1. Integrating Concepts in Biology
PowerPoint Slides for Chapter 20:
Emergent Properties in Ecological Systems by
A. Malcolm Campbell, Laurie J. Heyer, and Chris Paradise

2. Lamar Valley, in Yellowstone National Park, where emergent properties arise from the re-introduction of the gray wolf, a top predator
UN20.1 Lamar Valley, in Yellowstone National Park, where emergent properties arise from the re-introduction of the gray wolf, a top predator.
Talking Points: .
Figure UN20.1

3. A food web
Figure A food web. The arrows point in the direction of the energy flow. Here plants are eaten by grasshoppers and rodents, which are eaten by an assortment of predators, ending in the owl and fox, which have no predators.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.1

4. Elk and wolf population counts in Yellowstone National Park
Figure Elk and wolf population counts in Yellowstone National Park. Park rangers count elk from small planes. Years of missing data for elk counts are due to counts attempted during times of bad visibility, or from counts not being made at all in 1996 and 1997.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.2

5. Frequency distribution of diameters of mature cottonwood trees and of estimated narrowleaf cottonwood year of germination
Figure a. Frequency distribution of diameters of two species of mature cottonwood trees from the Lamar Valley of Yellowstone National Park. The bar on the left of the graph represents the estimated density of seedlings, and is not part of the 700 trees used to measure diameter. b. Frequency distribution of estimated narrowleaf cottonwood year of germination, in 20-year increments, using two different diameter-to-age estimates.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.3

6. Cottonwoods in winter, with elk herd and grove at Devil’s Slide along the Yellowstone River
Figure a. Cottonwoods in winter, with elk herd (photo credit: Yellowstone National Park; circa 1970s). Note the lack of small and intermediate sized trees. b. Cottonwood grove at Devil’s Slide refuge site along the Yellowstone River, with a wide distribution of tree sizes. In this site, the road on the upslope side and the river on the downslope side prevented elk from foraging.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.4

7. Frequency distributions of cottonwood diameters at five study sites in the northern Yellowstone elk winter range
Figure Frequency distributions of narrowleaf cottonwood (and black cottonwood in panel d) diameters for trees >5 cm in diameter at breast height (dbh) at five study sites in the northern Yellowstone elk winter range. dbh is a standard measure in ecology, and refers to diameter 1.3 meters off the ground. Note that panel d contains the same data shown in Figure 20.3a.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.5

8. Elk locations in and vegetation map of Gallatin Canyon within Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem
Figure Elk locations in Gallatin Canyon within the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (outside of Yellowstone National Park). a. Elevation and the location of radiotracked elk during the study (N = 2,288 locations of the 14 elk, but only one part of the study area is shown here). Red dots are locations of elk when wolves were known to be nearby, black dots are elk locations when wolves were not detected, and blue crosses indicate wolf kills of elk. b. A vegetation map of the same area.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.6

9. Effects of wolf presence on habitat use by elk
Figure Effects of wolf presence on habitat use by elk. The probabilities shown are the probabilities that grassy areas or coniferous areas were prevalent where elk were found. Bars show means and 95% confidence intervals.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.7

10. Comparison of terrain on tree growth
Figure Comparison of terrain on tree growth. a. Percentage of leading shoots of aspen eaten. b. Average aspen height.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.8

11. Direct and indirect interactions without wolves in the northern ecosystems of Yellowstone National Park (a) and with wolves present (b). Solid arrows indicate documented responses; dashed arrows indicate predicted responses.
Figure Direct and indirect interactions without wolves in the northern ecosystems of Yellowstone National Park (a) and with wolves present (b). Solid arrows indicate documented responses; dashed arrows indicate predicted responses.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.9

12. The distributions of seven plant species along the organic matter gradient of a lakeshore
Figure The distributions of seven plant species along the organic matter gradient of a lakeshore. The organic matter gradient was arbitrarily divided into seven categories along a logarithmic scale. The average sediment organic content associated with each species is indicated by an arrow. Species' common names are given.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.10

13. RIPij values for each pairwise combination of seven plant species grown in experimental buckets.
Three-way sedge
Brown-fruit rush
Loose-strife
St. John’s wort
Breaksedge
Sundew
Pipe-wort
Target 1
1.33
1.18
1.17
1.25
1.34
1.21
Brownfruit rush
0.63
1.46
1.52
1.49
1.27
0.88
0.87
1.63
1.78
1.57
1.09
0.99
0.91
1.22
1.29
1.23
1.10
1.05
0.73
0.93
1.36
1.03
0.98
1.02
1.11
1.00
Pipewort
0.65
0.71
0.89
1.48
Neighbor
0.90
1.15
1.35
1.30
Table RIPij values for each pairwise combination of seven plant species grown in experimental buckets. The species listed in the rows are i, the species being compared to others; those in columns are j, the species to which species i is being compared. Target score is the mean RIP of a species in comparison to all six other species. Neighbor score is the mean RIP of a species when it is the neighbor of each of the six other species.
Talking Points: .
Table 20.1

14. The relationship between target and neighbor scores and percent sediment organic matter content for the seven species at Axe Lake, Ontario
Figure a. The relationship between target scores and percent sediment organic matter content for the seven species at Axe Lake, Ontario. b. The relationship between neighbor scores and percent sediment organic matter content for the seven species. Correlation coefficients are given for each panel. PW = pipewort, BS = breaksedge, BFR = brownfruit rush, LS = loosestrife, TWS = three-way sedge, SJW = St John’s wort, and SD = sundew.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.11

15. Bluefin and rainwater killifish, time for 50% of a test population to die from exposure to two low oxygen concentrations and two high temperature conditions, and percentage of test populations that died from exposure to three different salt concentrations.
Figure a. The bluefin killifish. b. Rainwater killifish. c. The time for 50% of a test population to die from exposure to two low oxygen concentrations and two high temperature conditions. The higher the bar, the longer the fish could tolerate the condition. No fish died at 1.0 mg / L O2. d. Percentage of test populations that died from exposure to three different salt concentrations. The higher the bar, the less tolerant the fish were of the condition. For most tests, except for 35 ppt, only one replicate of a test population of ten fish was performed.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.12

16. Results of competition tests at different salt concentrations for rainwater and bluefin killifish
Figure Results of competition tests at different salt concentrations for rainwater and bluefin killifish. There were 2 replicates of each test condition, and error bars represent one standard deviation above and below the average.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.13

17. The carbon cycle Figure 20.14
Figure The carbon cycle, showing how light energy and carbon dioxide (CO2) are taken up by plants as the first step of producing chemical energy that can later flow into higher trophic levels (the consumers).
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.14

18. Distribution of biomass or energy at different trophic levels in an ecological system
Figure Distribution of biomass or energy at different trophic levels in an ecological system. Primary consumers are those animals that eat plants, also known as herbivores. A secondary consumer eats primary consumers, and a tertiary consumer eats secondary consumers. Secondary consumers and above are also known as carnivores or predators.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.15

19. Range of habitats typically observed in a salt marsh and surrounding terrestrial zone
Figure Range of habitats typically observed in a salt marsh and surrounding terrestrial zone. Notice how the vegetation type changes as distance from the tidal creek increases. The tidal creek rises and falls with the tides, and can reach as far as the high marsh, but only rarely, leaving salty water behind when it recedes.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.16

20. Re-creation of Teal’s saltmarsh foodweb
Figure Recreation of Teal’s saltmarsh foodweb. The lower group of herbivores, as classified by Teal, are feeding on both living algae and dead cordgrass that sinks to the bottom of the marsh. Bacteria are feeding on decomposing organic matter – the cordgrass and animals that die are decomposed by bacteria.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.17

21. Energy relationships in saltmarsh planthoppers and katydids
Figure Energy relationships in saltmarsh planthoppers and katydids. Estimates are from Teal (1962) except that they estimated 85% assimilation efficiency for planthoppers, because they feed on liquid sugar solutions from plants, which are easy to digest, not cellulose, which is a plant structural chemical that is not easy to digest. The assimilation efficiency for grasshoppers, which consume mostly cellulose, was estimated by Teal to be 30%.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.18

22. One pathway of energy and carbon in the Georgia saltmarsh
Figure One pathway of energy and carbon in the Georgia saltmarsh. Carbon cycles (atmosphere --> plants --> herbivores --> carnivores), and each component sends carbon dioxide back to the atmosphere. Decomposers also respire or provide biomass to predators. The pathway of carbon is combined with energy flow (sunlight --> plants --> herbivores --> carnivores, with respiration energy used for metabolism and lost as heat). The size of the boxes for cordgrass, insects herbivores, and predators is proportional to the energy content in each trophic level.
Talking Points: .
Figure 20.19