (North Carolina)New Zealand New ZealandAustralia sub-tropics 2 Australia sub-tropics 2Costa Rica (La Palma) Costa Rica (La Palma)China (Hainan montane) China (Hainan montane)Australia WL (NSW) Australia WL (NSW)Portugal PortugalCosta Rica (Las Cruces) Costa Rica (Las Cruces)Laos LaosQuebec QuebecAustralia WT (Tully) Australia WT (Tully)Costa Rica (Puerto Jimenez) Costa Rica (Puerto Jimenez)Summary Summary -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 Correlation coefficientr Correlation coefficientr
    47. 47. Towards Multifunctional Landscapes• Ecological Aspects – What are the driving mechanisms behind ES • Species richness, composition, functional diversity arrangement.• Social and Economic Drivers – How do communities organize to impact change – Integration of multiple stakeholders in ecoagricultural landscapes.• Does the ES paradigm provide conservation and development goals?
    48. 48. Thanks! THANKS!!!

    ×