Journal of Ecosystem & Ecography
Open Access

Environment; Anthropocene; Climate; Biodiversity

Introduction

All sorts of species on the globe are being profoundly impacted by these anthropogenic changes, and the variety of all species is dwindling at a rate 1,000 times faster than it did before humans arrived. Such biodiversity losses might be beneficial. The fact that global livestock biomass has increased to more than ten times that of all wild mammals and birds put together may serve as an effective illustration of such biodiversity reductions. Macroscopic plants and animals, both in water and on land, have received practically all of the attention from scientific academics and the general public so far in their efforts to understand how diversity is declining. Even though these species, along with plants, make up the majority of the living biomass on Earth, little is known about how anthropogenic influences on their variety and those animals that live concealed in soils. In spite of the fact that the precise mechanisms are frequently unknown, soil biodiversity is essential for delivering essential ecosystem services. As a result, a decline in soil biodiversity is linked to a concurrent decline in a number of soil functions. A growing body of knowledge exists regarding the makeup and purposes of soil biota, thanks in large part to the development of new techniques like high-throughput sequencing. Is there anything important that we’re overlooking as we deepen our grasp of soil biodiversity? The short answer is yes: soil is home to a diverse range of species that participate actively in the global carbon cycle and other biochemical nutrient cycling processes, as well as other ecosystem services. Thus, processes that affect global warming, such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions, directly engage soil biota [1]. However, several harmful plant and animal pests are also present in the soil biota. The physiological activity of the soil biota may change as a result of human influences on the environment, either directly or indirectly. This will increase the soil biota’s contributions to warming, pest outbreaks, and other soil-borne ecosystem services. Major and almost limitless opportunities are provided by soil biodiversity, which also serves as a source of novel antibiotics, a biocontrol agent, a biofertilizer, and a number of other ecosystem services. We need to learn a lot more about the intricate ecosystems of the soil if we are to make effective use of this vast biotic reserve and minimise the harmful anthropogenic changes that threaten belowground biodiversity. We contend that in order to keep an ecosystem functioning and to improve ecosystem health, understanding, maintaining, and utilising soil biodiversity will be major tasks. The majority of biotic carbon on Earth is bound in plants, with soil biota making up the second-largest pool [2]. Equals to 92 gigatons when subsoils are taken into account. Since a single gramme of soil supports millions of microbes and dozens of tiny invertebrate animals, including bacteria, fungi, and their protist predators, as well as a wide range of animals that range in size from tens of micrometres in the case of nematodes to metres in the case of earthworms or mammals, such as foxes and badgers that spend part of their lives underground, this enormous reservoir of biotic carbon bound up in the soil Even an Armil laria fungus, the largest living thing on earth, is entirely soil borne; its area is equivalent to more than 1,000 football fields (including both American and soccer fields) [3].

The functional soil community includes significant decomposers that are important for the cycling of nutrients and carbon. Plant performance can be directly influenced by pathogens, parasites, and mutualisms in the soil, which can then alter the performance of aboveground biota. Although our knowledge of soil biodiversity is growing, the taxonomic diversity of the soil biota is still unknown, and most soil organisms, especially microorganisms like viruses, bacteria, fungus, and protists, lack ecological knowledge at high taxonomic resolution, such as at the species level. Despite the functional significance of soil biodiversity for key ecosystem services and soil activities, such as the provision of clean water for human use and the prevention of Disease-causing soil organisms are not frequently considered in analyses of declining soil quality or biodiversity, nor are they included in models of the Earth’s systems. We can better comprehend the significance of soil biodiversity on a global scale by taking into account and incorporating it into large-scale analysis and models. Physical and chemical characteristics of the soil as well as interactions with other soil and above-ground biota, such as plants, shape the biodiversity of the soil. On local, regional, and global scales, soil type, pH, carbon and nutrient levels, and soil moisture are the primary determinants of soil biodiversity. However, plants also influence soil biodiversity, frequently in a species-specific manner, and interactions between soil organisms such as trophic, competitive, facilitative, and other types can affect soil structure. Because of its close reliance on the local abiotic and biotic environment, soil biota is particularly vulnerable to anthropogenic alterations. These changes are related to the rapid expansion of the human population and the sealing of a growing quantity of land for the construction of cities and other infrastructure. For example, the European Union alone seals every year an area of open soil with a surface area equal to that of Berlin. Land is also being taken for agriculture in order to generate food, feed, and bioenergy as well as mining operations that provide us with electricity. One billion hectares of land might be used for agricultural management just for food production. In addition, agricultural methods are being improved in order to support the expanding human population [4].

Agriculture that is intensified largely relies on irrigation, the operation of large machinery, and the increased use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides. These actions alter the environment, which instantly alters the physical and chemical properties of the soil. These changes, along with modifications to plant biodiversity, have an impact on and frequently decrease soil biodiversity. As a result, soil ploughing and other agricultural practises kill earthworms and disturb mycorrhizal fungi, resulting in microbial communities that are increasingly dominated by bacteria. The use of pesticides like neonicotinoids and herbicides like glyphosate, which can persist in soil for years and have an influence on non-target organisms, may all have an impact on soil biodiversity. Land use intensification of agricultural soil (Figure 1) [5].

Figure 1: Neonicotinoids in above-ground insects.

Since neonicotinoids are thought to be the cause of the decline in above-ground insects, it is clear that they frequently have unintended side effects. They can also harm soil invertebrates like earthworms and insects. Pollution from mining sites and smelters, as well as run-off pollution from agricultural operations, can kill microbial taxa and alter the community composition of soil. Other human-caused effects on soil biodiversity are linked to unforeseen environmental modifications brought on by continuing global climate change. The effects of climate change on soil biodiversity include an increase in extreme weather events like drought and strong rains as well as longer-term impacts like rising CO2 levels and temperatures. Most groups of soil life are negatively impacted by prolonged drought, less protists and larger soil creatures are present, and their diversity has decreased. Events of heavy rain are happening more frequently. However, the related waterlogging and increased soil erosion serve to limit soil biodiversity. Although these occurrences can improve the number and diversity of soil biota through rising moisture levels. By increasing plant productivity, increased atmospheric CO2 levels can improve microbial biomass. However, they may also lower the intricacy of food chains, for example by reducing the abundance of bigger, omnivorous, and predatory nematodes. Warming alters the variety of the soil, for instance by favouring fungi over bacteria, which changes the make-up of higher trophic-level consumers. Increased emissions of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide, which alter vegetation and soil chemistry, result in acid rain, another unintended anthropogenic effect that reduces soil biodiversity [6].

We cannot accurately determine how much soil biodiversity has already been lost during the Anthropocene because the majority of it has not yet been identified. Anthropogenic effects on and decreases in soil biodiversity will vary across regional and temporal scales and within groups of organisms, just like in better understood aboveground systems. Earthworm invasions in the United States, which have decreased the diversity of soil microarthropods, are one example of how human-induced invasions can increase soil biodiversity in the short term because not all species occur everywhere, but they can also reduce the biodiversity of native species over the long term. These alterations may also have an impact above ground alterations, for example, by lowering plant variety. Invasive earthworms, however because they can also boost local biodiversity, invading earthworms may not always have a negative impact on biodiversity as a whole. Nevertheless, there is mounting evidence that the Anthropocene is seeing a decline in soil biodiversity. The variety of strictly speciesspecific plant host-associated organisms will probably decline as a result of invasions that irreversibly limit plant diversity, particularly on a global scale. Numerous plant species will die along with their host plant species when there is growing evidence that plant species host their own species-specific microbiomes. To determine the extent of the decreases in soil biodiversity, more research is required. In order to effectively combat possible biodiversity reductions, the potential impact of restoration initiatives on soil biodiversity should be evaluated [7].

Despite the fact that there were numerous potential cities in the area, we concentrated our research on the four primary case studies of Singapore, Jakarta, Hong Kong (PR China), and Naha for which full temporal and geographic coral survey data were available. Shorter summaries of the urban coral reefs in Pattaya Thailand, Nha Trang Vietnam, Davao City southern Mindanao, Philippines, Kota Kinabalu northwest Sabah, Malaysia, and Bandar Seri Begawan are included with these four in-depth case studies. In the end, the patterns described in this analysis serve as the foundation for further hypothesis testing and field experimentation that mechanistically elucidates the key factors influencing the structure and function of urban coral reef ecosystems. Such improvements in our understanding of urban reef ecosystems are essential since the rising urbanisation of nearshore habitats in coastal locations is a serious concern. The majority of Singapore’s coral cover is confined to a 3 to 6 meter-deep zone between the reef crest and upper reef slope. This depth restriction is brought on by the canopyforming macroalgae sargassum predominating in the upper reef flats (0-2 m) for the majority of the year (Low, 2015) and the significant light attenuation that occurs as depth increases (> 6 m). high sediment deposition and suspended particles over time. Leptoseris and Oxypora, two genera of coral that are typically found in deeper zones, can be found in Singapore at rather shallow depths. At the same time, the region’s characteristic shallow-water species, such Acropora, are not numerous. The most prevalent hard corals belong to a number of taxa that can tolerate silt, including Montipora, Pectinia, and Porites. High sediment loads and light restrictions in Singapore waters can affect calice form, slow growth rates, and restrict other aspects of coral condition even for taxa that are tolerant to sediment. The total reef area in Singapore has significantly decreased during the past century. Hilton and Manning calculated the entire area of intertidal reefs in Singapore fell from 32.2 km2 in 1922 to 30.5 km2 in 1953 using historical maps. Allater’s investigation revealed additional reductions to 17 km2 in 1993 and 9.5 km2 in 2011. Large portions of the subtidal reef have been covered by sediments and man-made structures as a result of dredging and land reclamation, resulting in extensive losses in the subtidal reef zone [8].

Discussion

In this research, we consolidate the information that is currently accessible on the urban coral reefs in East and Southeast Asia in an effort to uncover commonalities and traits among urban coral reefs. We concentrate on consequences from urbanisation particularly and explore for patterns across numerous cities, despite the fact that many previous assessments have presented anthropogenic variables that negatively impact corals and coral reefs generally. Despite resource depletion and Although resource use and extraction historically had significant effects on coral reefs close to cities, they have diminished in recent years and are therefore only discussed to the level required to explain past and present trajectories of urbanised reefs. Urban waterways, urban watersheds, or locations with obvious urban gradients in one or more of the abiotic variables particularly relevant for hard corals, as major reef builders, are all considered to be urban coral reefs by this definition. This definition includes recently or currently forming coral reefs as well as coral-dominated habitats close to the latitudinal limits of reef-building corals; evidence of carbonate deposition is not a requirement under this definition. Additionally, even though we use the separation between metropolitan areas as our concept of urban coral reefs purposely omits more precise spatial measurements since the footprint or coastline extent of urbanisation is anticipated to vary significantly between coastal cities and between stressors brought on by urban growth. We concentrate on East and Southeast Asia due to the vast number of coastal towns there that are overlapping with historically coral-dominated reef systems and are rising quickly [9].

Conclusion

Only a portion of the 255 hard coral species that have historically been recorded in Singapore have been discovered in recent. For instance, recorded 161 species in 2006-2007, which is comparable to surveys conducted in more isolated areas of the surrounding area. The genera Bryopsis and Sargassum are macroalgal competitors of coral, but cover on the reef crest is typically modest, at only 20 percent, though this varies greatly between sites and in response to other factors. The Indonesian island of Java’s northwest coast is where Jakarta is located. One of the biggest cities on earth, it. The greater metropolitan area’s population estimates range from 10 million to 30 million, depending on the limits chosen. Jakarta Bay, a 500 km2 open embayment that is a portion of the partially confined Java Sea, borders the city to the north. The Ciliwung, Cisadane, and Citarum are three significant rivers that provide freshwater inside or around the bay. Sewage plumes that reach tens of kilometres into the surrounding coastal areas are a persistent problem, as are sewage discharge, runoff, and contamination from heavy metals, organic, and inorganic contaminants. Even though current estimates of the overall amount of reclaimed land are low, coastal building and land reclamation have an impact on water quality and area were lacking, as determined by our review. Additional future plans to reclaim more than half of Jakarta Bay, adjacent to either the 5m or 10m isobaths, would support upscale housing, tourism, shipping, and economic growth while reducing coastal flooding and land subsidence. However, they would have a negative impact on fishermen and those from the lowest socioeconomic strata. In the past, Jakarta and the surrounding areas were home to vast and diversified coral reefs that were crucial for local subsistence and small-scale fisheries. Reconstruction of historical data indicates that Jakarta Bay may have been home to diverse coral assemblages as recently as 1920, including more than 70 acro-porids, more than 30 faviids (now classed as merulinids), more than 20 poritids, and numerous other hard coral families. Other benthic and demersal creatures abundant in Jakarta Bay include 11 species of macroalgae, 36 benthic forams, 171 species of molluscs, a variety of sponges and other invertebrates, and numerous fish species of high commercial value [10].

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgement

None

1. Asefa A, Girma M, Tolera S, Yosef M (2019) Local and Landscape-Level Effects of Land Use Change on Bird Diversity in Abiata-Shalla Lakes National Park, Ethiopia. Afr J Ecol 57: 51-58.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

2. Ayenew (2002) Recent Changes in the Level of Lake Abiyata, Central Main Ethiopian Rift. Hydrol Sci J 47: 493-503.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

3. Balliett JF (2011) Wetlands: Environmental Issues, Global Perspectives. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 6: 951-952.

Google Scholar  

4. Bekele F, Estifanos S (2018) Challenges to National Park Conservation and Management in Ethiopia J Agric Sci 10: 52-62..

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

5. Bhatta LD, Sunita CH, Anju P, Himlal B, Partha JD, et al. (2016) Ecosystem Service Changes and Livelihood Impacts in the Maguri-Motapung Wetlands of Assam, India. Land 5: 15.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

6. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007) Climate Change: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, New York.

Google Scholar

7. Dechasa F, Feyera S, Dawit D (2019) Determinants of Household Wetland Resources Use and Management Behavior in the Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia. Environ Sustain 2: 355-368.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

8. Deka S, Om PT, Ashish P (2019) Perception-Based Assessment of Ecosystem Services of Ghagra Pahar Forest of Assam, Northeast India. Geol Ecol Landsc 3: 197-209.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

9. Elias E, Weldemariam S, Bereket T, Wondwosen G (2019) Impact of Land Use/Cover Changes on Lake Ecosystem of Ethiopia Central Rift Valley. Cogent Food Agric 5.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

10. McKay NP, Overpeck JT, Otto-Bliesner BL (2011) The Role of Ocean Thermal Expansion in Last Interglacial Sea Level Rise. Geophysical Research Letters. American Geophysical Union (AGU) 38:14.

Google Scholar, Cross ref