Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 18 views

    Ehrlich & Walker 1998 Rivets and Redundancy

    Uploaded by

    paola bernal
    The document discusses two hypotheses about the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem services: the 'rivet-popper hypothesis' and the 'redundancy hypothesis'. It argues that both recognize redundancy in ecosystems but emphasize different aspects, and that maintaining functional groups is important to ecosystem resilience.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Ehrlich & Walker 1998 Rivets and Redundancy

    Uploaded by

    paola bernal
    18 views2 pages
    The document discusses two hypotheses about the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem services: the 'rivet-popper hypothesis' and the 'redundancy hypothesis'. It argues that both recognize redundancy in ecosystems but emphasize different aspects, and that maintaining functional groups is important to ecosystem resilience.

    Original Title

    3. Ehrlich & Walker 1998 Rivets and redundancy

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses two hypotheses about the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem services: the 'rivet-popper hypothesis' and the 'redundancy hypothesis'. It argues that both recognize redundancy in ecosystems but emphasize different aspects, and that maintaining functional groups is important to ecosystem resilience.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    18 views2 pages

    Ehrlich & Walker 1998 Rivets and Redundancy

    Uploaded by

    paola bernal
    The document discusses two hypotheses about the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem services: the 'rivet-popper hypothesis' and the 'redundancy hypothesis'. It argues that both recognize redundancy in ecosystems but emphasize different aspects, and that maintaining functional groups is important to ecosystem resilience.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    Rivets and Redundancy

    Author(s): Paul Ehrlich and Brian Walker


    Reviewed work(s):
    Source: BioScience, Vol. 48, No. 5 (May, 1998), p. 387
    Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the American Institute of Biological Sciences
    Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1313377 .
    Accessed: 24/01/2013 10:33

    Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
    http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

    .
    JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
    content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
    of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

    University of California Press and American Institute of Biological Sciences are collaborating with JSTOR to
    digitize, preserve and extend access to BioScience.

    http://www.jstor.org

    This content downloaded on Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:33:26 AM


    All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
    Roundtable

    Rivets and redundancy


    T he issueof how biodiversity
    is vital strands in the web of life" (Budi- The essential message of both the
    related to the delivery of eco- ansky 1995)-a 180-degree misin- redundancy and rivet-popper hy-
    system services has been char- terpretation because the original for- potheses is that we force species and
    acterized in two different, but related, mulation explicitly recognizes the populations (Hughes et al. 1997) to
    ways. The "rivet-popper" hypothesis existence of redundancy but empha- extinction at our own peril. Human-
    (Ehrlich and Ehrlich 1981) states that sizes our ignorance of which species ity is utterly dependent on services
    in the light of the uncertainty about might be redundant. The redundancy delivered by ecosystems (Daily 1997).
    both the degree of redundancy and hypothesis points out that because Considering the uncertainties and
    the size of future stresses in both ecosystems are composed of func- complexities in the relationships be-
    airplane wings and ecosystems, pro- tional groups of species, the deletion tween biodiversity and ecosystem
    grams of continual "rivet-popping" of a species would, in many cases, services, policy decisions should have
    (forcing species to extinction, in the have no immediate significant im- a large "insurance" bias toward pro-
    case of ecosystems) are not wise. The pact on ecosystem function. In addi- tection of biodiversity-and there-
    "redundancy hypothesis" (Walker tion, because some species are "driv- fore especially toward functional
    1992, 1995) suggests that the best ers" and others "passengers," groups in which there is little or no
    way to conserve all the species in an extermination of a species would not redundancy. A policy of trying to
    ecosystem is to ensure the continued necessarily produce observable nega- increase or at least to maintain "re-
    functioning of that ecosystem and tive impacts on the delivery of eco- dundancy" in ecosystems will maxi-
    that this strategy, in turn, calls for system services. But the other side of mize the maintenance of ecosystem
    special attention to be paid to func- this coin (and one that is overlooked resilience.
    tional groups that are represented by in misinterpretations of the hypoth-
    only one or two species-that is, esis) is that the redundancy is likely Acknowledgments
    functional groups in which there is to be important in the long run, in
    little or no redundancy. the face of ecosystem stresses (such We thank Jane Lubchenco and Hal
    These two views are sometimes as global change). Moreover, not all Mooney for suggesting that we write
    interpreted as opposing hypotheses. apparently redundant species are pas- this article.
    On one hand, the rivet-popper hy- sengers. A "redundant" species in a
    pothesis is interpreted as meaning functional group that is exterminated References cited
    that every species should be consid- today might well be the only species
    ered critical to ecosystem function- in that group that is able to adapt to Budiansky S. 1995. Nature's Keepers: The New
    new environmental conditions im- Science of Nature Management. New York:
    ing. On the other hand, the redun- The Free Press.
    dancy hypothesis is interpreted as posed on the ecosystem. Daily G, ed. 1997. Nature's Services. Washing-
    meaning that because in most eco- The redundancy hypothesis ex- ton (DC): Island Press.
    systems there are many species in plicitly made two particular points. Ehrlich P, Ehrlich A. 1981. Extinction: The
    each functional group, it is not neces- First, species redundancy in ecosys- Causes and Consequences of the Disap-
    tems is an important property that pearance of Species. New York: Random
    sary to be so concerned about species House.
    losses. However, we contend that both contributes to ecosystem resilience. Hughes JB, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR. 1997. Popu-
    characterizations are misinterpreta- Second, in efforts devoted to species lation diversity: Its extent and extinction.
    tions and that there is no essential conservation, it makes sense to put Science 278: 689-692.
    difference between the two views. the highest priority on those species Walker BH.1992. Biodiversity and ecological
    redundancy. Conservation Biology 6: 18-
    The rivet-popper hypothesis rec- that are the sole representatives of 23.
    ognizes that there is likely to be re- their functional groups-that is, on . 1995. Conserving biological diversity
    dundancy in ecosystems analogous groups in which there is no redun- through ecosystem resilience. Conservation
    to the redundancy in the number of dancy. But just because some func- Biology 9: 1-7.
    rivets in an airplane's wing. This tional groups consist of single spe-
    Paul Ehrlich is Bing Professor of Popula-
    analogy is sometimes interpreted to cies that warrant special attention, it tion Studies and professor of biological
    mean that "all species are equally does not follow that where there is sciences at Stanford University, Palo Alto,
    significant redundancy in a func- CA. Brian Walker is chief of the Division
    tional group we can afford to lose of Wildlife and Ecology in the CSIRO,
    by Paul Ehrlich some of the species. Such a policy Canberra, Australia. ? 1998 American
    and Brian Walker would lead to loss of resilience. Institute of Biological Sciences.

    May 1998 387

    This content downloaded on Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:33:26 AM


    All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

    You might also like