Drivers of arthropod biodiversity in an urban ecosystem.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Jan 2024
03 Jan 2024
Historique:
received:
10
08
2023
accepted:
22
12
2023
medline:
4
1
2024
pubmed:
4
1
2024
entrez:
3
1
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Our world is becoming increasingly urbanized with a growing human population concentrated around cities. The expansion of urban areas has important consequences for biodiversity, yet the abiotic drivers of biodiversity in urban ecosystems have not been well characterized for the most diverse group of animals on the planet, arthropods. Given their great diversity, comparatively small home ranges, and ability to disperse, arthropods make an excellent model for studying which factors can most accurately predict urban biodiversity. We assessed the effects of (i) topography (distance to natural areas and to ocean) (ii) abiotic factors (mean annual temperature and diurnal range), and (iii) anthropogenic drivers (land value and amount of impervious surface) on the occurrence of six arthropod groups represented in Malaise trap collections run by the BioSCAN project across the Greater Los Angeles Area. We found striking heterogeneity in responses to all factors both within and between taxonomic groups. Diurnal temperature range had a consistently negative effect on occupancy but this effect was only significant in Phoridae. Anthropogenic drivers had mixed though mostly insignificant effects, as some groups and species were most diverse in highly urbanized areas, while other groups showed suppressed diversity. Only Phoridae was significantly affected by land value, where most species were more likely to occur in areas with lower land value. Los Angeles can support high regional arthropod diversity, but spatial community composition is highly dependent on the taxonomic group.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38172148
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-50675-3
pii: 10.1038/s41598-023-50675-3
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
390Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Foley, J. A. et al. Global consequences of land use. Science 309, 570–574 (2005).
pubmed: 16040698
doi: 10.1126/science.1111772
Dobbs, C., Escobedo, F. J. & Zipperer, W. C. A framework for developing urban forest ecosystem services and goods indicators. Landsc. Urban Plan. 99, 196–206 (2011).
doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.11.004
Escobedo, F. J., Kroeger, T. & Wagner, J. E. Urban forests and pollution mitigation: Analyzing ecosystem services and disservices. Environ. Pollut. 159, 2078–2087 (2011).
pubmed: 21316130
doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2011.01.010
Collins, J. P. et al. A new urban ecology: Modeling human communities as integral parts of ecosystems poses special problems for the development and testing of ecological theory. Am. Sci. 88, 416–425 (2000).
doi: 10.1511/2000.35.416
Grimm, N. B. et al. Global change and the ecology of cities. Science 319, 756–760 (2008).
pubmed: 18258902
doi: 10.1126/science.1150195
McPhearson, T. et al. Advancing urban ecology toward a science of cities. Bioscience 66, 198–212 (2016).
doi: 10.1093/biosci/biw002
Rebele, F. Urban ecology and special features of urban ecosystems. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. Lett. 4, 173–187 (1994).
doi: 10.2307/2997649
Wu, J. Urban ecology and sustainability: The state-of-the-science and future directions. Landsc. Urban Plan. 125, 209–221 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.01.018
McIntyre, N. E. Ecology of urban arthropods: A review and a call to action. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 93, 825–835 (2000).
doi: 10.1603/0013-8746(2000)093[0825:EOUAAR]2.0.CO;2
Brown, B. V. & Hartop, E. A. Big data from tiny flies: Patterns revealed from over 42,000 phorid flies (Insecta: Diptera: Phoridae) collected over one year in Los Angeles, California, USA. Urban Ecosyst. 20, 521–534 (2017).
doi: 10.1007/s11252-016-0612-7
Hall, D. M. et al. The city as a refuge for insect pollinators. Conserv. Biol. 31, 24–29 (2017).
pubmed: 27624925
doi: 10.1111/cobi.12840
Baldock, K. C. et al. A systems approach reveals urban pollinator hotspots and conservation opportunities. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 363–373 (2019).
pubmed: 30643247
pmcid: 6445365
doi: 10.1038/s41559-018-0769-y
Silva, V. H. et al. Diverse urban pollinators and where to find them. Biol. Conserv. 281, 110036 (2023).
doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2023.110036
Narango, D. L., Tallamy, D. W. & Marra, P. P. Nonnative plants reduce population growth of an insectivorous bird. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 115, 11549–11554 (2018).
pubmed: 30348792
pmcid: 6233133
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1809259115
Felson, A. J. & Ellison, A. M. Designing (for) urban food webs. Front. Ecol. Evol. 9, 582041 (2021).
doi: 10.3389/fevo.2021.582041
Baldock, K. C. et al. Where is the UK’s pollinator biodiversity? The importance of urban areas for flower-visiting insects. Proc. R. Soc. B 282, 20142849 (2015).
pubmed: 25673686
pmcid: 4345454
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2014.2849
Braaker, S., Obrist, M. K., Ghazoul, J. & Moretti, M. Habitat connectivity and local conditions shape taxonomic and functional diversity of arthropods on green roofs. J. Anim. Ecol. 86, 521–531 (2017).
pubmed: 28164299
doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12648
Gathof, A. K., Grossmann, A. J., Herrmann, J. & Buchholz, S. Who can pass the urban filter? A multi-taxon approach to disentangle pollinator trait-environmental relationships. Oecologia 199, 165–179 (2022).
pubmed: 35505250
pmcid: 9120122
doi: 10.1007/s00442-022-05174-z
Ossola, A., Hahs, A. K., Nash, M. A. & Livesley, S. J. Habitat complexity enhances comminution and decomposition processes in urban ecosystems. Ecosystems 19, 927–941 (2016).
doi: 10.1007/s10021-016-9976-z
Newbound, M., Mccarthy, M. A. & Lebel, T. Fungi and the urban environment: A review. Landsc. Urban Plan. 96, 138–145 (2010).
doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.04.005
Tresch, S. et al. Litter decomposition driven by soil fauna, plant diversity and soil management in urban gardens. Sci. Total Environ. 658, 1614–1629 (2019).
pubmed: 30678018
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.235
Forister, M. L., Pelton, E. M. & Black, S. H. Declines in insect abundance and diversity: We know enough to act now. Conserv. Sci. Pract. 1, e80 (2019).
doi: 10.1111/csp2.80
Adams, B. J. et al. Local-and landscape-scale variables shape insect diversity in an urban biodiversity hot spot. Ecol. Appl. 30, e02089 (2020).
pubmed: 32017294
pmcid: 7317463
doi: 10.1002/eap.2089
Fenoglio, M. S., Rossetti, M. R. & Videla, M. Negative effects of urbanization on terrestrial arthropod communities: A meta-analysis. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 29, 1412–1429 (2020).
doi: 10.1111/geb.13107
Stewart, P. S., Stephens, P. A., Hill, R. A., Whittingham, M. J. & Dawson, W. Model selection in occupancy models: Inference versus prediction. Ecology 104, e3942 (2023).
pubmed: 36477749
doi: 10.1002/ecy.3942
Arif, S. & MacNeil, M. A. Predictive models aren’t for causal inference. Ecol. Lett. 25, 1741–1745 (2022).
pubmed: 35672133
doi: 10.1111/ele.14033
Cinelli, C., Forney, A. & Pearl, J. A crash course in good and bad controls. Sociol. Methods Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/00491241221099552 (2022).
doi: 10.1177/00491241221099552
Laubach, Z. M., Murray, E. J., Hoke, K. L., Safran, R. J. & Perng, W. A biologist’s guide to model selection and causal inference. Proc. R. Soc. B 288, 20202815 (2021).
pubmed: 33499782
pmcid: 7893255
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2020.2815
Heino, J., Alahuhta, J., Fattorini, S. & Schmera, D. Predicting beta diversity of terrestrial and aquatic beetles using ecogeographical variables: Insights from the replacement and richness difference components. J. Biogeogr. 46, 304–315 (2019).
doi: 10.1111/jbi.13485
Theodorou, P. et al. Urban areas as hotspots for bees and pollination but not a panacea for all insects. Nat. Commun. 11, 576 (2020).
pubmed: 31996690
pmcid: 6989530
doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-14496-6
Fenoglio, M. S., Calviño, A., González, E., Salvo, A. & Videla, M. Urbanisation drivers and underlying mechanisms of terrestrial insect diversity loss in cities. Ecol. Entomol. 46, 757–771 (2021).
doi: 10.1111/een.13041
Corcos, D. et al. Impact of urbanization on predator and parasitoid insects at multiple spatial scales. PLoS ONE 14, e0214068 (2019).
pubmed: 30943220
pmcid: 6447152
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214068
Wenzel, A., Grass, I., Belavadi, V. V. & Tscharntke, T. How urbanization is driving pollinator diversity and pollination—A systematic review. Biol. Conserv. 241, 108321 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108321
Wood, E. M. et al. Historical racial redlining and contemporary patterns of income inequality negatively affect birds, their habitat, and people in Los Angeles, California. Ornithol. Appl. 126, 044 (2023).
Clarke, L. W., Jenerette, G. D. & Davila, A. The luxury of vegetation and the legacy of tree biodiversity in Los Angeles, California. Landsc. Urban Plan. 116, 48–59 (2013).
doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.04.006
Chamberlain, D. E., Henry, D. A., Reynolds, C., Caprio, E. & Amar, A. The relationship between wealth and biodiversity: A test of the luxury effect on bird species richness in the developing world. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 3045–3055 (2019).
doi: 10.1111/gcb.14682
Li, H., Parker, K. A. & Kalcounis-Rueppell, M. C. The luxury effect beyond cities: Bats respond to socioeconomic variation across landscapes. BMC Ecol. 19, 1–13 (2019).
doi: 10.1186/s12898-019-0262-8
Magle, S. B. et al. Wealth and urbanization shape medium and large terrestrial mammal communities. Glob. Change Biol. 27, 5446–5459 (2021).
doi: 10.1111/gcb.15800
Kaiser, A. & Resasco, J. The impact of the urban matrix on arthropod biodiversity and ecosystem services in community gardens. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2949625/v1 (2023).
Kempf, J. K., Adams, B. J. & Brown, B. V. Urban spider diversity in Los Angeles assessed using a community science approach. Urban Nat. 40, 1–10 (2021).
van Rijn, P. C., Kooijman, J. & Wäckers, F. L. The contribution of floral resources and honeydew to the performance of predatory hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae). Biol. Control 67, 32–38 (2013).
doi: 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2013.06.014
Wood, E. M. & Esaian, S. The importance of street trees to urban avifauna. Ecol. Appl. 30, e02149 (2020).
pubmed: 32340072
pmcid: 7583466
doi: 10.1002/eap.2149
Vasquez, A. V. & Wood, E. M. Urban parks are a refuge for birds in park-poor areas. Front. Ecol. Evol. 10, 1048 (2022).
doi: 10.3389/fevo.2022.958572
Jenerette, G. D. et al. Urban vegetation and income segregation in drylands: A synthesis of seven metropolitan regions in the southwestern United States. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 044001 (2013).
doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/8/4/044001
Avolio, M. et al. Urban plant diversity in Los Angeles, California: Species and functional type turnover in cultivated landscapes. Plants People Planet 2, 144–156 (2020).
doi: 10.1002/ppp3.10067
Human, K. G. & Gordon, D. M. Effects of Argentine ants on invertebrate biodiversity in northern California. Conserv. Biol. 11, 1242–1248 (1997).
doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1997.96264.x
Holway, D. A., Suarez, A. V. & Case, T. J. Role of abiotic factors in governing susceptibility to invasion: A test with argentine ants. Ecology 83, 1610–1619 (2002).
doi: 10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[1610:ROAFIG]2.0.CO;2
Chalker-Scott, L. Nonnative, noninvasive woody species can enhance urban landscape biodiversity. Arboric. Urban For. 41, 173–186 (2015).
Sattler, T., Duelli, P., Obrist, M., Arlettaz, R. & Moretti, M. Response of arthropod species richness and functional groups to urban habitat structure and management. Landsc. Ecol. 25, 941–954 (2010).
doi: 10.1007/s10980-010-9473-2
Herrmann, J., Buchholz, S. & Theodorou, P. The degree of urbanisation reduces wild bee and butterfly diversity and alters the patterns of flower-visitation in urban dry grasslands. Sci. Rep. 13, 2702 (2023).
pubmed: 36792660
pmcid: 9932066
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-29275-8
Lagucki, E., Burdine, J. D. & McCluney, K. E. Urbanization alters communities of flying arthropods in parks and gardens of a medium-sized city. PeerJ 5, e3620 (2017).
pubmed: 28890848
pmcid: 5590548
doi: 10.7717/peerj.3620
Rocha, E. A. & Fellowes, M. D. Urbanisation alters ecological interactions: Ant mutualists increase and specialist insect predators decrease on an urban gradient. Sci. Rep. 10, 6406 (2020).
pubmed: 32286349
pmcid: 7156700
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-62422-z
Nelson, E. H., Hogg, B. N., Mills, N. J. & Daane, K. M. Syrphid flies suppress lettuce aphids. Biocontrol 57, 819–826 (2012).
doi: 10.1007/s10526-012-9457-z
Hamblin, A. L., Youngsteadt, E. & Frank, S. D. Wild bee abundance declines with urban warming, regardless of floral density. Urban Ecosyst. 21, 419–428 (2018).
doi: 10.1007/s11252-018-0731-4
Clarke, D. & Robert, D. Predictive modelling of honey bee foraging activity using local weather conditions. Apidologie 49, 386–396 (2018).
doi: 10.1007/s13592-018-0565-3
MacInnis, G., Normandin, E. & Ziter, C. D. Decline in wild bee species richness associated with honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) abundance in an urban ecosystem. PeerJ 11, e14699 (2023).
pubmed: 36755869
pmcid: 9901307
doi: 10.7717/peerj.14699
Campbell, J. W. & Hanula, J. Efficiency of malaise traps and colored pan traps for collecting flower visiting insects from three forested ecosystems. J. Insect Conserv. 11, 399–408 (2007).
doi: 10.1007/s10841-006-9055-4
Uhler, J. et al. A comparison of different malaise trap types. Insect Conserv. Divers. 15, 666–672 (2022).
doi: 10.1111/icad.12604
Hawkins, B. A. & Holyoak, M. Transcontinental crashes of insect populations? Am. Nat. 152, 480–484 (1998).
pubmed: 18811454
doi: 10.1086/286184
McGlynn, T. P. et al. Temperature accounts for the biodiversity of a hyperdiverse group of insects in urban Los Angeles. Proc. R. Soc. B 286, 20191818 (2019).
pubmed: 31575368
pmcid: 6790764
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2019.1818
Eidlin, E. The worst of all worlds: Los Angeles, California, and the emerging reality of dense sprawl. Transp. Res. Rec. 1902, 1–9 (2005).
doi: 10.1177/0361198105190200101
Hunter, M. R. & Hunter, M. D. Designing for conservation of insects in the built environment. Insect Conserv. Divers. 1, 189–196 (2008).
doi: 10.1111/j.1752-4598.2008.00024.x
Lerman, S. B., Larson, K. L., Narango, D. L., Goddard, M. A. & Marra, P. P. Humanity for habitat: Residential yards as an opportunity for biodiversity conservation. BioScience 73, 671 (2023).
doi: 10.1093/biosci/biad085
Pauly, G. B., Brown, B. V. & Bettison-Varga, L. Fostering community engagement with nature at the natural history museums of Los Angeles County. In Proc. Conference on Science and Actions For Species Protection 46 (2020).
Hartop, E. A., Brown, B. V. & Disney, R. H. L. Flies from LA, the Sequel: A further twelve new species of Megaselia (Diptera: Phoridae) from the BioSCAN project in Los Angeles (California, USA). Biodivers. Data J. 4, e7756 (2016).
doi: 10.3897/BDJ.4.e7756
Hartop, E. A., Brown, B. V. & Disney, R. H. L. Opportunity in our ignorance: Urban biodiversity study reveals 30 new species and one new Nearctic record for Megaselia (Diptera: Phoridae) in Los Angeles (California, USA). Zootaxa 3941, 451–484 (2015).
pubmed: 25947525
doi: 10.11646/zootaxa.3941.4.1
Grimaldi, D. et al. Strange little flies in the big city: Exotic flower-breeding Drosophilidae (Diptera) in urban Los Angeles. PLoS ONE 10, e0122575 (2015).
pubmed: 25923661
pmcid: 4414507
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122575
Ballard, H. L. et al. Contributions to conservation outcomes by natural history museum-led citizen science: Examining evidence and next steps. Biol. Conserv. 208, 87–97 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.08.040
Murdock, C. C., Evans, M. V., McClanahan, T. D., Miazgowicz, K. L. & Tesla, B. Fine-scale variation in microclimate across an urban landscape shapes variation in mosquito population dynamics and the potential of Aedes albopictus to transmit arboviral disease. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 11, e0005640 (2017).
pubmed: 28558030
pmcid: 5466343
doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005640
Fick, S. E. & Hijmans, R. J. Worldclim 2: New 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Climatol. 37, 4302–4315 (2017).
doi: 10.1002/joc.5086
County of Los Angeles, Department of Regional Planning. Parcels (2023).
County of San Bernardino California. SBCo Parcel Polygons (2023).
Moquet, L., Laurent, E., Bacchetta, R. & Jacquemart, A.-L. Conservation of hoverflies (Diptera, Syrphidae) requires complementary resources at the landscape and local scales. Insect Conserv. Divers. 11, 72–87 (2018).
pubmed: 32336985
doi: 10.1111/icad.12245
Morrison, L. W., Kawazoe, E. A., Guerra, R. & Gilbert, L. E. Phenology and dispersal in Pseudacteon flies (Diptera: Phoridae), parasitoids of Solenopsis fire ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 92, 198–207 (1999).
doi: 10.1093/aesa/92.2.198
Henne, D. C. & Johnson, S. J. Short-term population redistribution of Pseudacteon tricuspis (Diptera: Phoridae) from point source releases. Environ. Entomol. 40, 73–81 (2011).
pubmed: 22182614
doi: 10.1603/EN10067
Dewitz, J. & Survey, U. G. National Land Cover Database (NLCD) 2019 Products (ver. 2.0, June 2021). Google Earth Engine. https://doi.org/10.5066/P9KZCM54 (2021).
JPL, N. NASADEM Merged DEM Global 1 Arc Second v001 [Data Set]. Google Earth Engine. https://doi.org/10.5067/MEaSUREs/NASADEM/NASADEM_HGT.001 (2020).
Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. ArcGIS [GIS software].
Samways, M. J. et al. Solutions for humanity on how to conserve insects. Biol. Conserv. 242, 108427 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108427
Pebesma, E. Simple features for R: Standardized support for spatial vector data. R J. 10, 439–446 (2018).
doi: 10.32614/RJ-2018-009
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2022).
CPAD 2016a. https://www.calands.org ( 2023).
Arif, S. & MacNeil, M. A. Applying the structural causal model framework for observational causal inference in ecology. Ecol. Monogr. 93, e1554 (2023).
doi: 10.1002/ecm.1554
Textor, J., van der Zander, B., Gilthorpe, M. S., Liśkiewicz, M. & Ellison, G. T. Robust causal inference using directed acyclic graphs: The R package ‘dagitty’. Int. J. Epidemiol. 45, 1887–1894 (2016).
pubmed: 28089956
Wickham, H., Chang, W. & Wickham, M. H. Package ‘ggplot2’. Create Elegant Data Visualisations Using the Grammar of Graphics. Version 2 1–189 ( 2016).
Plummer, M. JAGS: A program for analysis of Bayesian graphical models using Gibbs sampling. In Proc. 3rd International Workshop on Distributed Statistical Computing (DSC 2003) 1–8 ( 2003).
Hijmans, R. J. et al. raster: Geographic Data Analysis and Modeling ( 2023).
Wickham, H. et al. Welcome to the tidyverse. J. Open Source Softw. 4, 1686 (2019).
doi: 10.21105/joss.01686
Plummer, M. rjags: Bayesian Graphical Models Using MCMC. R Package Version 4-10 (2019).
Su, Y.-S. & Yajima, M. R2jags: Using R to Run ‘JAGS’. R Package Version 0.6-1 (2021).
Denwood, M. J. runjags: An R package providing interface utilities, model templates, parallel computing methods and additional distributions for MCMC models in JAGS. J. Stat. Softw. 71, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v071.i09 (2016).
doi: 10.18637/jss.v071.i09
Van Rossum, G. & Drake, F. L. Jr. Python Tutorial (Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica Amsterdam, 1995).
Gorelick, N. et al. Google earth engine: Planetary-scale geospatial analysis for everyone. Remote Sens. Environ. 202, 18–27 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2017.06.031
Kahle, D. & Wickham, H. ggmap: Spatial visualization with ggplot2. R J. 5, 144–161 (2013).
doi: 10.32614/RJ-2013-014
Schwalb-Willmann, J. basemaps: Accessing Spatial Basemaps in R. R Package Version 0.0.5 (2022).