5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The overkill model and its impact on environmental research

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Research on human‐environment interactions that informs ecological practices and guides conservation and restoration has become increasingly interdisciplinary over the last few decades. Fueled in part by the debate over defining a start date for the Anthropocene, historical disciplines like archeology, paleontology, geology, and history are playing an important role in understanding long‐term anthropogenic impacts on the planet. Pleistocene overkill, the notion that humans overhunted megafauna near the end of the Pleistocene in the Americas, Australia, and beyond, is used as prime example of the impact that humans can have on the planet. However, the importance of the overkill model for explaining human–environment interactions and anthropogenic impacts appears to differ across disciplines. There is still considerable debate, particularly within archeology, about the extent to which people may have been the cause of these extinctions. To evaluate how different disciplines interpret and use the overkill model, we conducted a citation analysis of selected works of the main proponent of the overkill model, Paul Martin. We examined the ideas and arguments for which Martin's overkill publications were cited and how they differed between archeologists and ecologists. Archeologists cite overkill as one in a combination of causal mechanisms for the extinctions. In contrast, ecologists are more likely to accept that humans caused the extinctions. Aspects of the overkill argument are also treated as established ecological processes. For some ecologists, overkill provides an analog for modern‐day human impacts and supports the argument that humans have “always” been somewhat selfish overconsumers. The Pleistocene rewilding and de‐extinction movements are built upon these perspectives. The use of overkill in ecological publications suggests that despite increasing interdisciplinarity, communication with disciplines outside of ecology is not always reciprocal or even.

          Related collections

          Most cited references87

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Assessing the causes of late Pleistocene extinctions on the continents.

          One of the great debates about extinction is whether humans or climatic change caused the demise of the Pleistocene megafauna. Evidence from paleontology, climatology, archaeology, and ecology now supports the idea that humans contributed to extinction on some continents, but human hunting was not solely responsible for the pattern of extinction everywhere. Instead, evidence suggests that the intersection of human impacts with pronounced climatic change drove the precise timing and geography of extinction in the Northern Hemisphere. The story from the Southern Hemisphere is still unfolding. New evidence from Australia supports the view that humans helped cause extinctions there, but the correlation with climate is weak or contested. Firmer chronologies, more realistic ecological models, and regional paleoecological insights still are needed to understand details of the worldwide extinction pattern and the population dynamics of the species involved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            Late Quaternary Extinctions: State of the Debate

            Between fifty and ten thousand years ago, most large mammals became extinct everywhere except Africa. Slow-breeding animals also were hard hit, regardless of size. This unusual extinction of large and slow-breeding animals provides some of the strongest support for a human contribution to their extinction and is consistent with various human hunting models, but it is difficult to explain by models relying solely on environmental change. It is an oversimplification, however, to say that a wave of hunting-induced extinctions swept continents immediately after first human contact. Results from recent studies suggest that humans precipitated extinction in many parts of the globe through combined direct (hunting) and perhaps indirect (competition, habitat alteration) impacts, but that the timing and geography of extinction might have been different and the worldwide magnitude less, had not climatic change coincided with human impacts in many places.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Naiveté and an aquatic-terrestrial dichotomy in the effects of introduced predators.

              There is much evidence that suggests that freshwater systems are more sensitive to introduced predators than are terrestrial or marine systems. We argue here that this dichotomy reflects widespread naiveté toward introduced predators among freshwater prey. Continental terrestrial animals are seldom naive toward novel predators owing to the homogenizing effects of historical biotic interchanges. Comparable biotic interchanges might have also precluded prey naiveté in most marine systems. By contrast, freshwater systems exhibit persistent large- and small-scale heterogeneity in predation regimes. This heterogeneity promotes naiveté at multiple spatial scales in freshwater prey, thereby producing a systemic vulnerability to introduced predators that is not seen in continental terrestrial or marine systems.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                lisa.nagaoka@unt.edu
                Journal
                Ecol Evol
                Ecol Evol
                10.1002/(ISSN)2045-7758
                ECE3
                Ecology and Evolution
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                2045-7758
                05 September 2018
                October 2018
                : 8
                : 19 ( doiID: 10.1002/ece3.2018.8.issue-19 )
                : 9683-9696
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Geography and the Environment University of North Texas Denton Texas
                [ 2 ] Department of Anthropology Smithsonian Institution National Museum of Natural History Washington District of Columbia
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Lisa Nagaoka, Department of Geography and the Environment, University of North Texas, Denton, Texas.

                Email: lisa.nagaoka@ 123456unt.edu

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9562-8842
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8254-5885
                Article
                ECE34393
                10.1002/ece3.4393
                6202698
                d3952697-9da8-4498-842d-aa988d55c3bb
                © 2018 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 04 December 2017
                : 10 May 2018
                : 20 June 2018
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 4, Pages: 14, Words: 11940
                Categories
                Original Research
                Original Research
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                ece34393
                October 2018
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:version=5.5.1 mode:remove_FC converted:26.10.2018

                Evolutionary Biology
                citation analysis,communication,conservation,human impacts,interdisciplinarity,megafauna extinctions,pleistocene overkill

                Comments

                Comment on this article