Earthworm distribution in global soils: Earthworms are key components of soil ecological communities, performing vital functions in decomposition and nutrient cycling through ecosystems. Using data from more than 7000 sites, Phillips et al. developed global maps of the distribution of earthworm diversity, abundance, and biomass (see the Perspective by Fierer). The patterns differ from those typically found in aboveground taxa; there are peaks of diversity and abundance in the mid-latitude regions and peaks of biomass in the tropics. Climate variables strongly influence these patterns, and changes are likely to have cascading effects on other soil organisms and wider ecosystem functions. Science , this issue p. 480 ; see also p. 425

Social-ecological system theory draws upon concepts established within the discipline of ecology, and applies them to a more holistic view of a human-in-nature system. We incorporated the keystone concept into social-ecological system theory, and used the quantum co-evolution unit (QCU) to quantify biocultural elements as either keystone components or redundant components of social-ecological systems. This is done by identifying specific elements of biocultural diversity, and then determining dominance within biocultural functional groups. The “Hawaiian social-ecological system” was selected as the model of study to test this concept because it has been recognized as a model of human biocomplexity and social-ecological systems. Based on both quantified and qualified assessments, the conclusions of this research support the notion that taro cultivation is a keystone component of the Hawaiian social-ecological system. It further indicates that sweet potato cultivation was a successional social-ecological keystone in regions too arid to sustain large-scale taro cultivation, and thus facilitated the existence of an “alternative regime state” in the same social-ecological system. Such conclusions suggest that these biocultural practices should be a focal point of biocultural restoration efforts in the 21st century, many of which aim to restore cultural landscapes.

Winter, K. B., N. K. Lincoln, F. Berkes, R. A. Alegado, N. Kurashima, K. L. Frank, P. Pascua, Y. M. Rii, F. Reppun, I. S. S. Knapp, W. C. McClatchey, T. Ticktin, C. Smith, E. C. Franklin, K. Oleson, M. R. Price, M. A. McManus, M. J. Donahue, K. S. Rodgers, B. W. Bowen, C. E. Nelson, B. Thomas, J.-A. Leong, E. M. P. Madin, M. A. J. Rivera, K. A. Falinski, L. L. Bremer, J. L. Deenik, S. M. Gon III, B. Neilson, R. Okano, A. Olegario, B. Nyberg, A. H. Kawelo, K. Kotubetey, J. K. Kukea-Shultz, and R. J. Toonen. 2020. Ecomimicry in Indigenous resource management: optimizing ecosystem services to achieve resource abundance, with examples from Hawaiʻi. Ecology and Society 25(2):26. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-11539-250226

Indigenous crops, tremendously valuable both for food security and cultural survival, are experiencing a resurgence in Hawaiʻi. These crops have been historically valued by agricultural researchers as genetic resources for breeding, while cultural knowledge, names, stories and practices persisted outside of formal educational and governmental institutions. In recent years, and following conflicts ignited over university research on and patenting of kalo (Hāloa, Colocasia esculenta), a wave of restoration activities around indigenous crop diversity, cultivation, and use has occurred through largely grassroots efforts. We situate four crops in Hawaiian cosmologies, review and compare the loss and recovery of names and cultivars, and describe present efforts to restore traditional crop biodiversity focusing on kalo, ʻuala (Ipomoea batatas), kō (Saccharum officinarum), and ʻawa (Piper methysticum). The cases together and particularly the challenges of kalo and ‘awa suggest that explicitly recognizing the sacred role such plants hold in indigenous worldviews, centering the crops’ biocultural significance, provides a foundation for better collaboration across multiple communities and institutions who work with these species. Furthermore, a research agenda that pursues a decolonizing approach and draws from more participatory methods can provide a path forward towards mutually beneficial exchange among research, indigenous, and farmer communities. We outline individual and institutional responsibilities relevant to work with indigenous crops and communities and offer this as a step towards reconciliation, understanding, and reciprocity that can ultimately work to create abundance through the restoration of ancestral crop cultivar diversity.