Next-Generation Individual-Based Models Integrate Biodiversity and Ecosystems: Yes We Can, and Yes We Must

Ecosystem and community ecology have evolved along different pathways, with little overlap. However, to meet societal demands for predicting changes in ecosystem services, the functional and structural view dominating these two branches of ecology, respectively, must be integrated. Biodiversity–ecosystem function research has addressed this integration for two decades, but full integration that makes predictions relevant to practical problems is still lacking. We argue that full integration requires going, in both branches, deeper by taking into account individual organisms and the evolutionary and physico-chemical principles that drive their behavior. Individual-based models are a major tool for this integration. They have matured by using individual-level mechanism to replace the demographic thinking which dominates classical theoretical ecology. Existing individual-based ecosystem models already have proven useful both for theory and application. Still, next-generation individual-based models will increasingly use standardized and re-usable submodels to represent behaviors and mechanisms such as growth, uptake of nutrients, foraging, and home range behavior. The strategy of pattern-oriented modeling then helps make such ecosystem models structurally realistic by developing theory for individual behaviors just detailed enough to reproduce and explain patterns observed at the system level. Next-generation ecosystem scientists should include the individual-based approach in their toolkit and focus on addressing real systems because theory development and solving applied problems go hand-in-hand in individual-based ecology.

[1]  Steven F Railsback,et al.  Trait-mediated trophic interactions: is foraging theory keeping up? , 2013, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[2]  Steven F. Railsback,et al.  ANALYSIS OF HABITAT‐SELECTION RULES USING ANINDIVIDUAL‐BASED MODEL , 2002 .

[3]  G. Daily,et al.  Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity , 2012, Nature.

[4]  Maureen A. O’Malley,et al.  Do simple models lead to generality in ecology? , 2013, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[5]  R. Sibly,et al.  Representing the acquisition and use of energy by individuals in agent‐based models of animal populations , 2013 .

[6]  T. Hunter,et al.  A new computational system, DOVE (Digital Organisms in a Virtual Ecosystem), to study phenotypic plasticity and its effects in food webs , 2007 .

[7]  R. Naiman,et al.  Selective Foraging and Ecosystem Processes in Boreal Forests , 1992, The American Naturalist.

[8]  T. Spies,et al.  An Individual-Based Process Model to Simulate Landscape-Scale Forest Ecosystem Dynamics , 2012 .

[9]  Matthew J. Smith,et al.  Emergent Global Patterns of Ecosystem Structure and Function from a Mechanistic General Ecosystem Model , 2014, PLoS biology.

[10]  J. Platt Strong Inference , 2007 .

[11]  Y. Shin,et al.  Exploring fish community dynamics through size dependent trophic interactions using a spatialized individual based model , 2001 .

[12]  V. Grimm,et al.  Simulating cryptic movements of a mangrove crab: Recovery phenomena after small scale fishery , 2007 .

[13]  Uta Berger,et al.  Pattern-Oriented Modeling of Agent-Based Complex Systems: Lessons from Ecology , 2005, Science.

[14]  Volker Grimm,et al.  Dynamic Energy Budget theory meets individual‐based modelling: a generic and accessible implementation , 2012 .

[15]  Andreas Huth,et al.  The effects of tree species grouping in tropical rainforest modelling: Simulations with the individual-based model Formind , 1998 .

[16]  Benjamin Smith,et al.  Implications of incorporating N cycling and N limitations on primary production in an individual-based dynamic vegetation model , 2013 .

[17]  R. Nisbet,et al.  Predicting Population Dynamics from the Properties of Individuals: A Cross-Level Test of Dynamic Energy Budget Theory , 2013, The American Naturalist.

[18]  H. Muller‐Landau,et al.  The Effects of Density, Spatial Pattern, and Competitive Symmetry on Size Variation in Simulated Plant Populations , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[19]  Florian Jeltsch,et al.  Reversed effects of grazing on plant diversity: the role of below- ground competition and size symmetry , 2009 .

[20]  D. DeAngelis,et al.  Individual-based models in ecology after four decades , 2014, F1000prime reports.

[21]  Tatsuya Amano,et al.  DECISION-MAKING IN GROUP FORAGERS WITH INCOMPLETE INFORMATION: TEST OF INDIVIDUAL-BASED MODEL IN GEESE , 2006 .

[22]  Richard M. Sibly,et al.  Predicting how many animals will be where: How to build, calibrate and evaluate individual-based models , 2016 .

[23]  J. R. Wallis,et al.  Some ecological consequences of a computer model of forest growth , 1972 .

[24]  Karin Frank,et al.  Pattern-oriented modelling in population ecology , 1996 .

[25]  Steven F. Railsback,et al.  Individual-based modeling and ecology , 2005 .

[26]  Brendan A. Wintle,et al.  Integrating modelling of biodiversity composition and ecosystem function , 2016 .

[27]  Uta Berger,et al.  Making Predictions in a Changing World: The Benefits of Individual-Based Ecology , 2014, Bioscience.

[28]  M. Petrere,et al.  Exploring community assembly through an individual-based model for trophic interactions , 2009 .

[29]  Owen L. Petchey,et al.  Predictive systems ecology , 2013, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[30]  Mark A. White,et al.  SPATIAL PATTERNS IN THE MOOSE–FOREST–SOIL ECOSYSTEM ON ISLE ROYALE, MICHIGAN, USA , 1998 .

[31]  Steven F Railsback,et al.  Pattern-oriented modelling: a ‘multi-scope’ for predictive systems ecology , 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[32]  D. DeAngelis,et al.  New Computer Models Unify Ecological TheoryComputer simulations show that many ecological patterns can be explained by interactions among individual organisms , 1988 .

[33]  C. Holmberg,et al.  Making Predictions , 2013 .

[34]  Geir Huse,et al.  End-To-End Models for the Analysis of Marine Ecosystems: Challenges, Issues, and Next Steps , 2010 .

[35]  Uta Berger,et al.  Differences between symmetric and asymmetric facilitation matter: exploring the interplay between modes of positive and negative plant interactions , 2012 .

[36]  H. Shugart A Theory of Forest Dynamics , 1984 .

[37]  P. James Spatial patterns , 2018, Oxford Scholarship Online.

[38]  Simon Scheiter,et al.  Next-generation dynamic global vegetation models: learning from community ecology. , 2013, The New phytologist.

[39]  Y. Shin,et al.  An end-to-end coupled model ROMS-N2P2Z2D2-OSMOSE of the southern Benguela foodweb: parameterisation, calibration and pattern-oriented validation , 2014 .

[40]  Volker Grimm,et al.  Using pattern-oriented modeling for revealing hidden information: a key for reconciling ecological theory and application , 2003 .

[41]  R. Stillman,et al.  Individual‐based ecology of coastal birds , 2010, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[42]  Volker Grimm Systems: Lessons from Ecology Pattern-Oriented Modeling of Agent-Based Complex , 2008 .

[43]  V. Grimm Ten years of individual-based modelling in ecology: what have we learned and what could we learn in the future? , 1999 .

[44]  M. Loreau Linking biodiversity and ecosystems: towards a unifying ecological theory , 2010, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[45]  Andreas Richter,et al.  Microbial community dynamics alleviate stoichiometric constraints during litter decay , 2014, Ecology letters.

[46]  Andreas Huth,et al.  Lessons learned from applying a forest gap model to understand ecosystem and carbon dynamics of complex tropical forests , 2016 .

[47]  Steven F. Railsback,et al.  InSTREAM-Gen: Modelling eco-evolutionary dynamics of trout populations under anthropogenic environmental change , 2016 .

[48]  H. Bugmann A Review of Forest Gap Models , 2001 .

[49]  Steven F Railsback,et al.  Effects of land use on bird populations and pest control services on coffee farms , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[50]  D. DeAngelis,et al.  Trait contributions to fish community assembly emerge from trophic interactions in an individual-based model , 2013 .

[51]  J. Landsberg A theory of forest dynamics, the ecological implications of forest succession models: by H.H. Shugart 1984, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 278 pp., DM 98- (Cloth). ISBN: 3-540-96000-7 , 1987 .

[52]  J. Platt Strong Inference: Certain systematic methods of scientific thinking may produce much more rapid progress than others. , 1964, Science.

[53]  Lael Parrott,et al.  A generic, individual-based approach to modelling higher trophic levels in simulation of terrestrial ecosystems , 2002 .

[54]  Jean-Marc Fromentin,et al.  Ecosystem oceanography for global change in fisheries. , 2008, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[55]  Leocadio G. Casado,et al.  Eco-Evolutionary Spatial Dynamics: Rapid Evolution and Isolation Explain Food Web Persistence , 2014 .

[56]  Uta Berger,et al.  Structural realism, emergence, and predictions in next-generation ecological modelling: Synthesis from a special issue , 2016 .

[57]  D. Tilman THE ECOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF CHANGES IN BIODIVERSITY: A SEARCH FOR GENERAL PRINCIPLES101 , 1999 .

[58]  Steven F. Railsback,et al.  Pattern-oriented modeling of bird foraging and pest control in coffee farms , 2011 .

[59]  Bas Kooijman,et al.  Dynamic Energy Budget Theory for Metabolic Organisation , 2005 .

[60]  H. Shugart A Theory of Forest Dynamics , 1984 .

[61]  G. Booth Gecko: A continuous 2d world for ecological modeling , 1997 .