Advertisement

Ecology in the Real World: How Might We Progress?

  • James B. Grace
  • Susan Carstenn
  • ShiLi Miao
  • Erik Sindhøj

Abstract

In this chapter, the authors consider how the various chapters in the book collectively contribute to ecological studies in the real world of large-scale, long-term phenomena. A framework is presented to describe how different types of analyses depend on the amount of data available and current knowledge about processes and underlying mechanisms. This theme of knowledge of process along with data as two inputs to ecological models is continued as the authors address general strategies for coping with constraints on sampling, replication, and control. Ultimately, the chapter argues that knowledge of process can, to a degree, be used as a substitute for data. The flexibility of modern analysis procedures permits a greater integration of process with data than up to this point, suggesting at least one way forward for the study of large-scale systems.

Keywords

Ecological System Causal Process Scientific Progress Multivariate Statistical Model Ecosystem Science 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgment

We appreciate M. Nungesser, Matt Kirwan, and D. Drum for their comments on the early draft of the manuscript.

References

  1. Borgelt, C. and Kruse, R. 2002. Graphical Models. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Canham, C.D., Cole, J.J., and Laurenroth, W.K. (eds.) 2003. Models in Ecosystem Science. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  3. Carpenter, S. 1996. Microcosm experiments have limited relevance for community and ecosystem ecology. Ecology, 77: 677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clark, J.S. and Gelfand, A.E. 2006. A future for data and models in ecology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 21: 375–380.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Congdon, P. 2003. Applied Bayesian Modelling. John Wiley & Sons, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Grace, J.B. 2006. Structural Equation Modeling and Natural Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hilborn, R. and Mangel, M. 1997. The Ecological Detective: Confronting Models with Data. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  8. Holling, C.S. 1978. Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Lele, S.R., Dennis, B., and Lutscher, F. 2007. Data cloning: easy maximum likelihood estimation for complex ecological models using Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo methods. Ecology Letters, 10: 551–563.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Levins, R. 1968. Evolution in Changing Environments. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  11. Loehle, C. 1987. Hypothesis testing in ecology: psychological aspects and the importance of theory maturation. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 62: 397–409.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. McCune, B. and Grace, J.B. 2002. Analysis of Ecological Communities. MJM, Gleneden Beach, OregonGoogle Scholar
  13. Miao, S. and Carstenn, S. 2006. A new direction for large-scale experimental design and analysis. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 4: 227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Odum, E.P. 1969. The strategy of ecosystem development. Science 164: 262–270.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Pearl, J. 2000. Causality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  16. Pickett, S.T.A., Kolasa, J., and Jones, C.G. 1994. Ecological Understanding. Academic Press, San Diego, California.Google Scholar
  17. Pugesek, B.H., Tomer, A., and von Eye, A. 2003. Structural Equation Modeling. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Shipley, B. 2000. Cause and Correlation in Biology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Spirtes, P., Glymour, C., and Scheiners, R. 2000. Causation, Prediction, and Search. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  20. Starfield, A.M. and Bleloch, A.L. 1986. Building Models for Conservation and Wildlife Management. Macmillian Publishing, New York.Google Scholar
  21. Terri, J.A. and Raven, P.H. 2002. A national ecological observatory network. Science 298: 1893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Turner, M.G. 2003. Modeling for synthesis and integration: Forest, people, and riparian coarse woody debris. pp. 83–110, In: Canham, C.D., Cole, J.J. and Laurenroth, W.K. (eds.) 2003. Models in Ecosystem Science. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  23. Urban, D.L. 2003. A community-wide investment in modeling. pp. 466–470, In: Canham, C.D., Cole, J.J. and Laurenroth, W.K. (eds.) Models in Ecosystem Science. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  24. Wright, S. 1921. Correlation and causation. Journal of Agricultural Research, 10: 557–585.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • James B. Grace
    • 1
  • Susan Carstenn
  • ShiLi Miao
  • Erik Sindhøj
  1. 1.U.S. Geological SurveyLafayetteUSA

Personalised recommendations