Meyer, Katrin Mareike

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","93"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","2"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Basic and Applied Ecology"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","101"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","14"],["dc.contributor.author","Jeltsch, Florian"],["dc.contributor.author","Blaum, Niels"],["dc.contributor.author","Brose, Ulrich"],["dc.contributor.author","Chipperfield, Joseph D."],["dc.contributor.author","Clough, Yann"],["dc.contributor.author","Farwig, Nina"],["dc.contributor.author","Geissler, Katja"],["dc.contributor.author","Graham, Catherine H."],["dc.contributor.author","Grimm, Volker"],["dc.contributor.author","Hickler, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Huth, Andreas"],["dc.contributor.author","May, Felix"],["dc.contributor.author","Meyer, Katrin M."],["dc.contributor.author","Pagel, Jörn"],["dc.contributor.author","Reineking, Björn"],["dc.contributor.author","Rillig, Matthias C."],["dc.contributor.author","Shea, Katriona"],["dc.contributor.author","Schurr, Frank M."],["dc.contributor.author","Schröder, Boris"],["dc.contributor.author","Tielbörger, Katja"],["dc.contributor.author","Weiss, Lina"],["dc.contributor.author","Wiegand, Kerstin"],["dc.contributor.author","Wiegand, Thorsten"],["dc.contributor.author","Wirth, Christian"],["dc.contributor.author","Zurell, Damaris"],["dc.date.accessioned","2017-09-07T11:52:18Z"],["dc.date.available","2017-09-07T11:52:18Z"],["dc.date.issued","2013"],["dc.description.abstract","Improving our understanding of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning and our capacity to inform ecosystem management requires an integrated framework for functional biodiversity research (FBR). However, adequate integration among empirical approaches (monitoring and experimental) and modelling has rarely been achieved in FBR. We offer an appraisal of the issues involved and chart a course towards enhanced integration. A major element of this path is the joint orientation towards the continuous refinement of a theoretical framework for FBR that links theory testing and generalization with applied research oriented towards the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. We further emphasize existing decision-making frameworks as suitable instruments to practically merge these different aims of FBR and bring them into application. This integrated framework requires joint research planning, and should improve communication and stimulate collaboration between modellers and empiricists, thereby overcoming existing reservations and prejudices. The implementation of this integrative research agenda for FBR requires an adaptation in most national and international funding schemes in order to accommodate such joint teams and their more complex structures and data needs. {\\textcopyright} 2013 Gesellschaft f{\\\"{u}}r {\\\"{O}}kologie."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1016/j.baae.2013.01.001"],["dc.identifier.gro","3148895"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/5533"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Wiegand Crossref Import"],["dc.notes.status","public"],["dc.notes.submitter","chake"],["dc.relation.issn","1439-1791"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Abteilung Ökosystemmodellierung"],["dc.subject.gro","Biodiversity experiments"],["dc.subject.gro","Biodiversity theory"],["dc.subject.gro","Conservation management"],["dc.subject.gro","Decision-making"],["dc.subject.gro","Ecosystem functions and services"],["dc.subject.gro","Forecasting"],["dc.subject.gro","Functional traits"],["dc.subject.gro","Global change"],["dc.subject.gro","Interdisciplinarity"],["dc.subject.gro","Monitoring programmes"],["dc.title","How can we bring together empiricists and modellers in functional biodiversity research?"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","no"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","e2993"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","PeerJ"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","5"],["dc.contributor.author","Li, Yuanheng"],["dc.contributor.author","Brose, Ulrich"],["dc.contributor.author","Meyer, Katrin"],["dc.contributor.author","Rall, Bjoern Christian"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T10:27:15Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T10:27:15Z"],["dc.date.issued","2017"],["dc.description.abstract","Knowledge on how functional responses (a measurement of feeding interaction strength) are affected by patch size and habitat complexity (represented by refuge availability) is crucial for understanding food-web stability and subsequently biodiversity. Due to their laborious character, it is almost impossible to carry out systematic empirical experiments on functional responses across wide gradients of patch sizes and refuge availabilities. Here we overcame this issue by using an individual-based model (IBM) to simulate feeding experiments. The model is based on empirically measured traits such as body-mass dependent speed and capture success. We simulated these experiments in patches ranging from sizes of petri dishes to natural patches in the field. Moreover, we varied the refuge availability within the patch independently of patch size, allowing for independent analyses of both variables. The maximum feeding rate (the maximum number of prey a predator can consume in a given time frame) is independent of patch size and refuge availability, as it is the physiological upper limit of feeding rates. Moreover, the results of these simulations revealed that a type III functional response, which is known to have a stabilizing effect on population dynamics, fitted the data best. The half saturation density (the prey density where a predator consumes half of its maximum feeding rate) increased with refuge availability but was only marginally influenced by patch size. Subsequently, we investigated how patch size and refuge availability influenced stability and coexistence of predator-prey systems. Following common practice, we used an allometric scaled Rosenzweig-MacArthur predator-prey model based on results from our in silico IBM experiments. The results suggested that densities of both populations are nearly constant across the range of patch sizes simulated, resulting from the constant interaction strength across the patch sizes. However, constant densities with decreasing patch sizes mean a decrease of absolute number of individuals, consequently leading to extinction of predators in the smallest patches. Moreover, increasing refuge availabilities also allowed predator and prey to coexist by decreased interaction strengths. Our results underline the need for protecting large patches with high habitat complexity to sustain biodiversity."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.7717/peerj.2993"],["dc.identifier.isi","000396900400006"],["dc.identifier.pmid","28243529"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/43210"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","PUB_WoS_Import"],["dc.relation.issn","2167-8359"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Abteilung Ökosystemmodellierung"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.title","How patch size and refuge availability change interaction strength and population dynamics: a combined individual- and population-based modeling experiment"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]