Future of ecology (continued)

Lecture graphics

Keddy (1992, J. Veg. Sci. 3:157-164) suggested the following goals for community ecology:

1. Development of "assembly rules" (sensu Diamond 1975, Assembly of species communities, pp. 342-444 in Ecology and Evolution of Communities)

   Diamond has been criticized for the methods he proposed to create assembly rules; although his proposed methods were flawed, the goals he proposed were fine

   Objective of assembly rules:

   Given (1) species pool and (2) an environment, can we predict the abundance of organisms actually found in that environment?

2. Development of "response rules"

   Objective of response rules:

   Given (1) a specified assemblage of spp., (2) total species pool, and (3) a specified disturbance or treatment, can we predict the composition of a future community?

   Again, we need knowledge of key life-history traits in the species pool, and the way in which spp. interact w/ basic types of disturbances

   This requires a combination of:

   description (to delineate spp. pool, to define initial states of systems, and to describe naturally-occurring states resulting from disturbances),

   comparison (of attributes of species --> necessary ecological info on spp. in the pool), and

   experimentation (to determine which traits provide the capacity to predict responses to different kinds of disturbances)

Which systems should be studied?

Different groups of organisms differ in their importance in the functioning of ecosystems

Groups also differ in abundance in the biosphere

Let's return to studies of interactions, where we began the semester:

Tansley's (1914) Presidential Address to the British Ecological Society dealt w/ contemporary issues in studying competition

focus on release experiments and the virtues of generality

Clements et al. (1929, Plant Competition: An Analysis of Community Functions)

included thorough review of competition concepts back to Malthus

extensive series of transplant experiments for studying competition

studies designed to assess competition for different limited resources (light, water, nutrients)

summary of consequences of competition for community organization

So, we had a clear statement of conceptual approaches for plant ecology research over 80 yr ago, followed by a synthesis over 65 yr ago

What does this tell us about the progress of ecology as a science?

Why did it take so long for field experiments to be popularly accepted by plant ecologists?

Why did (& does) plant ecology continue to be dominated by description?

Several hypotheses:

Human tendency to seek dichotomies

for ecology:

does competition or predation structure communities?

holistic vs. reductionist approaches

Scientists are rewarded for solving answerable questions, not important ones

Focus on inappropriate study media

Obstacles to communication

Weiner (1995) provides positive feedback for those of us who are critical of, and cynical about, the progress of ecology ("Ecology should be taught with a high degree of skepticism and cynicism")

Nontheless, there are good reasons to be optimistic about the future of ecology

the world needs general, predictive ecological theory for conservation and sustained use of the natural resources

we should be intellectually and ethically satisfied by pursuing ecological research

It appears that most of the obstacles to ecological research have more to do w/ psychology of scientists than w/ ecological systems