DESCRIPTION >>> BioMERGE Workshop II

BEF experimental research manipulates both species and functional (intra- and inter-trophic) groups in a combinatorial fashion (Tilman et al. 1996, Hooper and Vitousek 1997, Naeem and Li 1997, Hector et al. 1999, Symstad 2000). Disentangling effects due to functional diversity from those due to taxonomic diversity is one of the central issues of BEF (Körner 1993, Chapin III et al. 1996, Mooney et al. 1996, Gitay and Noble 1997, Hooper and Vitousek 1997, Tilman et al. 1997a, Hooper 1998, Symstad 2000, Reich et al. in press) and is important for management and conservation because it provides information on ecological redundancy (Walker 1992, Lawton and Brown 1993, Walker 1995, Gitay et al. 1996, Naeem 1998).

Taxonomic and functional diversity, however, are studied by separate groups. While biodiversity loss is quantified almost entirely by changes in the distribution and abundance of taxonomic richness (Erwin 1982, Wilson 1988, Lawton and May 1994, Heywood 1995, Reaka-Kudla et al. 1997), ecosystem functioning is more closely tied to changes in functional richness. The study of taxonomic richness is conducted primarily by taxonomists, museums, and organizations conducting biotic inventories such as USBS and ALAS. Functional richness and its implications are studied most often by ecologists. While taxonomists group species by evolutionary relationships, ecologists group species by function (Raunkier 1934, Root 1967, Körner 1993, Meyer 1993, Smith et al. 1993, Cowling et al. 1994, Steneck and Dethier 1994, Allison et al. 1996, Chapin III et al. 1996, Mooney et al. 1996, Gitay and Noble 1997, Smith et al. 1997, Arnold and Skinner 1998, Naeem 1998, Bisevac and Majer 1999). These systems can be based on physiology, behavior, trophic status, life history, and much more.

A further difficulty is that landscape-level patterns in taxonomic diversity are driven by extrinsic factors such as climate and disturbance while experimental BEF has focused exclusively on intrinsic drivers such as competition and niche complementarity. Thus ASW-II logically follows ASW-I which tackles the extrinsic-intrinsic driver issues.Both empirical and theoretical approaches in BEF are hindered by this disconnect between the study of taxonomic diversity and the study of functional diversity. Furthermore, the lack of uniformity among ecologists in the way they construct systems of functional classification makes comparative studies difficult. These two problems represent central elements of BioMERGE's goal and product-oriented framework.

1. BioMERGE will establish an electronic network that will bridge these two groups. Participants will focus on where taxonomic and functional groups overlap
2. biodiversity indices that incorporate both taxonomic and functional diversity
3. uniform systems of functional groupings for plants, animals, and microbes
   

Results from this activity will culminate in a workshop to be held at the Missouri Botanical Garden (MBG). MBG is recognized as the world leader in botanical exploration in the tropics and is currently expanding its network of long-term tree plots. The plots are designed for collaborative work with zoologists and ecologists, and MBG is launching an outreach initiative to promote their use as platforms for ecosystem and landscape science. BioMERGE will facilitate these collaborative ties which are critically needed to understand the world's most diverse ecosystems. MBG is also one of the world's leading institutes studying plant taxonomic diversity and the BioMERGE Coordinators, Jason Bradford, Robert McManus, and Peter Raven will oversee the coordination of ASW-II at this site.

ST. LOUIS TOURISM >>>

http://www.stlouis.worldweb.com/
http://www.slfp.com/
http://www.explorestlouis.com/