Ever wanted your taxonomic revision with its own custom-made iphone app?
Here in the lab we are always looking for ways to make taxonomic work more exciting and engaging, and we believe that technology can help us connect people with biodiversity in new ways. We have previously been exploring the use of 3D x-ray imaging for enhancing taxonomic revisions (remember the dragon ants?). But one nice thing about 3D imaging is these data can travel to many endpoints, everything from an image on your computer monitor to a physical 3D print or to virtual or augmented reality.
We were wondering how augmented reality might help enhance taxonomic revisions, and scientific papers in general. Imagine as you flip through a paper 3D figures and images pop out of the page and float on your desk. How much more exciting would that be as a way to experience new species?
Some time ago, Eli Sarnat and many of our lab members decided to revise the Fijian Strumigenys, just a little project to organize one of the coolest endemic radiations in Fiji and describe some new species. But to push it further, we thought we would see if we could do it with augmented reality enhancement. After lots of testing and looking around, we hired an app dev team based in Ukraine to code us up a custom app to display species models, 3D rangemaps, and automatically project 3D figures. The result, Insects3D, can be downloaded at the app store for iphone. Check it out, especially while reading the open source paper from Insect Systematics & Diversity. While primitive and not at all simple or fast enough to achieve for all taxonomic works, we hope it shows an inkling of what’s possible in the future. Let us know what you think!
Light-vented bulbul (Pycnonotus sinensis), one of the species of interest in the Ryūkyū archipelago.
Biogeography is often more complicated than the species-area relationship as discussed in a recent Journal of Animal Ecology paper testing multiple extensions of island biogeography theory. Sam Ross, lead author of the study, describes how this work fits into the long history of biogeography research.
The species-area relationship is considered
one of the only ‘rules’ in ecology. We have observed more species on larger
‘islands’ (whether true islands or simply some habitat patch of interest) in
studies of different plants and animals all around the world. When MacArthur
and Wilson (1967) proposed this pattern and the pioneering biogeographical
principles which underpin it, they acknowledged that a piece of the puzzle was
missing: species identity.
Biogeographers have since recognised that
species aren’t randomly distributed across the globe. We now believe there to
be ecological factors which predict where species occur. For example, predators
can only live in habitats where their prey are sufficiently abundant, otherwise
they’ll starve. This led Dominique Gravel and colleagues to predict that larger
islands should have more complex food webs, since smaller islands support fewer
prey species and so can in turn support fewer, if any, predators (Gravel
et al. 2011). They then proposed
that predators should be more influenced by island size than their prey,
producing steeper species-area relationships for higher trophic levels. They
called this idea the ‘trophic theory of island biogeography.’
We tested this empirically using checklists of bird sightings across the Ryūkyū archipelago running from southern mainland Japan to Taiwan. We separated birds by their trophic groups and found that contrary to the trophic theory of island biogeography, our predatory birds didn’t really differ in the slope of their species-area relationship from our herbivorous birds. This wasn’t really what we expected to find but the trophic theory hasn’t yet been tested across a range of different study systems, so our test helps us to understand whether communities may be structured by trophic level or not.
Expectation versus reality of our test of the trophic theory of island biogeography with the birds of the Ryūkyūs.
Another way species’ identities might structure communities is based on the idea of environmental filtering. These filters are thought to be strongest on small islands, where there is little opportunity to just scrape by. Small islands are harsh; there are many ways populations can go extinct on small islands, but particularly life on these islands is strongly affected by environmental conditions. This means that only species particularly suited to the environment are likely to survive and thrive on small islands. By expanding on the work of Claire Jacquet and colleagues (Jacquet et al. 2017), we could then predict that small islands would have species which are similar to each other and are all adapted to the local environment, whereas larger islands are more likely to contain random species from the regional pool of all species which could possibly live there.
Another longstanding idea predicts the opposite pattern. Because smaller islands have fewer resources, species must compete for those finite resources to survive. This means that on small islands, we might expect species to be widely different from each other to minimise competition for food and space. If there’s only one small grasshopper population on the island for example, it seems more likely that we’ll find five species of birds that all eat different things than five that are competing for the chance to eat this one grasshopper. So, we might expect that competition results in distinctive species on smaller islands and that as competitive pressure relaxes on larger islands, these islands again are more likely to contain a random assortment of species.
Blue Rock Thrush (Monticola solitarius) pictured at Cape Zanpa, Okinawa—the edge of the island.
We tested whether either of these two processes structured the bird communities of the Ryūkyūs by calculating the functional and phylogenetic diversity of birds on each island using two global databases. We used the global phylogeny of birds and a database of functional traits to measure the observed functional and phylogenetic diversity of birds on each of our study islands. We also tested whether this observed diversity was higher or lower than expected by random chance by shuffling the names of species on the phylogeny and functional trait matrix. Together, this meant we could test whether diversity was lower than expected by random on small islands and increasing to a random sample of the regional pool (trait-based assembly), or whether competitive assembly occurred, where diversity was higher than expected on small islands and closer to random on larger islands.
We found no clear overall pattern of either trait-based or competitive assembly of bird communities in the Ryūkyūs, but we did find some differences among our trophic groups in whether communities were structured randomly or not. The insectivorous intermediate predators showed patterns of trait-based community assembly since their phylogenetic and functional diversity was lower than expected on small islands and increased to random on larger islands.
Community assembly processes across our trophic groups of birds. We
found no clear patterns for apex predators or herbivores, but
intermediate predators followed the predictions of trait scaling by Jacquet et al. (2017).
Overall, we tested multiple extensions to the theory of island biogeography which have been rarely tested, and certainly not extensively across a range of study locations and focal species. In the subtropical Ryūkyū archipelago, we found that bird communities did not clearly conform to the theories laid out by recent extensions to island biogeography theory, but that some held true. For now, we encourage others to continue testing these hypotheses in a variety of study systems to see whether our subtropical bird communities show the same biogeographic patterns as animal communities around the world.
This post is written by: Sam Ross, a PhD student at Trinity College Dublin studying ecological responses to global change and a visiting research student at the Arilab.
Ross, S. R. P-J., Friedman, N. R., Janicki,
J., & Economo, E. P. (2019). A test of trophic and functional island
biogeography theory with the avifauna of a continental archipelago. Journal of Animal Ecology. DOI: 10.1111/1365-2656.13029
Nick chatted with Chris, OIST’s Science Communication Fellow and the host of Wonderlabs Podcast, on his soundscape research as part of the OKEON project. They dove into how the sound data is collected, processed and interpreted, and also headed into the field to listen to some birds and insects.
Congrats to Patricia Wepfer and Yafei Mao, the two latest PhD graduates from the lab! Patricia is back in Switzerland working on a project at ETH Zurich, but came back for OIST graduation, and Yafei is about to leave for a postdoc at the U. of Washington. Both Patricia and Yafei did great PhDs on coral evolution. Corals aren’t very ant-like, but we like them anyway.
We had a signing “ceremony” with Patricia, Yafei, and Cong Liu, the first lab graduate from last year and is about to leave to be the E.O. Wilson postdoc at Harvard.
We are pleased to welcome three new arrivals to the lab recently.
-Jamie Kass (left) is starting a term as a JSPS postdoctoral fellow coming from the US. He is an expert on species distribution modeling and one of the lead developers of Wallace. He is going to be working on our OKEON community monitoring data and also collaborating on other projects related to global biodiversity.
-Fumika Azuma (center), also coming most recently from the UK where she recently got a bachelors in geography from UCL, is the new technician in the lab. She has actually been here for a while as a research intern, but we liked her so much we convinced her to stay. She will be working on a range of tasks, but especially GIS, insect collection curation, micro-CT, and molecular work.
-Kosmas Deligkaris (right), coming from the UK, has a background in neuroscience and is now a computational specialist who will be working on computational support, data and database management, server admin, workflow design, and other related projects for the lab.