Fads and fallacies in the name of ecology

View Large Image | Download PowerPoint SlideIn broad brush strokes, the principle messages relayed in the The Moon in the Nautilus Shell by influential ecological modeler Daniel Botkin are: (i) ecological systems are both spatially and temporally dynamic, making equilibrium or steady-state assumptions routinely invalid; (ii) stochastic processes are critical to ecological process; and (iii) resource management and policy based on assumptions of system stability are doomed to failure.These points are anything but novel for anyone who has been paying attention to the ecological field over the past 30 years. Back in the early 1990s, when I was in graduate school, an understanding of the individualistic nature of communities was expected of all undergraduate ecology students, seminars in ‘disturbance ecology’ were being offered to both upper-level undergraduates and graduate students, and nonlinear dynamics (aka chaos mathematics) was impacting the field on both theoretical and popular levels (e.g., [1xThe Ecology of Natural Disturbance and Patch Dynamics. Pickett, S.T.A. and White, P.S. See all References, 2xChaos: Making a New Science. Gleick, J. See all References]). Over the intervening decades, an even greater emphasis has been placed on these and related topics.Why then was this book written? Clearly, the author's motivation is part memoir, with much of the text detailing seminal personal experiences that helped him understand the lack of balance in nature. However, other motivations also exist: Botkin spends more than a chapter musing about the philosophical reasons that steady-state perspectives have proven so appealing, even though they are easily falsified. He also considers the importance of keeping an open mind and continually confronting current paradigms with data, as well as the poor track record that the ecological sciences have generally displayed in letting data, and not belief, dogma, and politics, drive our understanding of the world.These are critically important insights. It is thus particularly discouraging how easily Botkin falls prey to the exact same flaws. First, little of the relevant ecological literature published since his 1990 book Discordant Harmonies [3xDiscordant Harmonies, A New Ecology for the Twenty-First Century. Botkin, D.B. See all References[3] is mentioned. Although early on he states that only ‘a small group of ecological scientists’ share his outlook on the dynamic quality of ecological systems, this belief seems to be based on an inadequate reading of the current literature. The voluminous work done on neutral community assemblage, nonequilibrium disturbance, complex ecological systems, fracticality and other forms of nonlinear dynamics, and the role of stochasticism and entropy (e.g., [4xThe Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography. Hubbell, S.P. See all References, 5xLandscape disturbance models and the long-term dynamics of natural areas. Turner, M.G. et al. Nat. Areas J. 1994; 14: 3–11See all References, 6xThe fractal nature of nature: power laws, ecological complexity, and biodiversity. Brown, J.H. et al. Proc. R. Soc. B. 2002; 357: 619–626See all References, 7xMaximum Entropy and Ecology: A Theory of Abundance, Distribution, and Energetics. Harte, J. CrossrefSee all References]) is simply not discussed. Given these topics include some of the most active areas of ecological research over the past two decades, it is hard to justify why they were not reviewed.Second, Botkin spends almost two chapters talking about how essential disturbance, particularly fire, is to the maintenance of diversity in many USA grassland and conifer forest communities. However, he then chooses to ignore the accumulating empirical evidence documenting catastrophic biodiversity losses across many taxa groups following the reintroduction of fire into reserves (e.g., [8xEffects of fire and hay management on the abundance of prairie butterflies. Swengel, A.B. Biological Conservation. 1996; 76: 73–85CrossrefSee all References, 9xEffects of fire management on the richness and abundance of central North American grassland land snail faunas. Nekola, J.C. Anim. Biodivers. Conserv. 2002; 25: 53–66See all References]). Such works suggest that the widespread improper use of fire management represent one of the single most harmful immediate threats to biodiversity within the USA today.Perhaps the most embarrassing lapse relates to the title of the book itself. As Stephen Gould did earlier in The Panda's Thumb [10xThe Panda's Thumb, More Reflections in Natural History. Gould, S.J. See all References[10], Botkin uncritically recounts a now 35-year-old paper that purports to show the importance of multiscale interactions, with planetary orbital factors influencing the construction of individual cephalopod shells. Unfortunately, immediately upon publication, this work was shown to be based on faulty assumptions and has now been widely discounted [11xGrowth and longevity of Nautilus. Landman, N.H. and Cochran, J.K. : 401–420CrossrefSee all References[11].It is thus hard to see how The Moon in the Nautilus Shell is ‘poised to be a core text’, as the dust jacket predicts. At least, not for ecologists. However, perhaps we are not the anticipated audience. Based upon the solicited blurbs on the back cover, it seems likely that this book was principally written for resource managers and policy makers. If this is so, it suggests a troubling disconnect between pure and applied ecology, with the latter field lagging perhaps a quarter of a century or more behind the former. Too often I have seen resource managers ignore empirical findings when these contradicts strongly held beliefs based on what they were taught decades before. Too infrequently have I seen such managers keep an open, inquisitive mind that continually confronts their existing worldviews with both the current literature as well as their own quantitative observations. The result is almost always disastrous for the systems involved.If this book can help modernize resource management pedagogy and catalyze a more rapid response of applied ecology to new concepts stemming from pure ecological research, then it will have indeed affected a much-needed revolution.