Spatiotemporal dynamics of abiotic and biotic properties explain biodiversity–ecosystem‐functioning relationships

Abstract

There is increasing evidence that spatial and temporal dynamics of biodiversity and ecosystem functions play an essential role in biodiversity-ecosystem-functioning (BEF) relationships. Despite the known importance of soil processes for forest ecosystems, belowground functions in response to tree diversity and spatiotemporal dynamics of ecological processes and conditions remain poorly described. We propose a novel conceptual framework integrating spatiotemporal dynamics in BEF relationships and hypothesized a positive tree species richness effect on soil ecosystem functions through the spatial and temporal stability of biotic and abiotic soil properties based on species complementarity and asynchrony. We tested this framework within a long-term tree diversity experiment in Central Germany by assessing soil ecosystem functions (soil microbial properties and litter decomposition) and abiotic variables (soil moisture and surface temperature) for two consecutive years in high spatial and temporal resolution. Tree species richness and identity had significant effects on soil properties (e.g., soil microbial biomass). Structural equation modeling revealed that overall soil microbial biomass was partly explained by (1) enhanced temporal stability of soil surface temperature and (2) decreased spatial stability of soil microbial biomass. Overall, spatial stability of soil microbial properties was positively correlated with their temporal stability. These results suggest that spatiotemporal dynamics are indeed crucial determinants in BEF relationships and highlight the importance of vegetation-induced microclimatic conditions for stable provisioning of soil ecosystem functions and services.

Tree community composition stabilizes ecosystem functions in response to drought

“…The decomposition period of two months deviated from the usual standard of three months, given overall high decomposition rates. Two months were chosen based on preliminary tests and experiments in Kreinitz and have been found to be appropriate for this site (Gottschall et al, 2022). Keuskamp et al (2013) recommend two different types of tea to assess two different phases of decay.…”

“…Keuskamp et al (2013) recommend two different types of tea to assess two different phases of decay. We chose to focus on the overall decomposition of one suitable standard litter to be able to cover a wider range of spatial heterogeneity with an increased sample size (Gottschall et al, 2022).…”

“…Despite some inconsistent findings across case studies, recent syntheses have provided compelling evidence that plant species richness generally provides enhanced drought resistance (Isbell et al, 2015) due to the asynchrony of different plant species in the community (Craven et al, 2018; de Mazancourt et al, 2013) responding to environmental fluctuations. However, additional context‐dependent information on identity effects of particular tree species and community composition calls for further research (Elsalahy et al, 2020; Gottschall et al, 2022; Lanta et al, 2012; Van Ruijven & Berendse, 2010).…”

Using long-term experimental restoration of agroecosystems in Aotearoa New Zealand to improve implementation of Nature-based Solutions for climate change mitigation

“…Although observational data are frequently used as a basis for modeling the outcomes of NbS (e.g., Hutchison et al, 2018;Chausson et al, 2020), long-term ecological experiments (e.g., Lindenmayer et al, 2012) are crucial for achieving a detailed understanding of the causal processes linking carbon, biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (e.g., Scherer-Lorenzen et al, 2007;Gottschall et al, 2022) associated with woody, non-production vegetation . This is because large variability in both tree growth rates across environmental gradients and in the response of biodiversity and ecosystem functions to environmental management make outcomes unpredictable (e.g., Grossman et al, 2018;Yuan et al, 2020); in addition, most restoration activity is designed for achieving successful plant establishment, not for understanding the underlying ecological processes and functions such as nutrient cycling, interaction webs (pollination, predation, competition, dispersal), decomposition, carbon sequestration, and water cycling.…”

Soil health, soil genetic horizons and biodiversity#

“…In this complex scenario, both composition and functions of soil biota are also significantly affected by soil features and their spatiotemporal heterogeneity, which makes it difficult to link specific soil microbial taxa to many soil processes (Fierer, 2017; Gottschall et al., 2021; Kuzyakov & Blagodatskaya, 2015; Mocali et al., 2020; Nemergut et al., 2013). As discussed later, spatial variability in distributions of soil microorganisms has been largely explored in the last decade (Delgado‐Baquerizo et al., 2018; Thompson et al., 2017).…”