Ecosystem engineering effects on species diversity across ecosystems: a meta-analysis.

Ecosystem engineering is increasingly recognized as a relevant ecological driver of diversity and community composition. Although engineering impacts on the biota can vary from negative to positive, and from trivial to enormous, patterns and causes of variation in the magnitude of engineering effects across ecosystems and engineer types remain largely unknown. To elucidate the above patterns, we conducted a meta-analysis of 122 studies which explored effects of animal ecosystem engineers on species richness of other organisms in the community. The analysis revealed that the overall effect of ecosystem engineers on diversity is positive and corresponds to a 25% increase in species richness, indicating that ecosystem engineering is a facilitative process globally. Engineering effects were stronger in the tropics than at higher latitudes, likely because new or modified habitats provided by engineers in the tropics may help minimize competition and predation pressures on resident species. Within aquatic environments, engineering impacts were stronger in marine ecosystems (rocky shores) than in streams. In terrestrial ecosystems, engineers displayed stronger positive effects in arid environments (e.g. deserts). Ecosystem engineers that create new habitats or microhabitats had stronger effects than those that modify habitats or cause bioturbation. Invertebrate engineers and those with lower engineering persistence (<1 year) affected species richness more than vertebrate engineers which persisted for >1 year. Invertebrate species richness was particularly responsive to engineering impacts. This study is the first attempt to build an integrative framework of engineering effects on species diversity; it highlights the importance of considering latitude, habitat, engineering functional group, taxon and persistence of their effects in future theoretical and empirical studies.

A meta-analysis of predation risk effects on pollinator behaviour.

Flower-visiting animals are constantly under predation risk when foraging and hence might be expected to evolve behavioural adaptations to avoid predators. We reviewed the available published and unpublished data to assess the overall effects of predators on pollinator behaviour and to examine sources of variation in these effects. The results of our meta-analysis showed that predation risk significantly decreased flower visitation rates (by 36%) and time spent on flowers (by 51%) by pollinators. The strength of the predator effects depended neither on predator taxa and foraging mode (sit-and-wait or active hunters) nor on pollinator lifestyle (social vs. solitary). However, predator effects differed among pollinator taxa: predator presence reduced flower visitation rates and time spent on flowers by Squamata, Lepidoptera and Hymenoptera, but not by Diptera. Furthermore, larger pollinators showed weaker responses to predation risk, probably because they are more difficult to capture. Presence of live crab spiders on flowers had weaker effects on pollinator behaviour than presence of dead or artificial crab spiders or other objects (e.g. dead bees, spheres), suggesting that predator crypsis may be effective to some extent. These results add to a growing consensus on the importance of considering both predator and pollinator characteristics from a community perspective.

Contrasting cascade effects of carnivores on plant fitness: a meta-analysis.

1. Although carnivores indirectly improve plant fitness by decreasing herbivory, they may also decrease plant reproduction by disrupting plant-pollinator mutualism. The overall magnitude of the resulting net effect of carnivores on plant fitness and the factors responsible for the variations in strength and direction of this effect have not been explored quantitatively to date. 2. We performed a meta-analysis of 67 studies containing 163 estimates of the effects of carnivores on plant fitness and examined the relative importance of several potential sources of variation in carnivore effects. 3. Carnivores significantly increased plant fitness via suppression of herbivores and decreased fitness by consuming pollinators. The overall net effect of carnivores on plant fitness was positive (32% increase), indicating that effects via herbivores were stronger than effects via pollinators. 4. Parasitoids had stronger positive effect on plant fitness than predators. Active hunters increased plant fitness, whereas stationary predators had no significant effect, presumably because they were more prone to disrupt plant-pollinator mutualism. Carnivores with broader habitat domain had negative effects on plant fitness, whereas those with narrow habitat domain had positive effects. 5. Predator effects were positive for plants which offered rewards (e.g. extrafloral nectaries) and negative for plants which lacked any attractors. 6. This study adds new knowledge on the factors that determine the strength of terrestrial trophic cascades and highlights the importance of considering simultaneous contrasting interactions in the same study system.