Functional and phylogenetic diversity determine woody productivity in a temperate forest

Hao, Mengmeng; Zhang, Chunyu; Zhao, Xiuhai; Gadow, Klaus von

doi:10.1002/ece3.3857

Cited by 67 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 68 publications

(147 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While grain-dependent shifts are often expected (Table 1), this had not been shown previously with empirical data for S→NPP using spatial grains coarser than several hectares (Luo et al;Chisholm et al, 2013;Hao et al, 2018). If the S→NPP direction is the real causal one, then our results from SEM and RF analyses support several theoretical expectations (Table 1) and give further impetus to efforts quantifying biodiversity effects in naturally assembled ecosystems at broad spatial scales .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

A cross-scale assessment of productivity-diversity relationships

Craven

Sande

Meyer

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

0Biodiversity and ecosystem productivity vary across the globe and considerable effort has been made to 4 1 describe their relationships. Biodiversity-ecosystem functioning research has traditionally focused on how 4 2 experimentally controlled species richness affects net primary productivity (S→NPP) at small spatial 4 3 grains. In contrast, the influence of productivity on richness (NPP→S) has been explored at many grains 4 4 in naturally assembled communities. Mismatches in spatial scale between approaches have fostered 4 5 debate about the strength and direction of biodiversity-productivity relationships. Here we examine the 4 6 direction and strength of productivity's influence on diversity (NPP→S) and of diversity's influence on 4 7 productivity (S→NPP), and how this varies across spatial grains using data from North American forests 4 8 at grains from local (672 m 2 ) to coarse spatial units (median area = 35,677 km 2 ). We assess relationships 4 9 4 8 4

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

A cross-scale assessment of productivity-diversity relationships

Craven

Sande

Meyer

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…species richness, Shannon diversity, functional diversity and phylogenetic diversity) of the same functional group were simultaneously analysed as predictors of a certain ecosystem function (e.g. Hao et al, ), I regarded these collectively as a single BEF relationship. Based on these criteria, I found 726 published BEF relationships in naturally assembled communities.…”

Section: Quantitative Response Of Ecosystem Functioning To Biodiversimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, cases in which effects of functional diversity were strongest ( N = 12, e.g. Paquette & Messier, ; Hao et al, ) strongly outnumbered cases where phylogenetic diversity was more important ( N = 3, e.g. Hao et al, ) (χ 2 = 5.40; P = 0.0201).…”

Section: Relative Importance Of Biodiversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning in naturally assembled communities

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Approximately 25 years ago, ecologists became increasingly interested in the question of whether ongoing biodiversity loss matters for the functioning of ecosystems. As such, a new ecological subfield on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning (BEF) was born. This subfield was initially dominated by theoretical studies and by experiments in which biodiversity was manipulated, and responses of ecosystem functions such as biomass production, decomposition rates, carbon sequestration, trophic interactions and pollination were assessed. More recently, an increasing number of studies have investigated BEF relationships in non-manipulated ecosystems, but reviews synthesizing our knowledge on the importance of real-world biodiversity are still largely missing.I performed a systematic review in order to assess how biodiversity drives ecosystem functioning in both terrestrial and aquatic, naturally assembled communities, and on how important biodiversity is compared to other factors, including other aspects of community composition and abiotic conditions. The outcomes of 258 published studies, which reported 726 BEF relationships, revealed that in many cases, biodiversity promotes average biomass production and its temporal stability, and pollination success. For decomposition rates and ecosystem multifunctionality, positive effects of biodiversity outnumbered negative effects, but neutral relationships were even more common. Similarly, negative effects of prey biodiversity on pathogen and herbivore damage outnumbered positive effects, but were less common than neutral relationships. Finally, there was no evidence that biodiversity is related to soil carbon storage.Most BEF studies focused on the effects of taxonomic diversity, however, metrics of functional diversity were generally stronger predictors of ecosystem functioning. Furthermore, in most studies, abiotic factors and functional composition (e.g. the presence of a certain functional group) were stronger drivers of ecosystem functioning than biodiversity per se. While experiments suggest that positive biodiversity effects become stronger at larger spatial scales, in naturally assembled communities this idea is too poorly studied to draw general conclusions.In summary, a high biodiversity in naturally assembled communities positively drives various ecosystem functions. At the same time, the strength and direction of these effects vary highly among studies, and factors other than biodiversity can be even more important in driving ecosystem functioning. Thus, to promote those ecosystem functions that underpin human well-being, conservation should not only promote biodiversity per se, but also the abiotic conditions favouring species with suitable trait combinations.

show abstract

“…Given the complexity of factors that determine species diversity along environmental changes the use of structural equation model (SEM) is a powerful tool to test direct and indirect causal effects with a series of dependent and independent variables that may be correlated (Grace et al 2010, Lamb et al 2014, Hao et al 2018. For example, a study using SEM revealed that species diversity of mammals depends directly on environmental factors while functional diversity depends on the species evolutionary history (Oliveira et al 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defaunation and fragmentation erode small mammal diversity dimensions in tropical forests

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forest fragmentation and defaunation are considered the main drivers of biodiversity loss, yet the synergistic effects of landscape changes and biotic interactions on assemblage structure have been poorly investigated. Here, we use an extensive dataset of 283 assemblages and 105 species of small mammals to understand how defaunation of medium and large mammals and forest fragmentation change the community composition and diversity of rodents and marsupials in tropical forests of South America. We used structured equation models to investigate the relationship between small mammal species, functional and phylogenetic diversity with forest size, forest cover and the occurrence of medium and large mammals. The best‐fit model showed that defaunation reduced functional diversity, and that species diversity of small mammals increased with forest patch size. Forest cover did not affect functional and phylogenetic diversity. Our results indicate that occurrence of medium and large sized mammals (probably acting as predators, or competitors of small mammals) and forest patch size help to retain species and functional diversity in small mammal communities. Further, the number of species in a small mammal community was critical to the maintenance of phylogenetic diversity, and may have a pronounced influence on the ecological functions played by small mammals. Identifying how phylogenetic and functional diversity change in function of human pressures allows us to better understand the contribution of extant lineages to ecosystem functioning in tropical forests.

show abstract

Functional and phylogenetic diversity determine woody productivity in a temperate forest

Cited by 67 publications

References 68 publications

A cross-scale assessment of productivity-diversity relationships

A cross-scale assessment of productivity-diversity relationships

Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning in naturally assembled communities

Defaunation and fragmentation erode small mammal diversity dimensions in tropical forests

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About