Know Your Biomes IX: Chaparral

Fynbos in the Western Cape, South Africa*

As much as any biome or global ecoregion is a challenge to group, differentiate or otherwise generalize, the chaparral or Mediterranean woodlands (scrubland/heathland/grassland) biome may be the best example such classification difficulties. There’s perhaps more general agreement regarding the features of this biome, even if the name tends to change from author to author. Many texts will not even include this biome in their list of major regions, instead making a small reference to it in the section regarding deserts. However, these areas, considering their combined territory, contain about 20 percent of the world’s species of plants, many of them endemic gems found nowhere else. On the flipside, due to the often environmentally heterogeneous nature of this biome, organisms that are prominent, integral members of other biome classifications are found in the chaparral as well. For the sake of consistency in this post, I’ll continue to refer to this biome as chaparral, as incomplete a descriptive designation as that may be.

Specifically, chaparral biomes exist in five major regions: South Africa, South/Southwest Australia, Southwestern California/Mexico, Central Chile and in patches wrapped around the Mediterranean Sea, including Southern Europe and Northern Africa. These regions are unified by their hot, dry summers and mild winters, referred to as an archetypal Mediterranean climate at 40 degrees north and south approximately.

The vast majority of rainfall usually comes with the cold fronts of winter. Annually, chaparral can experience anywhere from 250 mm of rain all the way up to 3000 mm in isolated subregions like the west portion of Fynbos in South Africa.

Plants in chaparral areas tend to be sclerophyllous (Greek: “hard-leaved”), meaning the leaves are evergreen, tough and waxy. This adaptation allows plants to conserve water in an area where rainfall is discontinuous, but probably evolved to compensate for the low levels of phosphorous in ancient weathered soils, particularly in Australia where there have been relatively few volcanic events to reestablish nutrients over millions of years. Obviously, these plants also happen to do very well during the xeric summers of the chaparral where drought is always a threat.

Because of the aridity and heat, the chaparral plant communities are adapted to and often strategically dependent on fire. Evolutionary succession scenarios constructed by scientists typically point to fire as one of the major factors that created much of chaparral areas in Australia and South Africa from Gondwanaland rainforest. (Fire ecology really deserves at least a post of its own, which I’d like to discuss given the time in the future.)

Some of the regions in the chaparral are exceptional. In South Africa, the area known as the Fynbos constitutes its own floristic region (phytochorion) among phytogeographers, the Cape Floristic Region. While it is the smallest of these floral kingdoms, it contains some 8500 species of vascular plants, 70 percent of which are endemic. The March rose (Oromthamnus zeyheri) is one of the standout specimens of the group as well as the national flower of South Africa, the King protea (Protea cynaroides). P. cynaroides is a “resprouter” in its fire-prone habitat, growing from embedded buds in a subterranean, burl-like structure. Another endemic species, the Cape sugarbird, is shown feeding on a King protea below**.

There is one unique threat to the chaparral: anthropogenic fire. In the past, if nature had not provided a fire to burn back the accumulated brush in these areas, often the native peoples would do so, and generally speaking, the fires seemed to be controlled and effective. But increased frequency of fires due to negligence or downed power lines can potentially cause catastrophic, unrecoverable fire. Only so much tolerance to such a destructive force can be built by evolutionary processes.

*Image by Chris Eason
**Image by Derek Keats

Share

No responses yet

The history of the Joshua tree, threats new and old

Aug 25 2010 Published by under [Biology&Environment]

And the LORD said unto Joshua, Stretch out the spear that is in thy hand toward Ai; for I will give it into thine hand. And Joshua stretched out the spear that he had in his hand toward the city.

And the ambush arose quickly out of their place, and they ran as soon as he had stretched out his hand: and they entered into the city, and took it, and hasted and set the city on fire.

And when the men of Ai looked behind them, they saw, and, behold, the smoke of the city ascended up to heaven, and they had no power to flee this way or that way: and the people that fled to the wilderness turned back upon the pursuers.

And when Joshua and all Israel saw that the ambush had taken the city, and that the smoke of the city ascended, then they turned again, and slew the men of Ai.

And the other issued out of the city against them; so they were in the midst of Israel, some on this side, and some on that side: and they smote them, so that they let none of them remain or escape.

And the king of Ai they took alive, and brought him to Joshua.

And it came to pass, when Israel had made an end of slaying all the inhabitants of Ai in the field, in the wilderness wherein they chased them, and when they were all fallen on the edge of the sword, until they were consumed, that all the Israelites returned unto Ai, and smote it with the edge of the sword.

And so it was, that all that fell that day, both of men and women, were twelve thousand, even all the men of Ai.

For Joshua drew not his hand back, wherewith he stretched out the spear, until he had utterly destroyed all the inhabitants of Ai.

Only the cattle and the spoil of that city Israel took for a prey unto themselves, according unto the word of the LORD which he commanded Joshua.

And Joshua burnt Ai, and made it a heap for ever, even a desolation unto this day.

And the king of Ai he hanged on a tree until eventide: and as soon as the sun was down, Joshua commanded that they should take his carcass down from the tree, and cast it at the entering of the gate of the city, and raise thereon a great heap of stones, that remaineth unto this day.

-Joshua 8: 18 - 29

ResearchBlogging.orgWhen Captain John C. Frémont first beheld the Joshua tree, he saw not what the Mormons are purported to have seen in its limbs: the spear-tip of Joshua in its sharp leaves, bent and raised at the enemies of God, relentlessly held aloft until the inhabitants of Ai were slain, stones of the city were heaped the scattered desert rocks and their king was dangled from the upper reaches of a tree perhaps not so different than the giant yucca itself. Frémont noted only “their stiff and ungraceful forms” and declared the Joshua tree “the most repulsive tree in the vegetable kingdom.” His contempt was mild compared to the violent myth behind the honorific given by the Latter Day Saints.

When a pack mule toppled over a cliff, Frémont lost his botanical collection, including the information gathered regarding the Joshua tree. The yucca was finally described by modern science in 1871 after samples were collected during a War Department railroad survey of the Southwest.

Continue Reading »

Share

15 responses so far

Defining oil, recent news

Aug 23 2010 Published by under [Biology&Environment]

First I want to draw attention to the more recent comments of this post about the state of the oil in the gulf. Beyond my feeble attempt to explain the situation, we've had some folks drop by with a bit more experience. Thank you for that.

Found this post yesterday about the "brown residue" that's been found in different areas along the coast:

Ed Overton, a Louisiana State University scientist conducting oil analysis for the federal government, sent two researchers to accompany the newspaper to areas where the brown material was coming ashore in early August. Water and residue samples were collected from the tip of Dauphin Island to about five miles down the Ft. Morgan peninsula.

“It’s the weirdest thing I’ve ever seen. It’s got some hydrocarbons in it, but it does not match the oil from the Deepwater Horizon,” Overton said, adding that he has received samples collected by federal officials in other places that appear similar. “I have to think it is biological in origin.”

Monty Graham, a marine biologist with the Dauphin Island Sea Lab, said that just because the material coming ashore has a sheen associated with it and contains some of the components of crude does not mean it flowed from the broken well.

“At some level, somebody better define oil. This three letter word is starting to get pretty complicated,” Graham said. “Are we looking at the remnants of oil, of oil that has been worked over by the microbial community? The microbes take what they can, then just leave the parts they can’t eat. That’s likely happening out there on a microscopic level. I’d speculate that’s what we are seeing.”

Overton said he believes that the brown material is likely plankton that ate bacteria that has been consuming some of the oil floating in the Gulf.

Dr. Samantha Joye of UGA and her team headed back to the Gulf as well. Probably a good idea to keep an eye on the Gulf Oil Blog for any new insights:

We’ll be conducting many operations similar to those we conducted on our May/June cruise but our collaborators be doing a lot of work at higher trophic levels to see how oil and gas are moving through the food web and we’ll be collecting sediment cores to see how much oil is on the bottom. Our cruise plan is ambition. We want to locate and map (again) the mysterious deepwater plumes that were discovered on the Pelican cruise in May. We will be further documenting the plume’s distribution and following up the rate measurements we did in May/June with additional rate measurements and a suite of geochemical constituents.

Share

No responses yet

Environmental framing again, a clarification

Aug 20 2010 Published by under [Biology&Environment], [Science in Society]

Matt Nisbet has a post up at Big Think referencing a brief interview with Peter Groffman regarding the recent open-access science communication issue of Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. Both are worth a read. I was linked in the article (this post, a brief review of some of the content), and while I appreciate it, I do want to clarify and perhaps expand the gist of my post.

Nisbet’s post stated that I feared the “dumbing down” (his words, not mine, despite the quotation marks) of the science for public consumption. I think that certainly represents one of the concerns of framing critics, especially those in the scientific community. Personally, that’s not high on my list. I’m sure the ESA and associated scientists will be able to represent the science behind the problems and potential solutions plainly and efficiently.

The post I wrote was an attempt at expressing a general aversion for comprehensive marketing schemes and questioning, when it comes to the “humanities” portion of the plan, whether or not honesty – in worldview, philosophy or fiction – was important enough to preserve in its entirety. Some of the papers in the publication sounded like every business case, proposal and requirements doc I’ve ever read or written, which is fine, by the way; it’s typical. I’m sneering because documents like those are mostly industry fluff and setup language for the real meat, which can be boiled out rather easily and comprises a very small portion of the actual verbiage. We toss charts and graphs into technical documents to fill them out and give a visual for the sake of color or flow (or because it’s a standard) instead of representing an accurate depiction of process.

I’m being stubborn. Ultimately I think it’s sad and reflects poorly on us that people in positions of influence believe these kinds of campaigns are the key to reaching "the public," that only through demographical media saturation can we ever hope to teach science and instill environmental stewardship. Advertisers have to petition tribally to encourage us to buy; McDonald’s runs unique, culturally stereotypical commercials for WLITE 101.3, WURBAN 105.7 and WROCK 99.1 and it’s permissible to assume that the listeners to those stations are okay with being pigeonholed. I’m usually told something along the lines of “What do you expect?” or “You think this is new?” or “It’s just personal preference. I actually like that commercial,” and probably rightly so. It just doesn’t sit well with me.

Continue Reading »

Share

No responses yet

Gulf oil moving deeper, not disappearing

Aug 17 2010 Published by under [Biology&Environment]

The gulf oil is moving into "deeper waters," according to USF scientists where phytoplankton and other basal organisms will be threatened. I've been reading stories like this for a week, scientists concerned about the settling oil on the ocean floor and the potential toxic effect on the food chain.

This is in addition to GA scientists stating that 80 percent of the spilled oil lingers in the Gulf's waters, starkly contrasting the claims by the US gov that it's mostly gone.

Share

7 responses so far

Evidence that mountaintop mining is impacting water quality

Aug 10 2010 Published by under [Biology&Environment], [Politics]

In Science, an article that has uncovered details of exactly how mountaintop mining or mountaintop removal, the destructive practice of  blasting the overburden in order to access coal seams instead of digging under them, is indeed affecting streams in the same ways that traditional mines have.

Bernhardt and her colleagues overlaid images taken by satellites and aircraft of mining activity in West Virginia's Appalachian Mountains onto topographic maps of the area, allowing them to estimate the amount of mining taking place in mountain watersheds between 1996 and 2009. The research team also had access to data on water quality and invertebrate biodiversity for 478 sites in the area, collected over the same period by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection.

The EPA's current acceptable measure of minerals in the water, its ionic content, is up to 500 microsiemens per centimeter (µS cm−1). The UOM "siemen" represents overall conductivity. The higher the ionic content (dissolved minerals, or sometimes not so dissolved) the higher the measure.

The data reveal a very obvious exception (emphasis mine):

Mining had occurred at 208 of those sites, where the average water conductivity was 650 µS cm−1. In the most intensively mined areas, where 92% of the watershed had been mined at some point, conductivity levels rose to 1,100 µS cm−1. Bernhardt says that even in areas where just 2.5% of the watershed had been mined, some 30% of streams still had conductivity levels greater than the EPA's recommendation. The team also noted "sharp declines" in some stream invertebrates in areas where as little as 1% of the watershed had been mined.

Compare those numbers, and even the acceptable EPA limit to those recorded from streams in developed areas, which had an average conductivity of 228 µS cm−1. Without mining or development, the average was 105 µS cm−1.

The National Mining Association is obviously not happy with the results of the study, claiming that, "Conductivity should not be used as an exclusive tool for isolating impacts from mining activity from the many other sources or factors that may impact water quality."

To illustrate the extent of these mines visually, take a look at the growth of the Hobet Mine in WV over 25 years, from 1984 to 2009:

Hobet 1984

1984

Hobet 2009

2009

As you can see, the mine crept west, and as the operation expanded, they implemented reclamation procedures on the area already stripped (light green cover). Restoring the ecology is not as simple as planting a few species of grass and trees and calling it a day however. This area will not recover for a very long time. The soil column is homogenized, the water polluted and the alpha diversity completely shot. This doesn't even consider any public health consequences or the impact on the area's economy.

When I was in college we spent an entire day in the field measuring the conductivity and invertebrate compositions of streams in the middle Appalachian mountains, beginning with a highly polluted stream running through an old coal mining shaft at the top of the system, running through a small town and finally, down into an undeveloped region of a local state park. The ionic content of the initial stream was so high that much of it had fallen out, so to speak, and the rocks almost glowed orange and red. Obviously, the stream was more or less dead.

I spent a lot of time in these areas, saw the worst of it, but I never had to live with it long term. The strip mines can be seen everywhere in the area from the highways. Ambitious wind farmers are starting to build on these areas, making the claim that it's a productive use of the land. It's a conflicted, complicated area that rarely makes headlines because of how quiet, how far away it seems. There are very few large cities in the midst of the energy development, the coal and wind industry in particular, and perhaps that lack of urbanity shifts the focus away. Perhaps it's just the nature of how we as a society deal with most environmental issues; wait until it's the worst it can be and then act.

There are a lot of people working to provide support in Appalachia, however. Sometime this week I'll have a post up about a suite of solutions proposed for the area, a sustainable framework built upon a solid foundation of proper ecological and resource management.

Share

One response so far

Communicating environmental realities: framing and fiction

Aug 03 2010 Published by under [Biology&Environment], [Science in Society]

ResearchBlogging.orgI finally found the time yesterday evening to read through a few of the papers from the latest Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, which is focused on science/environmental communication this time around. The majority of the articles are driven by Nisbet's ideas about framing in general, but I don't really want to dive back into that mire of rhetoric, at least on a broadside.

I'll start out by saying that I do agree to some extent that the idea of stewardship is a good one in that it has been adopted by folks with very different worldviews. I think overall Wilson's The Creation took a good step of putting aside some of the more tedious ideological blockers between materialism and spiritualism in regard to feeling a connection to nature in any affectionate sense compelling enough to engender stewardship. Since it was published (and I'm sure before then) much work has been done to piece together a much more diverse, welcoming environmental movement.

Continue Reading »

Share

2 responses so far

The next incarnation

Aug 02 2010 Published by under [Et Al], [Science in Society]

Hello and welcome! Thrilled to be a part of Scientopia. It's been a hell of a lot of work for the folks working behind the scenes to get us set up here, especially Mark, who has done an outstanding job with the architecture of the site. I haven't played with WordPress in some time, so it'll be a nice switch from Blogger. The fact that the Android WP app is so awesome that I'm disappointed that I didn't switch before.

Below the fold, what this site is about and some musings on ecology, art and rhetorically, where we go from here.

Continue Reading »

Share

No responses yet

A hobbit's contemporaries: Biogeography and insular evolution on Flores

Jul 15 2010 Published by under [Biology&Environment]


ResearchBlogging.org
Painters create networks. The subject of the piece, even if it’s a simple splotch of color, garners the most attention, but without a descriptive background or other kinds of supporting elements to contextualize the portion of the painting where the artist wants you to look, the intended focus is lost. The subject loses a certain clarity of interpretation in the absence of those elements.

Continue Reading »

Share

No responses yet

Southeast Asia in the Pleistocene, from grassland to rain forest

Jun 09 2010 Published by under [Biology&Environment]

ResearchBlogging.orgI’ve been trying to keep up with the Gulf situation, so most of my reading of late has been dominated by those details, and the unread numbers in my RSS folders were a little intimidating, but I finally found some time to read some of the papers I’ve earmarked in the past month or so.

This study from the Journal of Biogeography attempts a new method to assemble the paleoecology and paleoenvironment of Southeast Asia in the late Pleistocene and runs a lengthy comparison against the results of previous studies, corroborating the evidences. The interest in reconstructing these environments is largely generated from more recent discoveries of hominins that lived there in the Pleistocene. Data regarding hominin-mammal interactions is important and can be used to determine evolutionary nuances. If the environments in which these hominins lived can be interpreted, it can give us more details about how they lived, how they continued to disperse and even give scientists better clues as to where remains and artifacts can be found.

Continue Reading »

Share

No responses yet

Older posts »

Bad Behavior has blocked 374 access attempts in the last 7 days.