Global biodiversity is declining at rates faster than at any other point in human history. Experimental manipulations at small spatial scales have demonstrated that communities with fewer species consistently produce less biomass than higher diversity communities. Understanding the consequences of the global extinction crisis for ecosystem functioning requires understanding how local experimental results are likely to change with increasing spatial and temporal scales and from experiments to naturally assembled systems. Scaling across time and space in a changing world requires baseline predictions. Here, we provide a graphical null model for area scaling of biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships using observed macroecological patterns: the species–area curve and the biomass–area curve. We use species–area and biomass–area curves to predict how species richness–biomass relationships are likely to change with increasing sampling extent. We then validate these predictions with data from two naturally assembled ecosystems: a Minnesota savanna and a Panamanian tropical dry forest. Our graphical null model predicts that biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships are scale‐dependent. However, we note two important caveats. First, our results indicate an apparent contradiction between predictions based on measurements in biodiversity–ecosystem functioning experiments and from scaling theory. When ecosystem functioning is measured as per unit area (e.g. biomass per m2), as is common in biodiversity–ecosystem functioning experiments, the slope of the biodiversity ecosystem functioning relationship should decrease with increasing scale. Alternatively, when ecosystem functioning is not measured per unit area (e.g. summed total biomass), as is common in scaling studies, the slope of the biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationship should increase with increasing spatial scale. Second, the underlying macroecological patterns of biodiversity experiments are predictably different from some naturally assembled systems. These differences between the underlying patterns of experiments and naturally assembled systems may enable us to better understand when patterns from biodiversity–ecosystem functioning experiments will be valid in naturally assembled systems.
Scaling up biodiversity–ecosystem function relationships across space and over time
Understanding how to scale up effects of biological diversity on ecosystem functioning and services remains challenging. There is a general consensus that biodiversity loss alters ecosystem processes underpinning the goods and services upon which humanity depends. Yet, most of that consensus stems from experiments performed at small spatial-scales for short time-frames, which limits transferability of conclusions to longer-term, landscape-scale conservation policies and management. Here we develop quantitative scaling relationships linking 374 experiments that tested plant diversity effects on biomass production across a range of scales. We show that biodiversity effects increase by factors of 1.68 and 1.10 for each 10-fold increase in experiment temporal and spatial scales, respectively. Contrary to prior studies, our analyses suggest that the time scale of experiments, rather than their spatial scale, is the primary source of variation in biodiversity effects. But consistent with earlier research, our analyses reveal that complementarity effects, rather than selection effects, drive the positive space-time interactions for plant diversity effects. Importantly, we also demonstrate complex space-time interactions and nonlinear responses that emphasize how simple extrapolations from small-scale experiments are likely to underestimate biodiversity effects in real-world ecosystems. Quantitative scaling relationships from this research are a crucial step towards bridging controlled experiments that identify biological mechanisms across a range of scales. Predictions from scaling relationships like these could then be compared with observations for fine-tuning the relationships and ultimately improving their capacities to predict consequences of biodiversity loss for ecosystem functioning and services over longer time-frames across real-world landscapes.
more »
« less
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10198402
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Ecology
- ISSN:
- 0012-9658
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract Synthesis . This paper provides a simple graphical null model that can be extended to any relationship between biodiversity and any ecosystem functioning across space or time. Furthermore, these predictions provide crucial insights into how and when we may be able to extend results from small‐scale biodiversity experiments to naturally assembled regional and global ecosystems where biodiversity is changing. -
Numerous biodiversity–ecosystem functioning (BEF) experiments have shown that plant community productivity typically increases with species diversity. In these studies, diversity is generally quantified using metrics of taxonomic, phylogenetic, or functional differences among community members. Research has also shown that the relationships between species diversity and functioning depends on the spatial scale considered, primarily because larger areas may contain different ecosystem types and span gradients in environmental conditions, which result in a turnover of the species set present locally. A fact that has received little attention, however, is that ecological systems are hierarchically structured, from genes to individuals to communities to entire landscapes, and that additional biological variation occurs at levels of organization above and below those typically considered in BEF research. Here, we present cases of diversity effects at different hierarchical levels of organization and compare these to the species‐diversity effects traditionally studied. We argue that when this evidence is combined across levels, a general framework emerges that allows the transfer of insights and concepts between traditionally disparate disciplines. Such a framework presents an important step towards a better understanding of the functional importance of diversity in complex, real‐world systems.more » « less
-
A large body of research shows that biodiversity loss can reduce ecosystem functioning. However, much of the evidence for this relationship is drawn from biodiversity–ecosystem functioning experiments in which biodiversity loss is simulated by randomly assembling communities of varying species diversity, and ecosystem functions are measured. This random assembly has led some ecologists to question the relevance of biodiversity experiments to real-world ecosystems, where community assembly or disassembly may be non-random and influenced by external drivers, such as climate, soil conditions or land use. Here, we compare data from real-world grassland plant communities with data from two of the largest and longest-running grassland biodiversity experiments (the Jena Experiment in Germany and BioDIV in the United States) in terms of their taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversity and functional-trait composition. We found that plant communities of biodiversity experiments cover almost all of the multivariate variation of the real-world communities, while also containing community types that are not currently observed in the real world. Moreover, they have greater variance in their compositional features than their real-world counterparts. We then re-analysed a subset of experimental data that included only ecologically realistic communities (that is, those comparable to real-world communities). For 10 out of 12 biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships, biodiversity effects did not differ significantly between the full dataset of biodiversity experiments and the ecologically realistic subset of experimental communities. Although we do not provide direct evidence for strong or consistent biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships in real-world communities, our results demonstrate that the results of biodiversity experiments are largely insensitive to the exclusion of unrealistic communities and that the conclusions drawn from biodiversity experiments are generally robust.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract A rich body of knowledge links biodiversity to ecosystem functioning (BEF), but it is primarily focused on small scales. We review the current theory and identify six expectations for scale dependence in the BEF relationship: (1) a nonlinear change in the slope of the BEF relationship with spatial scale; (2) a scale‐dependent relationship between ecosystem stability and spatial extent; (3) coexistence within and among sites will result in a positive BEF relationship at larger scales; (4) temporal autocorrelation in environmental variability affects species turnover and thus the change in BEF slope with scale; (5) connectivity in metacommunities generates nonlinear BEF and stability relationships by affecting population synchrony at local and regional scales; (6) spatial scaling in food web structure and diversity will generate scale dependence in ecosystem functioning. We suggest directions for synthesis that combine approaches in metaecosystem and metacommunity ecology and integrate cross‐scale feedbacks. Tests of this theory may combine remote sensing with a generation of networked experiments that assess effects at multiple scales. We also show how anthropogenic land cover change may alter the scaling of the BEF relationship. New research on the role of scale in BEF will guide policy linking the goals of managing biodiversity and ecosystems.
-
Biodiversity-ecosystem functioning (BEF) research grew rapidly following concerns that biodiversity loss would negatively affect ecosystem functions and the ecosystem services they underpin. However, despite evidence that biodiversity strongly affects ecosystem functioning, the influence of BEF research upon policy and the management of ‘real-world’ ecosystems, i.e., semi-natural habitats and agroecosystems, has been limited. Here, we address this issue by classifying BEF research into three clusters based on the degree of human control over species composition and the spatial scale, in terms of grain, of the study, and discussing how the research of each cluster is best suited to inform particular fields of ecosystem management. Research in the first cluster, small-grain highly controlled studies, is best able to provide general insights into mechanisms and to inform the management of species-poor and highly managed systems such as croplands, plantations, and the restoration of heavily degraded ecosystems. Research from the second cluster, small-grain observational studies, and species removal and addition studies, may allow for direct predictions of the impacts of species loss in specific semi-natural ecosystems. Research in the third cluster, large-grain uncontrolled studies, may best inform landscape-scale management and national-scale policy. We discuss barriers to transfer within each cluster and suggest how new research and knowledge exchange mechanisms may overcome these challenges. To meet the potential for BEF research to address global challenges, we recommend transdisciplinary research that goes beyond these current clusters and considers the social-ecological context of the ecosystems in which BEF knowledge is generated. This requires recognizing the social and economic value of biodiversity for ecosystem services at scales, and in units, that matter to land managers and policy makers.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.3166
