Abstract:Humans are altering the composition of biological communities through a variety of activities that increase rates of species invasions and species extinctions, at all scales, from local to global. These changes in components of the Earth's biodiversity cause concern for ethical and aesthetic reasons, but they also have a strong potential to alter ecosystem properties and the goods and services they provide to humanity. Ecological experiments, observations, and theoretical developments show that ecosystem properties depend greatly on biodiversity in terms of the functional characteristics of organisms present in the ecosystem and the distribution and abundance of those organisms over space and time. Species effects act in concert with the effects of climate, resource availability, and disturbance regimes in influencing ecosystem properties. Human activities can modify all of the above factors; here we focus on modification of these biotic controls. The scientific community has come to a broad consensus on many aspects of the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning, including many points relevant to management of ecosystems. Further progress will require integration of knowledge about biotic and abiotic controls on ecosystem properties, how ecological communities are structured, and the forces driving species extinctions and invasions. To strengthen links to policy and management, we also need to integrate our ecological knowledge with understanding of the social and economic constraints of potential management practices. Understanding this complexity, while taking strong steps to minimize current losses of species, is necessary for responsible management of Earth's ecosystems and the diverse biota they contain. Based on our review of the scientific literature, we are certain of the following conclusions: 1) Species' functional characteristics strongly influence ecosystem properties. Functional characteristics operate in a variety of contexts, including effects of dominant species, keystone species, ecological engineers, and interactions among species (e.g., competition, facilitation, mutualism, disease, and predation). Relative abundance alone is not always a good predictor of the ecosystem‐level importance of a species, as even relatively rare species (e.g., a keystone predator) can strongly influence pathways of energy and material flows. 2) Alteration of biota in ecosystems via species invasions and extinctions caused by human activities has altered ecosystem goods and services in many well‐documented cases. Many of these changes are difficult, expensive, or impossible to reverse or fix with technological solutions. 3) The effects of species loss or changes in composition, and the mechanisms by which the effects manifest themselves, can differ among ecosystem properties, ecosystem types, and pathways of potential community change. 4) Some ecosystem properties are initially insensitive to species loss because (a) ecosystems may have multiple species that carry out similar functional roles, (b) some species may contribute relatively little to ecosystem properties, or (c) properties may be primarily controlled by abiotic environmental conditions. 5) More species are needed to insure a stable supply of ecosystem goods and services as spatial and temporal variability increases, which typically occurs as longer time periods and larger areas are considered. We have high confidence in the following conclusions: 1) Certain combinations of species are complementary in their patterns of resource use and can increase average rates of productivity and nutrient retention. At the same time, environmental conditions can influence the importance of complementarity in structuring communities. Identification of which and how many species act in a complementary way in complex communities is just beginning. 2) Susceptibility to invasion by exotic species is strongly influenced by species composition and, under similar environmental conditions, generally decreases with increasing species richness. However, several other factors, such as propagule pressure, disturbance regime, and resource availability also strongly influence invasion success and often override effects of species richness in comparisons across different sites or ecosystems. 3) Having a range of species that respond differently to different environmental perturbations can stabilize ecosystem process rates in response to disturbances and variation in abiotic conditions. Using practices that maintain a diversity of organisms of different functional effect and functional response types will help preserve a range of management options. Uncertainties remain and further research is necessary in the following areas: 1) Further resolution of the relationships among taxonomic diversity, functional diversity, and community structure is important for identifying mechanisms of biodiversity effects. 2) Multiple trophic levels are common to ecosystems but have been understudied in biodiversity/ecosystem functioning research. The response of ecosystem properties to varying composition and diversity of consumer organisms is much more complex than responses seen in experiments that vary only the diversity of primary producers. 3) Theoretical work on stability has outpaced experimental work, especially field research. We need long‐term experiments to be able to assess temporal stability, as well as experimental perturbations to assess response to and recovery from a variety of disturbances. Design and analysis of such experiments must account for several factors that covary with species diversity. 4) Because biodiversity both responds to and influences ecosystem properties, understanding the feedbacks involved is necessary to integrate results from experimental communities with patterns seen at broader scales. Likely patterns of extinction and invasion need to be linked to different drivers of global change, the forces that structure communities, and controls on ecosystem properties for the development of effective management and conservation strategies. 5) This paper focuses primarily on terrestrial systems, with some coverage of freshwater systems, because that is where most empirical and theoretical study has focused. While the fundamental principles described here should apply to marine systems, further study of that realm is necessary. Despite some uncertainties about the mechanisms and circumstances under which diversity influences ecosystem properties, incorporating diversity effects into policy and management is essential, especially in making decisions involving large temporal and spatial scales. Sacrificing those aspects of ecosystems that are difficult or impossible to reconstruct, such as diversity, simply because we are not yet certain about the extent and mechanisms by which they affect ecosystem properties, will restrict future management options even further. It is incumbent upon ecologists to communicate this need, and the values that can derive from such a perspective, to those charged with economic and policy decision‐making.

Abstract:Microbial ecology is a science that studies the relationships between microorganisms and their biotic and abiotic environments. The ultimate goal of microbial ecology is to predict who is where with whom doing what, why and when. To achieve this predictive goal, computational modelling and simulation of microbial community dynamics and behaviour at both the structural and functional levels is essential. However, in contrast to the intensive modelling studies in plant and animal community ecology, the modelling of microbial community behaviour within different environmental contexts has not been initiated. The vast majority of the community studies in microbial ecology are still at a descriptive level rather than at a quantitative and predictive level. One of the major problems is the lack of reliable experimental information on community-wide spatial and temporal dynamics of microbial community structure, activities and functions. Because microorganisms are difficult to directly count, obtaining enough data required for modelling is extremely difficult and even impossible with conventional molecular techniques such as PCR-based cloning, in situ hybridization and quantitative PCR. Although applications of such conventional molecular techniques over the last two decades have provided new insights into microbial diversity and structure, they have failed to provide community-wide quantitative information in a rapid fashion for modelling and predicting microbial community dynamics. Lack of sufficient reliable data prevents microbial ecologists from addressing quantitatively important ecological and environmental questions such as competition, stability, succession, and adaptation in microbial communities. Such questions are extremely important for the applied manipulation of microbial communities for desired functions related to human health, food, energy production, environmental cleanup, and industrial and agricultural practices. With the recent development and application of large-scale high-throughput sequencing (see Sogin et al., 2006; Huber et al., 2007; Hamady et al. 2008) and associated metagenomics technologies such as GeoChip related functional gene arrays (He et al., 2007; Zhou et al., 2008; Handelsman et al., 2007), community-wide spatial and temporal information on microbial community functional structure and activities can be rapidly obtained. This will be the first time that microbial ecologists will be not frustrated by the paucity of experimental data to address ecological questions. In turn, microbial ecologists may very well be overwhelmed by massive amounts of metagenomics data and will be perplexed as to how to utilize and interpret the data within ecological and environmental contexts. Here, I will argue that we are in the new era of transforming microbial ecology from descriptive studies to a quantitative and predictive science. Using high-throughput metagenomics technologies and computational modelling, it is possible to tackle some fundamental ecological questions (Zhou et al., 2004), which have been difficult to address before such as: (i) How do the phylogenetic and functional structure of microbial communities change across various spatial (from micrometers, kilometers to tens of thousands kilometers) and temporal scales and what are the forces shaping their diversity and structure? (ii) How can the complex ecological networks in microbial communities be identified and whether are they important to ecosystem functioning? (iii) What is the molecular basis for functional stability and adaptation of microbial communities? (iv) How is the functional stability of a microbial community related to its genetic and metabolic diversity as well as environmental disturbance? (v) Can the functional stability and future status of a microbial community be predicted based on the metabolic functional conservation and differentiation of individual microbial populations? (vi) Can a microbial community be manipulated to achieve a desired stable function by manipulating the metabolic traits of the community? (vii) How can the information be scaled from molecules to populations, to communities, and to ecosystems for understanding ecosystem behaviours and dynamics? (viii) Can the molecular-level understanding of microbial community structure improve our predictive power of the ecological and evolutionary responses of microbial communities to environmental changes, especially global climate changes? Addressing the above questions in a quantitative and predictive way requires rigorous experimental designing and systematic intensive sampling of the microbial systems studied. Selection of experimental systems with appropriate complexity and replications could be very important. I believe that two general strategies can be employed. One is to focus on surveying complex natural microbial systems by using high-throughput metagenomics technologies to systematically compare the commonality and differences of microbial community diversity patterns, metabolic capacities, and functional activities across various spatial and temporal scales. While such survey-based approach provides rich information on microbial community diversity patterns and dynamics, it could be difficult to establish detailed definitive mechanistic linkages between microbial diversity and ecosystem functioning because the microbial systems in natural settings are generally very complex. Another complementary strategy is to establish well-controlled laboratory systems such as bioreactors with simplified communities to systematically examine the responses of microbial communities to environmental changes and the impacts of their responses on ecosystem functioning. Such laboratory systems are important to establish cause-and-effect relationships, because they have great advantages in terms of system controls, monitoring, data collection, replications and modelling. Determination of cause-and-effect relationships is much easier with simpler, engineered, laboratory-based bioreactor systems than with complex natural communities, as input and output parameters can be controlled, along with environmental conditions. Although the community in a controlled system is not a natural community, such systems would offer the best opportunity to acquire mechanistic understanding of the fundamental principles of interactions among various microorganisms and the molecular level ecological and evolutionary responses of microbial communities to environmental changes. Therefore, well-controlled laboratory engineered systems will be critical to predictive microbial ecology studies. Predictive microbial ecology requires not only high-throughput experimental tools but also high performance computational capabilities. System-level understanding of the dynamic behaviour of microbial community structure, functions and their relationships to ecosystem functioning faces several grand computational challenges. First, microbial diversity is extremely high. The number of genes in a genome or populations in a community far exceeds the number of sample measurements due to high cost of measurements. It is difficult to apply classical mathematical tools such as differential equations to simulate high-throughput metagenomics data because no sole solution can be obtained for the constructed models. New mathematical theories and approaches are needed to deal with such dimensionality problems. Second, metagenomic data from analyses of transcriptomes, proteomes and metabolomes, as well as physiological and geochemical data, are heterogeneous. Synthesizing various types of large-scale data together to make biological sense is also difficult. Rapid high performance parallel computational tools are needed for data processing, computation and visualization. In addition, because the dynamic behaviours of biological systems at various levels (cells, individuals, populations, communities, and ecosystems) are measured on different temporal and spatial scales, linking cellular-level genomic information to ecosystem-level functional information for predicting ecosystem dynamics is even more challenging. Novel mathematical framework and computational tools are needed for achieving systems-level understanding and prediction of microbial community dynamics, behaviour and functional stability. With the rapid continuing advances of metagenomics-based high-throughput experimental technologies and associated high performance computational tools, microbiologists should be able to perform more quantitative modelling studies of microbial systems as macroecologists have done since last half century. There is no doubt that the era of quantitative predictive microbial ecology is coming.

Analysing biodiversity: the necessity of interdisciplinary trends in the development of ecological theory

Analysing eco‐evolutionary dynamics—The challenging complexity of the real world

Theoretical Advances in Biodiversity Research

A multitrophic perspective on biodiversity–ecosystem functioning research

Predicting emergent animal biodiversity patterns across multiple scales

Uncovering The Complete Biodiversity Structure In Spatial Networks: The Example Of Riverine Systems

Integrative ecology in the era of big data-From observation to prediction

Perspectives in modelling ecological interaction networks for sustainable ecosystem management

Back to the Future: Reintegrating Biology to Understand How Past Eco-evolutionary Change Can Predict Future Outcomes

Evolutionary macroecology: Incorporating phylogenetic information more explicitly into process-based, forward time, simulation models

Linking ecosystems, habitats, and biodiversity: from the grand picture to the tiny details, and back

EFFECTS OF BIODIVERSITY ON ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONING: A CONSENSUS OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE

Reaching and implementing the best available knowledge in wildlife biology

Increasing the spatial and temporal impact of ecological research: A roadmap for integrating a novel terrestrial process into an Earth system model

People and nature – fostering inter- and transdisciplinary collaboration for biodiversity and sustainable human interactions

Big questions, big science: meeting the challenges of global ecology

Key problems and trends in the study of ecosystem ecology based on the debate of holism and reductionism

Biotic Interactions and Ecosystem Dynamics under Global Change: from Theory to Application

Predictive microbial ecology.

Unifying the concepts of stability and resilience in ecology

Linking evolutionary and ecological theory illuminates non-equilibrium biodiversity