What are the ecological consequences of trophic downgrading in mixed/short grass prairies in North America?

Dennis Ruez, University of Illinois at Springfield
Megan Styles, University of Illinois at Springfield
Felisa Smith, University of New Mexico
Eric Grimm, Illinois State Museum
Author Profile
Initial Publication Date: August 24, 2016 | Reviewed: November 25, 2019

Summary

North American ecosystems have fundamentally changed over the late Pleistocene and Holocene; from a system dominated by mammoths, to bison, to domestic livestock. Given the very different body size and herd formation of these 'ecosystem engineers', it is likely that animals influence soil structure, water tables, vegetation and other animals in the ecosystems. What has been the ecological influence of the continued 'downsizing' of the largest animals in the ecosystem?

Used this activity? Share your experiences and modifications

Learning Goals

  1. Students will understand
    • that ecosystems are dynamic and change is continual.
    • significant patterns in and impacts of climate change during the late Pleistocene and Holocene in North America.
    • how climate change, human action, and alterations in species distribution have collectively influenced the distribution and abundance of grassland ecosystems in North America.
  2. Students will be able to use the Neotoma database to create a map of the distribution of fossil remains of species.
  3. Students will investigate the role that "ecosystem engineers" play in driving ecosystem change. In particular, they will evaluate the ecological consequences of trophic downgrading of top herbivores (mammoth to bison to domestic livestock) during the late Quaternary.
  4. Students will develop hypotheses about the role played by top consumers in shaping observed variations over time in grassland ecosystems.

Context for Use

This activity is intended for undergraduates and can be done over several class periods. Before beginning, students need to be familiar with the concepts of ecosystem engineers, trophic downgrading, and at least a general sense of late Quaternary climate shifts.

Instructors could follow this introductory activity with a deeper exploration of interactions between different species by computing the area of the geographic range and overlap within and between species over time; for example, see this teaching activity:
Advanced exploration of the ecological consequences of trophic downgrading in mixed/short grass prairies in North America.

Alternatively, one could follow up with lecture about or discussion of one or more of the following: the terminal Pleistocene megafauna extinction, re-wilding and its role in modern conservation biology, the ecological differences between short and tall grass prairies, how human modifications of landscapes have influenced the extent of grasslands in the US, or other related topics.

Description and Teaching Materials

In part 1 of this activity, students will explore the Neotoma database using data on mammoths and mastodons. Students will generate maps that allow them to describe some basic patterns in the ways that geographic distribution of mastodons and mammoths changed over time. They also will investigate possible relationships between these and other species and proposed hypotheses about the causes of observed patterns and changes in distribution over time.

In part 2, students will explore one method for quantifying changes in the distribution of Mammuthus sp. (mammoths), Mammut (mastodons) and plants typical of short/mixed grass prairies (Artemisa), tall grass prairies (Ambrosia) and Picea sp. (spruce). Specifically, they will calculate the change in geographic range for each species over time (in kilometers, based on the centroid – the midpoint of each range, calculated using the mean latitude and longitude for the samples).

Download the student handout in PDF or Word format:

Teaching Notes and Tips

Because there are multiple reasonable ways to draw the geographic range of taxa in the ArcGIS component, instructors should expect there to be variation within results.

If you would like to have your students be familiar with the Neotoma database before beginning this exercise, you could have them complete the Exploring the Neotoma Paleoecology Database exercise first.


References and Resources

Asner, G.P. et al. 2015. Ecosystem-scale effects of megafauna in African savannas. -Ecography, 38: 001-013.

Bakker, E.S. et al. 2015a. Combining paleo-data and modern exclosure experiments to assess the impact of megafauna extinctions on woody vegetation. –Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113: 847-855.

Bakker E.S. et al. 2015b. Assessing the role of large herbivores in the structuring and functioning of freshwater and marine ecosystems. -Ecography, 39: 162-179.

Bakker E.S. et al. 2006. Herbivore impact on grassland plant diversity depends on habitat productivity and herbivore size. -Ecol. Ltrs. 9: 780-788.

Barnosky, A.D. 2008. Megafauna biomass tradeoff as a driver of Quaternary and future extinctions. - Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 105: 11543-11548.

Barnosky, A.D. et al. 2015. The variable impact of Late Quaternary defaunation in causing ecological state shifts in North and South America. -Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113: 856-861.

Calder, W.A. 1984 Size, function and life history. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Conservation Paleobiology.

Dietl GP, Flessa KW (eds). 2009. Conservation Paleobiology: using the past to manage for the future. Paleontological Society Papers, 15, 285 pp.

Dietl GP, Flessa KW. 2011. Conservation paleobiology: putting the dead to work. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 26(1): 30-37.

Dirzo, R. et al. 2014. Defaunation in the Anthropocene. -Science 345: 401–406.

Donlan, C.J. et al. 2006. Pleistocene Rewilding: an optimistic agenda for twenty-first century conservation. -Am. Nat. 168: 660-681.

Donlan, C.J. et al. 2005. Re-wilding North America. -Nature 436: 913–914.

Doughty, C.E. 2013. Preindustrial human impacts on regional and global environment. –Ann. Rev. Environ. Resources 38: 503-527.

Doughty, C.E., Faurby, S., and Svenning, J-C. 2015a. Did megafauna extinctions affect savanna woody cover in South America? -Ecography, 39: 213-222.

Doughty, C.E., Wolf, A., and Field, C.B. 2010. Biophysical feedbacks between the Pleistocene megafauna extinction and climate: the first human-induced global warming? –Geophys. Res. Ltrs. 37: L15703.

Doughty, C.E. et al. 2015d. Megafauna extinction, tree species range reduction, 
and carbon storage in Amazonian forests. -Ecography, 39: 194-203. 


Estes, J.A. et al. 2011. Trophic downgrading of planet earth. -Science 333: 301–306.

Faurby, S. and Svenning, J.-C. 2015. Historic and prehistoric human-driven extinctions have reshaped global mammal diversity patterns. – Divers. Distrib. 21:1155–1166.

Flessa KW. 2002. Conservation paleobiology. American Paleontologist, 10: 2-5.

Gill, J.L. 2014. Ecological impacts of the late Quaternary megaherbivore extinctions. -New Phytologist 201 :1163-1169.

Graham, R.W. and Grimm, E.C. 1990. Effects of global climate change on the patterns of terrestrial biological communities. -Trends Ecol. Evol. 5: 289-292.

Jepson, P. 2015. A rewilding agenda for Europe: creating a network of experimental reserves. -Ecography,39: DOI:10.1111/ecog.01602.

Johnson, C.N. 2009. Ecological consequences of late Quaternary extinctions of megafauna. -Proc. Roy. Soc. B 276: 2509–2519.

Johnson, C.N. et al. 2015. Geographic variation in the ecological effects of extinction of Australia's Pleistocene megafauna. -Ecography, 39: 109-116.

Jørgensen, D. 2015. Rethinking rewilding. Geoforum, in press; doi://10.1016/j.geoforum.2014.11.016

Koch, P.L. and Barnosky, A.D. 2006. Late Quaternary extinctions: state of the debate. –Ann. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 37: 215–250.

Martin, P.S. 2005. Twilight of the mammoths: ice age extinctions and rewilding America. -Univ. California Press.

Martin, P. S. and Burney, D.A. 1999. Bring back the elephants! Wild Earth 9: 57–64.

Martin, P.S. and Klein, R.G. 1984. Quaternary extinctions: a prehistoric revolution. - Univ. Arizona Press.

Oliveira-Santos, L.G.R. and Fernandez, F.A.S. 2010. Pleistocene rewilding, Frankenstein ecosystems, and an alternative conservation agenda. –Conser. Biol. 24 :4-5.

Owen-Smith, N. 1988. Megaherbivores: The influence of very large body size on ecology. -Cambridge Univ. Press.

Pardi, M.I. and Smith, F.A. 2015. Biotic responses of canids to the terminal Pleistocene megafauna extinction. -Ecography, in press.

Peters, R.H. 1983 The ecological implications of body size. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Smith, F.A., Elliott, S.M. and Lyons, S.K. 2010. Methane emissions from extinct megafauna. -Nature Geosci.3: 374-375.

Smith, F.A. et al. 2003. Body mass of late Quaternary mammals. -Ecology 84: 3402.

Smith, F.A. et al. 2015a. Exploring the influence of ancient and historic megaherbivore extirpations on the global methane budget. -Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113: 874-879.

Smith, F.A. et al. 2015b. Unraveling the consequences of the terminal Pleistocene megafauna extinction on mammal community assembly. -Ecography, 39: 223-239.

Terborgh, J. and Estes, J.A. (eds.) 2010. Trophic Cascades: Predators, Prey, and the Changing Dynamics of Nature. -Island Press.

Terborgh, J. et al. 2015b.
Megafaunal influences on tree recruitment in African equatorial forests. -Ecography, 39: 180-186.

Van Valkenburgh, B. et al. 2015. The impact of large terrestrial carnivores on Pleistocene ecosystems. -Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113: 862-867.

Zimov, S.A. et al. 1995. Steppe-tundra transition: a herbivore-driven biome shift at the end of the Pleistocene. -Am. Nat. 146: 765–794.