Ecology: The Biology of Interactions. 3.14. (supplement) Flora, Fauna, and Consortia

Ukrainian language (latest version) / Russian language (no longer updated) 3.13. Ecological Pyramids

D. Shabanov, M. Kravchenko. Ecology: The Biology of Interactions Chapter 3. Biogeocoenology and Community Ecology

D. Shabanov, M. Kravchenko. Ecology: Biology of Interactions Section 3. Biogeocenology and Ecology of Communities

3.15. (supplement) Ecosystem Efficiency and Energy Subsidies

3.14. (supplement) Flora, Fauna, and Consortia When describing the living world of specific territories, the concepts “flora,” “fauna,” and a number of related terms are often used. Flora is the totality of plant species associated with a particular geographic area. The composition of flora is determined both by current conditions and by geological history. Vegetation is the totality of all plant communities in a given territory. Plant world is the totality of all plant organisms. The species set of fungi is often included in flora, but at the current stage it is better to speak of mycobiota. When discussing animal diversity, the concept corresponding to “flora” is “fauna” (reflecting the qualitative aspect), corresponding to plant world is animal world, and corresponding to vegetation is animal population/community (the quantitative aspect). Flora, vegetation, fauna, and animal population can be characterized by taxonomic, chorological, biomorphological, ecological, and coenotic structures. For any species or taxon, one can identify a range: the part of Earth’s surface where all stages of its life cycle occur. Primary (autochthonous) and secondary ranges are distinguished, as well as current and potential ranges. By configuration, ranges may be continuous, disjunct, fragmented, or patchy. By use during the life cycle, reproductive, trophic, wintering, and summering ranges are distinguished. By dynamics, ranges may be expanding, contracting, or pulsating. Animal and plant populations are closely connected. In post-Soviet ecology, substantial importance is often given to consortia, functional-structural units of a biogeocoenosis (community). The concept was proposed independently in 1951 by V. N. Beklemishev and in 1952 by L. G. Ramensky. Ramensky: consortia are “combinations of heterogeneous organisms closely linked in their life activity by a certain community of fate” (L. I. Nomokonov, 1989). Beklemishev introduced the term “consortium,” considering it as a set of organisms associated with one individual of an edificator species. V. V. Mazing proposed distinguishing concenters within a consortium. Organisms of the first concenter are directly connected with the edificator, those of the second indirectly through members of the first, and so on. The most characteristic links are between the edificator and members of the first concenter; for forest-forming tree species, the number of first-concenter species can be around 1,000. Further development of consortium theory led to distinguishing consortia developing on living versus nonliving organisms, and on autotrophs versus heterotrophs. Consortia centered on autotrophs can be considered complete-membered, while the others are incomplete-membered. Usually, population consortia (sets of linked populations) are considered, but individual consortia can also be considered. N. V. Dylis: “From a biogeocoenotic perspective, consortia are functional structures of biota that, in their totality, reflect the diversity of pathways of movement and transformation of matter and energy from primary producers of a biogeocoenosis to all consumers and destructors participating in it” (L. I. Nomokonov, 1989). 3.13. Ecological Pyramids

D. Shabanov, M. Kravchenko. Ecology: The Biology of Interactions Chapter 3. Biogeocoenology and Community Ecology

D. Shabanov, M. Kravchenko. Ecology: Biology of Interactions Section 3. Biogeocenology and Ecology of Communities

3.15. (supplement) Consortium Theory