Ecolog: 

I have been "corrected" off-line, implying that I am out of line in referring 
to ecosystem engineers as humans who "engineer" ecosystems. Maybe so. However, 
aside from tradition, apparently initiated, at the latest at least by "Jones 
CG, Lawton JH and Shachak M 1994. Organisms as ecosystem engineers. Oikos 69: 
373-386," I would suggest that such a moniker should be relegated to popular 
literature rather than scientific tracts. For that matter, I suggest that the 
use of such a term should be used in "quotes," even in the popular literature. 
That is, a reconsideration of the term apparently coined via the published 
literature in Jones, et al, is in order. I do not believe that mere tradition 
is sufficient to retain terminology that is confusing and fundamentally 
inaccurate, as well as misleading. 

I have long heard of beavers referred to as "engineers" because they build dams 
"like human engineers," but I have dismissed the reference as a joke of sorts, 
even though I fully understand what is intended--I hope. I fear that others may 
not, and the difficulty in communicating issues concerning ecology will be 
compromised. I do not contest that this familiar label holds some water (pi), 
but it does fail to distinguish the concept of "engineering" ecosystems from 
the work of humans who arrogantly suggest that their engineering can "create" 
ecosystems. It is fundamental that ecosystems are critically different from the 
works of human cultures, and distinguishing, rather than blurring that 
distinction, is crucial. Ecology terminology should not reinforce the confusion 
that already plagues the job of communicating ecology to cultural beings 
worldwide.

A very quick review of the literature turns up no objections to the 
terminology, so my protestations will likely fall on unreceptive ears. Some of 
the literature seems to regard wormholes as "trivial," however, implying that, 
say, beaver dams are not, hence significant. Drawing lines between "trivial" 
and "significant" has longed seemed to me to be in itself problematical. 

If this is seen as a trivial matter, I will understand, but I would like to 
hear or know of any discussion on the merits. It is not my intention to 
trivialize the studies done under this banner. 

WT

PS: I did a little searching for similar terms and found definitions for 
"ecological engineering" and "bioengineering," both of which make me uneasy for 
similar reasons. 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "George Wang" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 11:42 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Ecosystem engineers response to biogeography/habitat 
complexity --reference help?


Hi Brittany,

Here are a few that can get you started:

Badano, et al. (2010) Predicting effects of ecosystem engineering on 
species richness along primary productivity gradients. Acta Oecologica 
36:46-54

Badano & Cavieres (2006) Ecosystem engineering across ecosystems: do 
engineer species sharing common features have generalized or idiosyncratic 
effects on species diversity? Journal of Biogeography 33:304-313

Marquis & Lill (2010) Impact of plant architecture versus leaf quality on 
attack by leaf-tying caterpillars on five oak species. Oecologia 163:203-
213

Rosell et al. (2005) Ecological impact of beavers Castor fiber and Castor 
canadensis and their ability to modify ecosystems. Mammal Review 35:248-276

Wright et al. (2003) Local vs. landscape controls on plant species 
richness in beaver meadows. Ecology 84:3162-3173

In addition, I think some of the original work of Jones and Lawton also 
cover this issue conceptually. Hope this helps.

George

On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 10:38:16 -0400, Brittany Huntington 
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Ecologgers:
>
>I am stumped with my literature searches to unearth papers on the
>response of ecosystem engineers (richness and abundance) to metrics of
>habitat heterogeneity.  In particular, I am interested in defining habitat
>heterogeneity with regards to spatial landscape metrics of habitat
>composition and configuration, and structural complexity.
>
>I realize that by their very definition, ecosystem engineers create and
>maintain the complex habitats that other species depend upon.  However, I 
>am interested in references that investigate how important habitat
>heterogeneity is to the foundation species themselves?
>
>I work in coral communities myself but am interested in analogous
>multi-species assemblages from the terrestrial world of habitat
>engineers/foundation species (i.e. forest tree communities; grassland
>communities).
>
>Any leads to work assessing the influence of configuration or composition 
>of habitat patches on foundation species/engineers would be appreciated!
>
>Thank you,
>Brittany
>
>
>
>
>Brittany Huntington
>Division of Marine Biology and Fisheries
>Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science
>University of Miami
>4600 Rickenbacker Causeway
>Miami, FL 33149
>=========================================================================


-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1410 / Virus Database: 1520/3912 - Release Date: 09/22/11

Reply via email to