What is System Ecology

Systems ecology is not a hypermathematical, abstract study for specialists only. It does not require precise, well-quantified observations any more than any other scientific pursuit. In fact, systems ecology does quite well with qualitative data alone. One of the aims of systems ecology is to incorporate in a logical structure, as much of a scientist´s intuition and ´feel´ for an ecosystem as possible. Systems ecology is an attempt to merge the mathematical rigor and predictive power of general systems theory, and its associated tools from operations research and engineering, with the knowledge base of natural history and ecology.

General systems theory is a science that studies the abstract properties of systems. It attempts to find the commonality in things as diverse as atomic particles, ecosystems, and political parties. The basic ideas were proposed in the 1940´s and 50´s by Ashby (1961), von Bertalanffy (1969), and others. They felt that the same techniques of interdisciplinary teamwork and mathematical analysis that had worked so well during World War II to produce weapons of destruction, could help solve problems of health, starvation and social unrest as well (Miser 1980). Their idea was that whenever objects interact, they must do so in certain well-defined ways. Study of new systems of objects should involve a determining which pattern of interaction the new system uses. It was hoped that patterns of interaction would be fairly limited so that they could be cataloged and studied as such. Except in certain narrowly defined fields (for example, queuing theory), this has not come to pass, although attempts have been made to produce such catalogs (Miller 1978). General Systems Theory, while not yet succeeding in its ultimate goal, does offer a great deal to ecologists and natural resource managers:

  • a structured world-view;
  • a structured approach to problem solving;
  • a theory of conceivable system behaviors; and
  • a set of powerful techniques for analyzing system behaviors.

Ecology is only a little older than General Systems Theory, starting at the end of the nineteenth century. Tansley (1935) introduced the term ´ecosystem,´ but the concept is much older. Möbius (1877) wrote about an oyster reef as a ´biocoenosis,´ and Forbes (1887) wrote about a lake as a ´microcosm.´ Ecology is the science of the interactions between organisms and their environment (Odum 1971, Miller 1979).

Despite over half a century of trying, it has not developed much beyond the stage of description. Many of the ´principles´ laid down by Odum and others in the early fifties are now being questioned. The strength of ecology still comes from its roots in Natural History, which goes back much further than 100 years. Ecology offers:

  • a wealth of descriptive natural history data,
  • extremely complex interactions,
  • a conceptual framework (ecosystem – community – population – individual).

The synthesis of these two sciences is called systems ecology. A systems ecologist is interested in interactions, and in whole system behavior. Mathematics often is involved, but the approach and attitude are more important than the tools. Science, including ecology, has tended to concentrate on small well-defined problems. Reductionism has been the rule. But General Systems Theory and systems ecology attempt to study systems as such, for example, organisms within their environment. Systems ecology involves:

  • constructing conceptual models of ecosystems;
  • statistical manipulation of data;
  • building dynamic models of ecosystems;
  • computer simulation;
  • applying systems analysis techniques to ecosystem models;
  • using all of the above to formulate new hypotheses and tests for hypotheses in the field.

1.1 Sects in Systems Ecology

A large number of approaches have already developed within ´systems ecology.´ Unfortunately, these various schools or sects are often on unfriendly terms, or at best seldom communicate with one another. The development of these sects was probably inevitable due to the diverse backgrounds of the scientists in the field, and due to the lack of firm laws in ecology. However, it should become apparent that all of these approaches have good points, and one should not scorn any of them. Ecosystems are too diverse, and ecologists are too small in number and too ignorant for any one group to have videos pornos gratis all the truth.

1.1.1 Population-evolution approach

This sect uses Lotka-Volterra equations applied to communities. Important concepts include K- and r-selection, island biogeography, and competition or predation as organizing features of biological communities. Key practitioners include Robert MacArthur, Richard Levins, G. Evelyn Hutchinson, Eric Pianka, etc. (Cody and Diamond 1975, Hutchinson 1978). Most likely to be published in American Naturalist.

1.1.2 Theoretical/Biomathematical Approach

This group uses simple equations to get mathematically tractable results and intuitive insights. Often optimization or optimal control is involved. Practitioners include John Maynard-Smith and Robert May. Mathematical Biosciences and American Naturalist are typical journals.

1.1.3 Big Biology – Simulation Approach

Make big, complicated differential (or difference) equation models of big, complicated systems. The model forms the focal point of a large interdisciplinary team of researchers. The International Biological Program (IBP) spawned a number of these efforts, some of which are continuing today. Practitioners include Scott Overton, George VanDyne, George Innis and the Oak Ridge group.

1.1.4 Statistical-Manipulation-of-Data Approach

Take big data sets, such as those generated by the IBP, and apply factor analysis, principal components analysis, multivariate regression, etc. to gain insight into ecosystems, or to answer specific questions. Practitioners include K. E. F. Watt, and T. F. H. Allen.

1.1.5 Systems Dynamics Approach

Based on modeling work of Forrester and Meadows of MIT. This group produced the first world model (Meadows et al. 1972), developed the DYNAMO computer simulation language, and a unique method of diagramming conceptual models (Forrester diagrams). They publish books through the Wright-Allen Press (Forrester 1961, 1969, 1971), and publish in engineering journals primarily. Key practitioners in the ecology arena are Dennis Meadows (now at Dartmouth), and ? Fey (at Georgia Tech).

1.1.6 Linear Modeling and Systems Analysis

Attempt to use the mathematical power of linear systems theory and systems analysis techniques to model the major processes of ecosystems. Major practitioners include B. C. Patten, the Oak Ridge group, Patten´s students (including me), and R. Mulholland. Publish in Ecological Modelling.

1.1.7 Energy Flow Analysis

This is a group of ecologists who believe that energy is the common currency of all systems. By analyzing energy flow in both natural and man-made systems, they hope to discern much of the behavior of these systems (Odum 1983). H. T. Odum and his students are the principal members of this group.

1.1.8 Management Modelers

This is a diverse group of people who use whatever technique they can to solve a problem presented to them in management of wildlife populations, parks, conservation preserves, etc. The driving principles here are to produce results that will improve management decisions. Practicioners include Mangel, Clark, Starfield, Bleloch, and others.

1.2 What is a Model?

Models come in many different forms, many of which we do not usually think of as models. Language itself is a model, allowing us to associate abstract concepts with labels (words), a set of rules for stringing words together (grammar), and allowing us to build models of reality. Some languages lack the tools necessary to express certain realities that we might want to express. Some languages allow complex expression of the status quo, but do not provide for dynamics. Because of the range of models, it is difficult to come up with a definition that fits them all. However, the following definition will suffice: A model is a simplification of reality that retains enough aspects of the original system to make it useful to the modeler.Models may take many forms.

Featured Project: Know-Your-Watershed in Canada

Based on the initial success of the RésEau initiative, an opportunity for a moderate amount of additional funding was offered by Government On-Line, the project’s sponsor. The new work will broaden the scope of the initiative in a number of key areas and provide a more complete coverage of water issues to be demonstrated under RésEau. The priorities identified were:

Improved National Access to Credible and Comparable Water Quality Data A more complete national picture of federal water quality will be developed to complement the regional work initiated by Environment Canada’s Atlantic and Pacific and Yukon Regions.
“One Window” View to Water Quality and Quantity Monitoring Networks Several new advanced tools will provide direct access to data and enhanced functionality allowing a nationally consistent view of water quality and quantity information.
National Aquatic Biodiversity Information System A new biodiversity component will provide access to aquatic biodiversity data and information, a key indicator of water quality.
Groundwater Quality Information System Two key priority groundwater quality issues – arsenic and perchlorate contamination – will be added to RésEau to complement the existing groundwater quantity work.

Imagine you are a parent volunteer with a Grade 6 class in your hometown of Bancroft, Ontario.

The teacher introduces a new environmental studies project. Students will create a wall mural of their local watershed and also collect photographs, interviews and some water samples. Before beginning, each class member is asked to sketch a ‘mental map’ of their local watershed from memory.

Wait a minute! You may be an adult, but you have no idea how to sketch that map, no idea which watershed you live in or how large an area it drains. Where is the source of your town’s drinking water? Do local agricultural or industrial practices threaten the water quality? Will the water supply meet the demand from area farms, households and businesses in the foreseeable future? How about adjoining watersheds? Which upstream activities may pollute your drinking water? If you are motivated to get involved, which organization(s) can you contact?

You are not alone. Despite an increasing appreciation of water issues amongst members of the public and the media, most of us lack basic knowledge about our local watershed. As politicians/planners and the public gain a new appreciation for the value of integrated land-use planning within watersheds, citizens will demand more information, and demand that it be reliable and relevant.

Until recently, many watershed-related databases and porno mexicano maps were not readily accessible to the public. Thanks to a partnership between Natural Resources Canada (digital watershed maps, place names database) and Environment Canada (systems development, watershed profile), a RésEau project entitled Know-Your-Watershed is about to change all that.

Imagine again if you could enter the name of your town (ex. Bancroft) on a website which would return a series of maps showing the extent of your local watershed as well as the ocean basin you inhabit. Imagine if you could do this for any town in Canada, and that the information was current, relevant and free-of-charge.

Locating your watershed is just the beginning of a growing ‘watershed profile’ which initially includes upstream/downstream basins, water heights, water quality, and names of local environmental groups involved in water-related activities. We have partners who have suggested new map layers (ex. water diversions, dams, resource-dependent communities, water use, snowfall), new services (postal code lookup, upstream/downstream tracing), new profiles (real-time water levels, water quality information, water quality in remote Aboriginal communities, updated census populations, indicators of agricultural and socio-economic effects on watersheds, pollution sources) and more.

Actually, that Grade 6 story might come true. This year, the Canadian Wildlife Federation has selected ‘Watersheds’ as their theme for Wildlife Week and Oceans’ Day (Spring 2006) and will highlight the RésEau Know-Your-Watershed site in a teachers’ kit mailed to all Canadian schools. Expect the initial release of Know-Your-Watershed via the RésEau site in January 2006.

(One final word of advice: Make sure you find the Know-Your-Watershed site before that Grade 6 class. Otherwise, it could be embarrassing.)

Importance of Rouge Park

Rouge Park is recognized as the largest urban park in North America and was officially opened on April 5, 1995.

The park’s area contains over 10,000 acres and includes portions of six different municipalities, mostly in the Greater Toronto Area.

The World Wildlife Fund has designated a major portion of the lower Rouge Valley as one of the 36 most important Carolinian life zones in all of Canada. The Carolinian life zone is the most endangered wildlife habitat in Canada.

With an extraordinary blend of Carolinian and Great Lakes forest habitats, Rouge Park is the largest urban vegetated ravine and marsh complex of its size and the last significant wildlife area remaining in the Greater Toronto Area.

The Rouge River valley which encompasses Rouge Park is considered to be exceptional for several reasons including:

The park represents more than 220 species of birds (including provincial rare, threatened or endangered); 28 species of mammals (11 regionally rare); and one quarter of Ontario’s flora, including over 700 plant species and flora… more than in all three of the largest provincial parks in Ontario; the Rouge River corridor is large and averages one mile in width from one side of the valley to the other; the area contains a remarkable diversity of natural and cultural heritage features and is especially important because of its close proximity to and inside Toronto; and
it is the last opportunity for ecological conservation of this size remaining in the Greater Toronto Area.

“We are expecting parks to do much more than sit there and be green. We expect parks to tell us something about our history, to teach us something about ecology, and to give us some kind of meaning in a world that may have less meaning then we’d like it to have.” George Kapelos, Toronto Designer and Curator

In addition to its natural features, the Rouge Valley and surrounding tableland area also contains dozens of native archaeological sites (some of which date back to 3,000 B.C.) and sacred burial grounds.

ROUGE RIVER – WATERSHED

The Rouge River plus its tributaries of Little Rouge Creek, Berczy Creek, Bruce Creek and Morningside Creek drains 327 sq.km. of the Rouge Watershed.
It does not exist in isolation but is connected to the slopes, soils, streams and to human uses of the watershed.

The Rouge River watershed covers an area approximately 330 square kilometres. The watershed stretches approximately 28.2 kilometres from Lake Ontario to the Oak Ridges moraine to the north.

The Watershed encompasses parts of the Greater Toronto area (Scarborough and Pickering), and the Towns of Markham, Richmond Hill, Whitchurch-Stouffville.

The Rouge Watershed an ecosystem of much more than water, it contains nutrients upon which all forms of life are dependent. If the forests of the Rouge Valley are the lungs of Rouge Park, then the river is its heart.

The spring-fed headwaters rise in the Oak Ridges Moraine and flow rapidly down the Moraine’s shoulders. Many small streams come together on relatively flat lands in Markham to form slower moving tributaries. By the time the main branches of the Rouge and Little Rouge reach Toronto, they have already formed large well-defined valleys.

“The Rouge River has many tributaries, the principal ones being the Little Rouge and Beaver Creeks… The Rouge River rises about one mile north-west of Gormley C.N.R. Station, at an elevation of 985 above mean sea level and flows in a general south-easterly direction for a distance of 27 miles to Lake Ontario… the total fall is 739.1 feet or an average fall of 27.4 feet to the mile which is a heavy gradient.” Rouge Duffin Highland Petticoat Conservation Report, 1956, Department of Planning and Development

Visible from Twyn Rivers Dr. and Sheppard Ave. are the natural erosion processes have exposed geological features that are provincially significant as well as distinctive bluffs that are as high as 131 feet (40 m).

In the last couple of miles (few kilometres), the Rouge River before it reaches Lake Ontario, widens into the Rouge Marsh – the largest provincially significant area in Toronto housing exceptional wildlife populations.

“The Rouge Watershed lies between that of Highland Creek on the west and Duffin and Petticoat Creeks on the east. It is a fan-shaped area funneling into Lake Ontario at Rosebank Station. The northerly part varies from 8 to 12 miles in width and the southerly part converges from a width of 6 miles at Steeles Avenue to about one mile at the lake. Its overall depth from the lake is about 19 miles and the area is 129.69 square miles…” Rouge Duffin Highland Petticoat Conservation Report, 1956 Department of Planning and Development

How the movement to preserve Rouge Valley began

The movement to preserve the Rouge Valley began almost by accident, not by recognition of its important natural features but because of one of the biggest natural disasters ever recorded in the history of the Toronto area.

The disastrous flooding which occurred as a result of Hurricane Hazel (October, 1954) destroyed or caused the removal of more than 125 houses and buildings along the Rouge, ruined two miles of roads, and caused over 20 realignments of sections of the river.

Shortly after, The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority was formed in part to implement the recommendations of one of the biggest conservation studies ever published toward preserving the Rouge Valley and preventing loss of life and property damage. It was called the R.D.H.P. (Rouge Duffins Highland Petticoat) Conservation Report and published in 1956 by the Toronto Department of Planning.

The formation of Rouge Park began in 1967 with the creation of the 157-acre Lower Rouge Conservation Area. It was the first of the 13 conservation areas owned by The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to provide beach frontage on Lake Ontario.

In 1972, the federal government began acquisition of 30 square miles (7800 hectares) of north Pickering countryside for a new airport. Two years later, the provincial goverment followed suit with the acquisition of another 30 square miles (7800 hectares), including a major section of the Little Rouge River.

Plans to create Rouge Park were first announced in March, 1990 when an advisory committee responsible for drafting a park management plan was set up to ensure protection of the ecological integrity of the Rouge Valley Park, originally between Lake Ontario and Steeles Ave.

In 1992, the Committee recommended a Strategy extending its northern boundary from Steeles Ave. to include publicly owned lands in the Rouge and Petticoat Creek watersheds and tablelands along the top of the valleys.

In May, 1994, the Province approved a Management Plan for the area which set out objectives, strategies and established protected areas.

In geology, a fault is a dislocation, fracture, crack or break
in the crust of the earth as a result of unequal stresses.

Rouge Park felt its first major tremors in 1999.

The tremors were NOT caused by the geological fault line through the middle of Rouge Valley; but by the FAULT LINE around it.

As Ontario’s economic boom and tidal waves of economic development crash against its boundaries, the biggest “urban” park in North America is slowly but surely being transformed into an isolated island, amdist the consuming sea of urbanity.

In miniature, an Island of development on conservation lands has already been carved in sinewy detail near the mouth of the Rouge River by The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) directly responsible for creating the “fault line”.

With TRCA’s default on longstanding Plans resulting in the loss of important conservation lands, Rouge Park is in the process of having its foot cut off – the only ecological corridor south of Hwy. 401 as shown in the Aerial Photograph of the South Rouge Park Area.

An important lesson was served here for the Park to show how the long-term stewardship of conservation lands can and does collide with the short-term economic needs of the Conservation Authority, especially on adjacent Rouge Park area tablelands.

Soon, Rouge Park is about to have another even more important body part in its headwaters (Oak Ridges Moraine) chopped off – THE HEAD!

The entire headwaters of Rouge River in Richmond Hill which empties into Lake Ontario, (Oak Ridges Moraine) now lies in developers’ hands. Along with the Developers and Ontario Municipal Board, TRCA will help hold the axe here too.

As a living breathing ecosystem, the Rouge Park is being dismembered at both ends. Increased anthropogenic degradation cannot possibly sustain it.

“Do we as humans have to have a future where we destroy everything?…
I think we as a species can do better than that.” Dr. Jay Malcolm, Ecologist, University of Toronto, Faculty of Forestry, The Globe and Mail, August 31, 2000

The North Rouge Park area has a potential worth of BILLIONS of dollars to Developers. At the same time, it will probably become a huge land grab for TRCA as a direct result of its numerous development approvals, based on its “deals” with Developers.

With the park boundary and buffer “skin” used as the bargaining ploy, Rouge Park most likely will become the biggest “park pawn” in Canadian History.

The water quality of the Rouge is dependent on the headwater area of the watershed located on the edge of the Oak Ridges Moraine where sand, silt and gravel acts as a sponge from the environment in which it is found. Over the years groundwater finds its way to the Rouge River and then drains to Lake Ontario where it will provide water for millions of users.

Insufficient research has been done on groundwater contamination. Many major contributors to water pollution are unregulated. Runoff and waste from residential developments enters the underground water supplies or flows directly into the Rouge River. Development changes water quality and quantity and accelerates the amount of water, salt and other pollutants to the river.

“The quantity and quality of groundwater resources in the Rouge basin is increasingly being impacted by urban development and related activities. Of particular concern is the degradation of groundwater quality and the disruption of recharge areas in the hydrogeologically significant Oak Ridges moraine. The quality of moraine recharge waters is threatened by numerous contaminant sources including urban runoff…” Earth Science Survey of the Rouge Valley Park, N. Eyles & J.I. Boyce, Dept. of Geology, University of Toronto, December 1991

As the headwater lands are developed, it is not difficult to predict the long term outlook on the health of the Rouge River and Lake Ontario into which it pours. Both are already polluted.

During a storm from the river’s mouth, the river’s brown flow is clearly visible far out into Lake Ontario.

“The eastward transport of sediments at the mouth of the Rouge is the result of drift divergence node… the process is evident on some aerial photos which show an eastward plume of sediment debauching from the river mouth”. Earth Science Survey of the Rouge Valley Park, N. Eyles & J.I. Boyce, Dept. of Geology, University of Toronto, December 1991

The Toronto waterfront is one of the “hot spots” around the Great Lakes, identified by the International Joint Commission as needing remedial action because of water quality problems. Bottom sediments are contaminated, organisms living in them show bioaccumulation of toxic substances, some fish have such high levels of contaminants they cannot be eaten by humans, aquatic life is already stressed from pollution. Public beaches are regularly closed during the summer.

The trend should not be to incrementally and increasingly subjugate the watershed environment but to treat the water within the Rouge River as an economic good.

Instead of enforcing Rouge Park values with adequate predetermined buffer zones, wildlife corridors and protected hot spots; the park’s boundary and biological heritage will become governed by tradeoffs and special concessions between the bureaucrats and developers.

These development agreements may save some valley and tableland, but will inevitably result in the irrevocable loss of even more land. The current policy will be irreparable in the long run, environmentally and economically, without a predetermined park boundary and clearly defined park buffer areas.

THE PUBLIC SHOULD HAVE REAL CONCERNS
ABOUT THE ROUGE PARK
PATTERN OF PROGRESSIVE DECLINE

The legislation which would have protected Rouge Park into perpetuity has NEVER passed, even though Rouge Park was “set aside” for a park in 1995. Rouge Park is not a federal park, it is not a provincial park, nor is it even a city park! It is a “partnership” park without legislated protection.
The lifeblood of Rouge Park, namely the Rouge River, is also not protected from the development onslaught encroaching on the ecological integrity of the valley. Increasing flooding and pollution problems for the Rouge River has very serious implications on its future health. Unlike the Humber River which has been protected and designated as a “heritage river” with built-in monitoring checks, Rouge River has no protection.
The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) is the primary owner of Rouge Park lands, but it is a owner with a tarnished track record as primary landowner, key land use planning agency and watershed authority.
TRCA sold important conservation lands in the only corridor of South Rouge Park. It has negotiated special trade-offs with developers incl. artificially moving top of bank lines to faciitate increased development; its has approved development in flood plains, it has approved the altering of Rouge River, it has voted for the minimal buffer setbacks for the park of only 10 m.(instead of the 30m recommended in the Rouge Park Management Plan); and it has recommended by way of a “secret deal” the narrowing of the Oak Ridges Moraine corridor to only 100 metres at the same time the Province was recommending six times the width.
As the key delivery mechanism of environmental protection in Rouge Park, TRCA is NOT accountable for its actions under the Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR).

The surrounding Municipalities of Rouge Park are also not accountable under the EBR for their actions.

The implications on the future of Rouge Park are clear.

Biodiversity Program

A shared goal
As the Canadian pulp and paper industry moves toward achieving sustainable forest management, it recognizes that maintaining biodiversity is an essential part of that process. While biodiversity is a relatively new field of study, Canadian forest companies have, over the past several years, undertaken a wide range of projects to better understand the ecology of species and apply their findings in management plans. CPPA’s Biodiversity Program was created to serve as a central liaison point for building awareness and for sharing the initiatives being taken to maintain the richness of our forests and waters.
Through its network of participating companies, CPPA’s Biodiversity Program enables our members to share their experience and expertise as they integrate biodiversity conservation into their sustainable forest management strategy. At the same time, the program serves as a primary communications link to a growing network of partners equally working to achieve this crucial environmental goal. The Program is also instrumental in coordinating the forest industry’s participation in local, national and international biodiversity initiatives.

Partnership
The Canadian pulp and paper industry is joining forces with a network of partners committed to the responsible stewardship of forest lands, sharing information and contributing to common projects. For example, CPPA with Wildlife Habitat Canada are developing a Forest Stewardship Recognition Award program aimed at stimulating biodiversity conservation initiatives by all forest users.
CPPA’s Biodiversity Program acts as industry liaison with groups such as the Canadian Forestry Association for their Loggers for Wildlife workshops. In partnership with the Canadian Forest Service and the Biodiversity Convention Office, CPPA’s Biodiversity Program has led a project to determine the national status and trends of twenty keystone forest species. The program is also a member of Partners in Flight.

Communication
In addition to keeping its member companies informed and connected, CPPA’s Biodiversity Program seeks to raise awareness and interest with the public. We invite our visitors to browse through our Internet database where we have compiled the key information on our member companies’ biodiversity initiatives. If there is some additional information you would like, please feel free to contact us through our online form.
For our member companies and our partners, CPPA’s Biodiversity Program offers a range of communication opportunities, including seminars, workshops and dedicated publications to keep up to date on news and developments. The Biodiversity Challenge provides a concise overview of forest biodiversity issues in Canada, and The Bioforester, is a biennial newsletter on recent events. Both are available to the public.

As the biodiversity network grows, CPPA’s Biodiversity Program will continue to provide timely information and work to expand the industry’s contribution.

Moving Forward Together
Through CPPA’s Biodiversity Program, the industry coordinates its participation at the regional, national and international level. In Canada, it was involved in the development of the Canadian Biodiversity Strategy and contributes to the Canadian Biodiversity Forum. It also coordinates the industry’s response to regulatory initiatives such as the Canadian Endangered Species Act and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. Internationally, the industry actively participated in the elaboration of Canada’s position for the negotiation of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
CPPA’s Biodiversity Program is closely following meetings of the Conferences of the Parties and of its Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice as well of those of the Inter-governmental Forum on Forests. Under the auspices of CPPA’s Biodiversity Program, the industry of videos porno is currently preparing its response to the Convention on Biological Diversity.

What is biodiversity?

Bio – what? Australia’s kookaburras, koalas, gum trees, platypuses and kangaroos make our island continent very special, but this is just the tip of the iceberg. Australia is home to over one million different plant and animal porno, and hundreds of different ecosystems.

This variety of nature is known as biological diversity or biodiversity. Biodiversity is a lot more than just the number of different plant and animal species.

BioDIVERSITY is the:

Variety of Life. This refers to the diversity of life from genes, the genetic building blocks of life, to Blue Whales, the largest animal that has ever lived, to large ecosystems, such as the Great Barrier Reef.

While many people think about this variety in terms of the number of species, it also includes the genes that make up the species, and the ecosystems they form. These three levels: species diversity, genetic diversity and ecosystem diversity, are explained below.

Web of Life. This refers to the connections that bind all living things. Many species depend on each other for their survival. For example, many plants rely on insects to pollinate them, while many animals (such as the koala) feed only on a few special plants.

THE THREE LEVELS OF BioDIVERSITY

Species diversity

Species diversity is the variety of plant and animal species in a given region. It is the most common way people think about biodiversity.

Scientists estimate that Australia has over 1 million different species. These range from tiny algae to humpback whales, from zoo plankton to towering eucalyptus trees. Our scientists have very limited knowledge about the species that live here; about 850,000 of them have yet to be classified.

Our knowledge about the number of species that live on Earth is even more vague. Estimates range from 5 to 30 million or more, though one well accepted estimate is 13.6 million. Scientists have only classified about 1.7 million species so far.

Genetic diversity

Genetic diversity is the variety of genes within species. Individual genes are the most basic unit of biodiversity. Made up of DNA sequences on chromosomes, genes encode information templates for specific body functions and characteristics. The different shape, features and colours among dogs, or the different hair and eye colour in humans are examples of genetic diversity. Genetic diversity also produces easily seen differences in many native Australian species, such as the White cheeked Rosella, which have yellow head plumage in north Queensland, red head plumage in southern Australia, and black head plumage in Northern Territory.

The total number of different genes distributed among Australian species is unknown but thought to be in the millions. The total number harboured by all species on Earth is estimated to be 10 trillion (109). The number of genes contained by different groups of species varies a great deal. Bacteria have about 1000 genes, some fungi about 10,000, and a typical mammal around 100,000. The group of species that have the greatest number of genes are not primates (which include humans), but flowering plants whose species often have over 400,000 genes.

Ecosystem diversity

Ecosystem diversity relates to the variety between and within ecosystems types. Australia has a broad range of ecosystem types ranging from the Snowy Mountain grassy meadows and Wet Tropic rainforests, to the sea grass beds found in many of our porno.

The number of different ecosystems in Australia is thought to be in the hundreds.

Sources

National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity definition of biodiversity:

“The variety of life forms: the different plants, animals and microorganisms, the genes they contain, and the ecosystems they form. It is usually considered at three levels: genetic diversity, species diversity and ecosystem diversity.”