The spatiotemporal profile and adaptation determine the joint effects and interactions of multiple stressors

Abstract

Abstract Background Biodiversity is declining worldwide as ecosystems are increasingly threatened by multiple stressors associated with anthropogenic global change. Stressors frequently co-occur across scales spatially and temporally, resulting in joint effects that are additive or non-additive, i.e., antagonism or synergism. Forecasting and counteracting threats from intensifying stressors requires improved mechanistic understanding of joint effects, which is currently relatively low. To date, research on multiple stressors has been biased toward simplified scenarios, emphasized classification of interactions over realized joint effects, and mostly ignored adaptation (i.e., phenotypic plasticity or evolving life-history traits) of organisms. To investigate if more a realistic scenarios design incorporating complex spatiotemporal stressor profiles and adaption change joint effects and interactions of multiple stressors compared to simplified scenarios, we modified a spatially explicit meta-population model for a generic freshwater insect. We used the model to simulate different, hypothetical spatiotemporal profiles of a continuous and a discrete stressor and evaluated their joint effects and interactions. Agricultural land use represented the continuous stressor impacting meta-population patch quality and network connectivity and related scenarios implied different trajectories. Climatic events represented the discrete stressor impacting all patches simultaneously by temporary mortality events, with related scenarios implying different event severity. Adaptation mitigated the effects of climatic events based on previous events. Results Excluding adaptation, we found that at higher levels of the discrete stressor (i.e., strong and frequent climatic events) it strongly dominates the joint effects, while at a low level (i.e., weak and infrequent climatic events) of the discrete stressor, the continuous stressor (i.e., land use) dominates. Yet, the continuous stressor always defined the interaction type, with decreasing land use stress leading to antagonism, and increasing land use stress leading to synergism. Adaptation reduced joint effects under decreasing land use stress, yet had little compensatory influence under increasing land use stress. Moreover, adaptation changed interaction sizes inconsistently across the different land use and climate scenarios, with change depending on the climate scenario. Here, interactions decreased in the moderate scenario but increased in the severe and intense scenarios. Conclusions We highlight that realistic stressor scenarios accounting for potential adaptation are critical for a mechanistic understanding of how species respond to global change. To our knowledge, this is the first modeling study to show that stressor interactions depend on complex spatiotemporal stressor profiles and adaptation, following general principles.