Precious
By Daniel Stolte and Koda Benavidez, University Communications
One of the world's longest rivers, the Amazon is known for its exceptional biodiversity. Contrary to conventional wisdom, which has associated species richness mostly with tropical regions, UArizona ecologists found that freshwater habitats in general tend to boast high biodiversity considering their tiny area compared to terrestrial and ocean habitats.Neil Palmer/CIAT (Wikimedia Commons)
While
much research has focused on the striking differences in biodiversity between
tropical and temperate regions, another, equally dramatic, pattern has gone
largely unstudied: the differences in species richness among Earth's three
major habitat types – land, oceans and freshwater.
A
new study led by ecologists at the University of Arizona reveals the origins of
diverse animal and plant species richness in terrestrial, ocean and freshwater
habitats at a global scale. It also explores the possible causes of these
richness patterns.
"As
far as we know, our paper is the first to provide a global analysis of
biodiversity by habitat and provide possible explanations as to what might
drive the observed patterns," Wiens said.
Despite
oceans covering 70% of Earth's surface, about 80% of the plant and animal
species are found on land, which accounts for only 28% of Earth's surface.
Freshwater habitats cover a minute fraction of Earth's surface, about 2%, but
have the highest animal species richness per area, the study revealed.
More
than 99% of known animal species were included in the analysis, as were all
known plant species. The authors estimate that 77% of known living animal
species inhabit land, 12% ocean habitats, and 11% freshwater habitats. Among
plants, only 2% of species call the ocean home, and a mere 5% live in
freshwater.
A
Mexican leaf frog, photographed near Alamos, Mexico. Like many frog species, it
depends on ponds and swamps for breeding and reproduction.John J. Wiens
The
authors were also interested in what scientists call phylogenetic diversity,
which provides a measure of how closely or distantly related organisms are to
each other on the tree of life. When the team looked at phylogenetic diversity
per unit area of each habitat type, they found freshwater diversity to be at
least twice as high as land and ocean habitat diversity, for both animals
and plants.
The
high phylogenetic diversity per unit area in freshwater habitats highlights the
importance of conserving freshwater ecosystems, Palacios said.
"The
large-scale patterns of freshwater community composition resemble the process
of creating mosaic art – where many groups in freshwater are like 'pieces'
sourced from either land or marine ecosystems," he said. "Therefore,
creating additional protections to freshwater habitats could help to
efficiently conserve, at once, very divergent groups of animals and
plants."
In
contrast, animal and plant species in terrestrial habitats tend to represent
only a few phyla, or taxonomic groups of organisms. Some examples of phyla
include sponges, nematodes, mollusks and chordates - the group that contains
vertebrates. This finding led the study authors to conclude that
preserving freshwater habitats can protect more species and more evolutionary
history than preserving the same amount of area on land or in the ocean.
"Insights
into phylogenetic diversity afford us a great opportunity to preserve
significant pieces of evolutionary history," Wiens said, adding that the
distribution of phyla among habitats helps explain these patterns of
phylogenetic diversity.
An
American alligator resting on a log in Florida's Big Cypress State Park.John
Wiens
The researchers found that the observed patterns of species richness are best explained by differences in diversification rates among habitats, which are a measure of how many species originate and accumulate in a given amount of time. In other words, habitats where species proliferate more rapidly have greater biodiversity.
Diversification rates can be dependent on several different factors. But
geographic barriers may be the most important for explaining differences in
diversification rates among habitats, according to Wiens.
"Species
may proliferate more rapidly on land than they do in the ocean or in freshwater
because there are many more barriers to dispersal on land compared to the
ocean, where organisms can move more freely," he said. "These
barriers seem to help drive the origin of new species in all habitats in both
plants and animals."
Alternative
explanations, such as whether a habitat was colonized earlier or more
frequently over time, were not supported.
Swamp
habitat in Big Cypress State Park in Florida.John Wiens
"We
were able to show that generally speaking, the oceans were colonized first,
then species moved into freshwater habitats and lastly, onto land," Wiens
said. "And that holds true for plants and animals. Therefore, the greater
biodiversity of land cannot be explained by an earlier colonization of terrestrial
habitats."
Biological
productivity – in essence, the growth of plants – which has traditionally been
considered one of the major drivers of global biodiversity patterns, turned out
to have a much smaller effect than previously thought.
"Overall
productivity is similar between the ocean and land, which tells us that at the
global scale, productivity is not the most important determinant of
biodiversity," Wiens said.
Similarly,
area does not appear to be a decisive factor, either, since the oceans have the
greatest area but very limited species numbers, Wiens explained.
"We
conclude that the rate of species proliferation might be the most important
aspect in driving species richness across the planet."