4.8 Article

Quality matters: Stoichiometry of resources modulates spatial feedbacks in aquatic-terrestrial meta-ecosystems

Journal

ECOLOGY LETTERS
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ele.14284

Keywords

cross-ecosystem subsidy; landscape scale; meta-ecosystem; spatial feedbacks; stoichiometry; terrestrial-aquatic ecotone

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Species dispersal and resource spatial flows have significant impacts on the dynamics of connected ecosystems. This study investigates the role of subsidy stoichiometry in mediating the response of a meta-ecosystem to subsidy flows. The results demonstrate the potential for positive feedback loops and increased production at the meta-ecosystem scale through spatial complementarity. However, accentuating the stoichiometric mismatch between local resources and basal species needs can also have a negative impact on production.
Species dispersal and resource spatial flows greatly affect the dynamics of connected ecosystems. So far, research on meta-ecosystems has mainly focused on the quantitative effect of subsidy flows. Yet, resource exchanges at heterotrophic-autotrophic (e.g. aquatic-terrestrial) ecotones display a stoichiometric asymmetry that likely matters for functioning. Here, we joined ecological stoichiometry and the meta-ecosystem framework to understand how subsidy stoichiometry mediates the response of the meta-ecosystem to subsidy flows. Our model results demonstrate that resource flows between ecosystems can induce a positive spatial feedback loop, leading to higher production at the meta-ecosystem scale by relaxing local ecosystem limitations ('spatial complementarity'). Furthermore, we show that spatial flows can also have an unexpected negative impact on production when accentuating the stoichiometric mismatch between local resources and basal species needs. This study paves the way for studies on the interdependency of ecosystems at the landscape extent.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available