Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- Ecology (2)
- Community ecology (1)
- Ecological networks (1)
- Ecosystem ecology (1)
- Nature conservation (1)
- Psychology (1)
- Social sciences (1)
- attitudes (1)
- emotions (1)
- human‐wildlife interactions (1)
Institute
- Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft (3) (remove)
Species’ functional traits set the blueprint for pair-wise interactions in ecological networks. Yet, it is unknown to what extent the functional diversity of plant and animal communities controls network assembly along environmental gradients in real-world ecosystems. Here we address this question with a unique dataset of mutualistic bird–fruit, bird–flower and insect–flower interaction networks and associated functional traits of 200 plant and 282 animal species sampled along broad climate and land-use gradients on Mt. Kilimanjaro. We show that plant functional diversity is mainly limited by precipitation, while animal functional diversity is primarily limited by temperature. Furthermore, shifts in plant and animal functional diversity along the elevational gradient control the niche breadth and partitioning of the respective other trophic level. These findings reveal that climatic constraints on the functional diversity of either plants or animals determine the relative importance of bottom-up and top-down control in plant–animal interaction networks.
Large carnivores often impact human livelihoods and well‐being. Previous research has mostly focused on the negative impacts of large carnivores on human well‐being but has rarely considered the positive aspects of living with large carnivores. In particular, we know very little on people's direct experiences with large carnivores like personal encounters and on people's awareness and tolerance toward their exposure to large carnivores. Here, we focus on the wolf (Canis lupus), and report on a phone survey in Germany. We examined whether encounters with wolves were positive or negative experiences and quantified people's awareness and tolerance related to their exposure to wolves. We found that the majority of people reported positive experiences when encountering wolves, regardless of whether wolves were encountered in the wild within Germany, in the wild abroad, or in captivity. The frequency of encounters did not affect the probability to report positive, neutral, or negative experiences. Moreover, people in Germany expressed a high tolerance of living in close vicinity to wolves. These findings are novel and important because they highlight the positive aspects of living in proximity with large carnivores in human‐dominated landscapes.
Attitude polarization describes an increasing attitude difference between groups and is increasingly recognized as a multidimensional phenomenon. However, a unified framework to study polarization across multiple dimensions is lacking. We introduce the attitudinal space framework (ASF) to fully quantify attitudinal diversity. We highlight two key measures—attitudinal extremization and attitudinal dispersion—to quantify across- and within-group attitudinal patterns. First, we show that affective polarization in the US electorate is weaker than previously thought based on mean differences alone: in both Democrat and Republican partisans, attitudinal dispersion increased between 1988 and 2008. Second, we examined attitudes toward wolves in Germany. Despite attitude differences between regions with and without wolves, we did not find differences in attitudinal extremization or dispersion, suggesting only weak attitude polarization. These results illustrate how the ASF is applicable to a wide range of social systems and offers an important avenue to understanding societal transformations.