Changing Assemblages Although the rate of species extinction has increased markedly as a result of human activity across the biosphere, conservation has focused on endangered species rather than on shifts in assemblages. Dornelas et al. (p. 296 ; see the Perspective by Pandolfi and Lovelock ), using an extensive set of biodiversity time series of species occurrences in both marine and terrestrial habitats from the past 150 years, find species turnover above expected but do not find evidence of systematic biodiversity loss. This result could be caused by homogenization of species assemblages by invasive species, shifting distributions induced by climate change, and asynchronous change across the planet. All of which indicates that it is time to review conservation priorities.

Scientists disagree about the nature of biodiversity change. While there is evidence for widespread declines from population surveys, assemblage surveys reveal a mix of declines and increases. These conflicting conclusions may be caused by the use of different metrics: assemblage metrics may average out drastic changes in individual populations. Alternatively, differences may arise from data sources: populations monitored individually, versus whole‐assemblage monitoring. To test these hypotheses, we estimated population change metrics using assemblage data. For a set of 23 241 populations, 16 009 species, in 158 assemblages, we detected significantly accelerating extinction and colonisation rates, with both rates being approximately balanced. Most populations (85%) did not show significant trends in abundance, and those that did were balanced between winners (8%) and losers (7%). Thus, population metrics estimated with assemblage data are commensurate with assemblage metrics and reveal sustained and increasing species turnover.

Temporal fluctuations in species richness are frequently regulated, exhibiting a tendency to return toward a central level.