Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T21:13:16.960Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - Introduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2016

Edward A. Johnson
Affiliation:
University of Calgary
Yvonne E. Martin
Affiliation:
University of Calgary
Edward A. Johnson
Affiliation:
University of Calgary
Yvonne E. Martin
Affiliation:
University of Calgary
Get access

Summary

The concept of ecosystem, like many ecological concepts that have come down to us from the early developments in ecology, has a rather elusive meaning. A. G. Tansley's (1935) original definition of ecosystem states: “the more fundamental conception is ‘as it seems to me’ the whole system (in the sense of physics) including not only the organism complex but the whole complex of physical factors we call the environment of the biome—the habitat factors in the widest sense.” However, “system” is never defined or further discussed so it is unclear what Tansley and his contemporaries understood it to mean. Did he mean simply that the abiotic and biotic were to be considered together as a unit unlike the more biologically focused concepts of community and biome? Or did he mean a more process-based approach, as in the physics of coupled systems of partial differential equations (i.e., coupled processes)? If the latter, how was this to be accomplished with no governing equations, such as the Navier–Stokes equations based on the conservation of three basic qualities – mass, energy, and momentum? Whatever Tansley meant initially, the ecosystem concept was subsequently used both as a classification of communities, biomes, and their habitat in terms of environmental factors and as nutrient cycles and energy flows through food webs (McIntosh, 1985). Thus, we are left with an incomplete understanding of how the environment is to be connected as a “system” to organisms, populations, communities, and ecosystems.

Recent decades have seen several advances that are contributing to the beginning of this synthesis (e.g., Nealson and Ghiorse, 2001; Hedin et al., 2002). One of the most interesting developments in ecology has been the Metabolic Theory of Ecology (MTE). This theory (West et al., 1997; 1999; Brown et al., 2004; Enquist et al., 2003; 2007) argues that mass conservation, biological mechanics, hydraulics, heat budgets, and thermodynamics can be used to explain the flux of energy, water, and nutrients from cells to ecosystems. This, in turn, explains the empirical scaling evidence for B = BoM3/4 where B is an organism's metabolic rate, Bo is a normalization constant independent of an organism's mass, and M is an organism's mass (West et al., 1997).

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beven, K. J. and Kirkby, M. J. (1979). A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology. Hydrological Sciences Bulletin, 24(1), 43–69, doi:10.1080/02626667909491834.Google Scholar
Brown, J. H., Gillooly, J. F., Allen, A. P., Savage, V. M. and West, G. B. (2004). Toward a metabolic theory of ecology. Ecology, 85, 1771–89.Google Scholar
Eagleson, P. S. (2002). Ecohydrology: Darwinian Expression of Vegetation Form and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Enquist, B. J., Brown, J. H. and West, G. B. (1998). Allometric scaling of plant energetics and population dynamics. Nature, 395, 163–5, doi:10.1038/25977.Google Scholar
Enquist, B. J., Economo, E. P., Huxman, T. E. et al. (2003). Scaling metabolism from organisms to ecosystems. Nature, 423, 639–42.Google Scholar
Enquist, B. J., Kerkhoff, A. J., Stark, S. C. et al. (2007). A general integrative model for scaling plant growth, carbon flux, and functional trait spectra. Nature, 449, 218–22.Google Scholar
Frost, P. C., Cross, W. F. and Benstead, J. P. (2005). Ecological stoichiometry in freshwater benthic ecosystems: an introduction. Freshwater Biology, 50(11), 1781–5.Google Scholar
Hedin, L., Chadwick, O., Schimel, J. and Torn, M. (2002). Linking Ecological Biology and Geoscience. Report to the National Science Foundation 4 April. Workshop at Annual Meeting of the Ecological Society of America August 2001, Madison, WI.
Henderson, L. J. (1913). The Fitness of the Environment: An Inquiry into the Biological Significance of the Properties of Matter. New York: The MacMillan Co.
Martin, Y. and Church, M. (2004). Numerical modelling of landscape evolution: geomorphological perspectives. Progress in Physical Geography, 28(3), 317–39, doi:10.1191/0309133304pp412ra.Google Scholar
McIntosh, R. P. (1985). The Background of Ecology: Concept and Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nealson, K. and Ghiorse, W. (2001). Geobiology. Exploring the Interface between the Biosphere and the Geosphere. A report from the American Academy of Microbiology. Available at http://academy.asm.org/images/stories/documents/12.GeobiologyReport.pdf.
Paola, C. and Voller, V. R. (2005). A generalized Exner equation for sediment mass balance. Journal of Geophysical Research, 110, F04014, doi:10.1029/2004JF000274.Google Scholar
Rodriguez-Iturbe, I. (2000). Ecohydrology: a hydrologic perspective of climate-soil-vegetation dynamics. Water Resources Research, 36, 3–9.Google Scholar
Savage, V. M., Gillooly, J. F., Brown, J. H., West, G. B. and Charnov, E. L. (2004). Effects of body size and temperature on population growth. The American Naturalist, 163(3), doi:10.1086/381872.Google Scholar
Sterner, R. W. and Elser, J. J. (2002). Ecological Stoichiometry: The Biology of Elements from Molecules to the Biosphere. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Tansley, A. G. (1935). The use and abuse of vegetation concepts and terms. Ecology, 16(3), 284–30.Google Scholar
West, G. B., Brown, J. H. and Enquist, B. J. (1997). A general model for the origin of allometric scaling laws in biology. Science, 276, 122–6.Google Scholar
West, G. B., Brown, J. H. and Enquist, B. J. (1999). A general model for the structure and allometry of plant vascular systems. Nature, 400, 664–7.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×