Critical Slowing Down as an Indicator of Transitions in Two

Download Report

Transcript Critical Slowing Down as an Indicator of Transitions in Two

Critical slowing down as an indicator
of transitions in two-species models
Ryan Chisholm
Smithsonian Tropical Research
Institute
Workshop on Critical Transitions
in Complex Systems
21 March 2012
Imperial College London
Acknowledgements
• Elise Filotas, Centre for Forest
Research at the University of
Quebec in Montreal
• Simon Levin, Princeton
University, Department of
Ecology and Evolutionary
Biology
• Helene Muller-Landau,
Smithsonian Tropical Research
Institute
• Santa Fe Institute, Complex
Systems Summer School 2007:
NSF Grant No. 0200500
Question
When is critical slowing down likely to be a
useful leading indicator of a critical transition in
ecological models?
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute
Background: critical slowing down
Competition model
Predator-prey model
Grasslands model
Future work
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute
Background: critical slowing down
Competition model
Predator-prey model
Grasslands model
Future work
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute
• “…dedicated to understanding biological
diversity”
• What determines patterns of diversity?
• What factors regulate ecosystem function?
• How will tropical forests respond to climate
change and other anthropogenic disturbances?
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute
Panama
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute
50 ha plot
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute
•
•
•
•
Green iguana
(Iguana iguana)
1500 ha
2551 mm yr-1 rainfall
381 bird species
102 mammal species
(nearly half are bats)
• ~100 species of
amphibians and reptiles
• 1316 plant species
Pentagonia
macrophylla
Keel-billed Toucan
(Ramphastos
sulfuratus)
Jaguar (Panthera onca)
Photo: Christian Ziegler
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute
Photo: Marcos Guerra, STRI
Photo: Leonor Alvarez
sciencedaily.com
Center for Tropical Forest Science
Forest resilience
Staver et al. 2011 Science
Chisholm, Condit, et al. in prep
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute
Background: critical slowing down
Competition model
Predator-prey model
Grasslands model
Future work
Transitions in complex systems
•
•
•
•
•
Eutrophication of shallow lakes
Sahara desertification
Climate change
Shifts in public opinion
Forest-savannah transitions
Scheffer et al. 2009 Nature, Scheffer 2009 Critical Transitions in Nature and Society
Critical transitions
May 1977 Nature
Detecting impending transitions
• Decreasing return rate
• Rising variance
• Rising autocorrelation
=> All arise from critical slowing down
Carpenter & Brock 2006 Ecol. Lett., van Nes & Scheffer 2007 Am. Nat.,
Scheffer et al. 2009 Nature
Critical slowing down
• Recovery rate: return
rate after disturbance
to the equilibrium
• Critical slowing down:
dominant eigenvalue
tends to zero; recovery
rate decreases as
transition approaches
van Nes & Scheffer 2007 Am. Nat.
Critical slowing down
van Nes & Scheffer 2007 Am. Nat.
Critical slowing down
van Nes & Scheffer 2007 Am. Nat.
Question
When is critical slowing down likely to be a
useful leading indicator of a critical transition in
ecological models?

What is the length/duration of the warning
period?
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute
Background: critical slowing down
Competition model
Predator-prey model
Grasslands model
Future work
Competition model
Ni = abundance of species i
Ki = carrying capacity of species i
ri = intrinsic rate of increase of species i
αij = competitive impact of species j on species i
Equilibria:
Lotka 1925, 1956 Elements of Physical Biology; Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Competition model
Case 1: Interspecific competition greater than intraspecific competition
Stable
Stable
Unstable
Unstable
Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Question
When is critical slowing down likely to be a
useful leading indicator of a critical transition in
ecological models?

What is the length/duration of the warning
period?
Competition model
Ni = abundance of species i
Ki = abundance of species i
ri = intrinsic rate of increase of species i
αij = competitive impact of species j on species i
Recovery rate:
When species 1 dominates, recovery rate begins to decline at:
Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Competition model
Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Competition model
Ni = abundance of species i
Ki = abundance of species i
ri = intrinsic rate of increase of species i
αij = competitive impact of species j on species i
Recovery rate begins to decline at:
More warning of transition if the dynamics of the rare species
are slow relative to those of the dominant species
Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Competition model
Case 2: Interspecific competition less than intraspecific competition
Stable
Stable
Unstable
Stable
Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Competition model
Case 2: Interspecific competition less than intraspecific competition
More warning of transition if the dynamics of the rare
species are slow relative to those of the dominant
species
Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute
Background: critical slowing down
Competition model
Predator-prey model
Grasslands model
Future work
Predator-prey model
V = prey abundance
P = predator abundance
Rosenzweig 1971 Science
Predator-prey model
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
V = prey abundance
P = predator abundance
r = intrinsic rate of increase of prey
0
k = predation rate
J = equilibrium prey population size
A = predator-prey conversion efficiency
K = carrying capacity of prey
f(V) = effects of intra-specific competition among prey
f(V) > 0; f ’(V) < 0; f(K) = 0; df/dK > 0
h(V) = per-capita rate at which predators kill prey
h(V) > 0; h’(V) > 0; h’’(V) < 0; h(0) = 0
h(V)
f(V)
20
40
60
VV
Rosenzweig 1971 Science, Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
80
100
Predator-prey model
Equilibria:
Unstable
Stable for K ≤ J
V = prey abundance
P = predator abundance
r = intrinsic rate of increase of prey
k = predation rate
J = equilibrium prey population size
A = predator-prey conversion efficiency
K = carrying capacity of prey
f(V) = effects of intra-specific competition among prey
f(V) > 0; f ’(V) < 0; f(K) = 0; df/dK > 0
h(V) = per-capita rate at which predators kill prey
h(V) > 0; h’(V) > 0; h’’(V) < 0; h(0) = 0
Exists for K ≥ J
Stable for J ≤ K ≤ Kcrit
Rosenzweig 1971 Science, Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Predator-prey model
Predator isocline
V = prey abundance
P = predator abundance
r = intrinsic rate of increase of prey
k = predation rate
J = equilibrium prey population size
A = predator-prey conversion efficiency
f(V) = effects of intra-specific competition among prey
f(V) > 0; f ’(V) < 0; f(K) = 0; df/dK > 0
h(V) = per-capita rate at which predators kill prey
h(V) > 0; h’(V) > 0; h’’(V) < 0; h(0) = 0
Prey isoclines
Rosenzweig 1971 Science, Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Predator-prey model
Unstable equilibrium
V = prey abundance
P = predator abundance
r = intrinsic rate of increase of prey
k = predation rate
J = equilibrium prey population size
A = predator-prey conversion efficiency
f(V) = effects of intra-specific competition among prey
f(V) > 0; f ’(V) < 0; f(K) = 0; df/dK > 0
h(V) = per-capita rate at which predators kill prey
h(V) > 0; h’(V) > 0; h’’(V) < 0; h(0) = 0
Stable equilibrium
Rosenzweig 1971 Science, Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Predator-prey model
Scheffer 1998 The Ecology of Shallow Lakes
Predator-prey model
Hopf bifurcation occurs when K = Kcrit :
Critical slowing down begins when K = Kr :
Predator-prey model
Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Predator-prey model
Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Predator-prey model
Kr and Kcrit converge as:
More warning of transition when:
• Predator-prey conversion efficiency (A) is high
• Predation rate (k) is high
• Prey growth rate (r) is low
 Prey controlled by predators rather than intrinsic density dependence
 Increases tendency for oscillations
 Larger K makes oscillations larger and hence rates of return slower
Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Predator-prey model
Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Multi-species models
van Nes & Scheffer 2007 Am. Nat.
Multi-species models
Expect that multi-species models will exhibit
longer warning periods of transitions induced
by changes in resource abundance when:
• Dynamics of rare species are slow relative to
those of the dominant species
• Prey species are controlled by predation
rather than intrinsic density dependence
Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute
Background: critical slowing down
Competition model
Predator-prey model
Grasslands model
Future work
Practical utility of critical slowing down
Chisholm & Filotas 2009 J. Theor. Biol.
“…even if an increase in variance or AR1 is detected, it provides no indication of how
close to a regime shift the ecosystem is…”
Biggs et al. 2008 PNAS
Western Basalt Plains Grasslands
Western Basalt Plains Grasslands
Western Basalt Plains Grasslands
Williams et al. 2005 J. Ecol.; Williams et al. 2006 Ecology
Grasslands invasion model
Agricultural fertiliser run-off
Native
grass
biomass
Sugar addition
Nutrient input rate
Grasslands invasion model
A = plant-available N pool
Bi = biomass of species i
ωi = N-use efficiency of species i
νi = N-use efficiency of species i
μi = N-use efficiency of species i
αij = light competition coefficients
I = abiotic N-input flux
K = soil leaching rate of plant-available N
δ = proportion of N in litterfall lost from the system
Parameterized so that
species 2 (invader) has a
higher uptake rate and
higher turnover rate.
Chisholm & Levin in prep.; Menge et al. 2008 PNAS
Grasslands invasion model
B2
B1
Relatively safe, but
higher control
Nutrient input costs.
Riskier, but lower
control costs.
Conclusions & Future work
Critical slowing down provides an earlier
indicator of transitions in two-species models
where:
• Dynamics of rare species are slow relative to
those of the dominant species
• Prey species are controlled by predation
rather than intrinsic density dependence
But utility of early/late indicators depends on
socio-economic considerations