Transferring biodiversity-ecosystem function research to the management of ‘real-world’ ecosystems

Manning, Peter; Loos, Jacqueline; Barnes, Andrew D.; Batáry, Péter; Bianchi, Felix J.J.A.; Buchmann, Nina; Deyn, Gerlinde B. De; Ebeling, Anne; Eisenhauer, Nico; Fischer, Markus; Fründ, Jochen; Graß, Ingo; Isselstein, J.; Jochum, Malte; Klein, Alexandra‐Maria; Klingenberg, Esther; Landis, Douglas A.; Lepš, Jan; Lindborg, Regina; Meyer, Sebastian T.; Temperton, Vicky M.; Westphal, Catrin; Tscharntke, Teja

doi:10.1016/bs.aecr.2019.06.009

Cited by 75 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 175 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Because our results can have strong implications for restoration settings where the sequence of arrival of different plant species or functional groups can be manipulated to create priority effects that alter community trajectories (Temperton et al, ; Wilsey et al, ; Young, Stuble, Balachowski, & Werner, ), we believe that future research combining both assembly and biodiversity approaches are needed. BEF findings can be applied in the ‘real world’ either by comparing ecosystems undergoing natural assembly or by including an element of intervention such as is commonly done in ecological restoration where species are added to a system (but usually at the same time) (Jochum et al, ; Manning et al, ). Further research combining our PFG order of arrival and BEF approach seems very promising, although challenging to design.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When history matters: The overlooked role of priority effects in grassland overyielding

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biodiversity–ecosystem functioning experiments have shown that plant species and functional group richness are important drivers of grassland productivity, but the impact that plant order of arrival (i.e. priority effects) has on grassland overyielding and its drivers (complementarity and dominance effects) has been overlooked so far. Using species‐specific plant biomass data collected in mixture and monoculture plots of a grassland field experiment (Jülich Priority Effect experiment) that manipulated the order of arrival of three plant functional groups (forbs, grasses and legumes), we quantified net biodiversity effects (overyielding) as well as complementarity and dominance effects in mixtures one and 2 years after sowing. In this experiment, priority effects were created by sowing one functional group 6 weeks before the two others. First, we tested whether plant order of arrival affected overyielding, complementarity and dominance effects. Second, we investigated whether the magnitude of net biodiversity, complementarity and dominance effects was dependent on the strength and direction of priority effects. We found that complementarity and dominance effects were affected by plant order of arrival during community assembly. In addition, we found that moving from negative to positive priority effects increased grassland overyielding, mainly via increased complementarity effects. These results highlight the need to combine biodiversity and assembly approaches in future ecosystem functioning research, as this will increase the predictive power of community ecology in conservation and ecological restoration. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When history matters: The overlooked role of priority effects in grassland overyielding

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…, in microcosms, mesocosms, or small plots; Cardinale et al, 2011), raising the question “ How does the BEF relationship change with spatial scale? ” (Barnes et al, 2016; Isbell et al, 2017a; Manning et al, 2019 this issue ; Thompson et al, 2018). Accordingly, Mori et al (2018) recently stressed the need for unification of beta-diversity and among-patch ecosystem-function theory.…”

Section: What Are the Key Challenges Of Future Bef Research?mentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Global change experiments, particularly those that manipulate multiple global change drivers, may be particularly valuable to study biodiversity changes and subsequent ecosystem responses (Giling et al, 2019; Vogel et al 2019 this issue ). Furthermore, it might be promising to look more closely into the many published studies using random extinction scenarios, as some of them might by chance resemble extinction patterns that are actually observed in nature and provide opportunities for re-analysis (Manning et al, 2019 this issue ). At the same time, the existing literature needs to be synthesized to derive a better understanding of trait-specific extinction risks of different taxonomic groups (Cardillo et al, 2005; Kotiaho et al, 2005; Seibold et al, 2015).…”

Section: What Are the Key Challenges Of Future Bef Research?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These conclusions are supported by a long history of intercropping literature that highlights the importance of increasing biodiversity in space and time to maintain crop yields (e.g., Darwin, 1859; Trenbath, 1974; Vandermeer, 1990). In this context, BEF research has the potential to apply the multifunctionality concept (Byrnes et al, 2014; Hector and Bagchi, 2007) to move beyond considering multifunctionality a suite of independent functions, but rather to consider synergies and trade-offs among different ecosystem services (Figure 3; Allan et al, 2015; Binder et al, 2018; Giling et al, 2019; Hines et al, 2015b; Manning et al, 2018; Meyer et al, 2018; see also Manning et al, 2019 this issue for an in-depth discussion of this topic). Biodiversity potentially provides a partial substitute for many costly and non-sustainable agricultural management practices, such as the application of fertilizers, pesticides, imported pollinators, and irrigation (Finger and Buchmann, 2015; Isbell et al, 2017b; Tilman et al., 2006; Weigelt et al, 2009).…”

Section: What Are the Key Challenges Of Future Bef Research?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A multitrophic perspective on biodiversity–ecosystem functioning research

Eisenhauer

Schielzeth

Barnes

et al. 2019

Advances in Ecological Research

Self Cite

134

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concern about the functional consequences of unprecedented loss in biodiversity has prompted biodiversity-ecosystem functioning (BEF) research to become one of the most active fields of ecological research in the past 25 years. Hundreds of experiments have manipulated biodiversity as an independent variable and found compelling support that the functioning of ecosystems increases with the diversity of their ecological communities. This research has also identified some of the mechanisms underlying BEF relationships, some context-dependencies of the strength of relationships, as well as implications for various ecosystem services that mankind depends upon. In this paper, we argue that a multitrophic perspective of biotic interactions in random and nonrandom biodiversity change scenarios is key to advance future BEF research and to address some of its most important remaining challenges. We discuss that the study and the quantification of multitrophic interactions in space and time facilitates scaling up from small-scale biodiversity manipulations and ecosystem function assessments to management-relevant spatial scales across ecosystem boundaries. We specifically consider multitrophic conceptual frameworks to understand and predict the context-dependency of BEF relationships. Moreover, we highlight the importance of the eco-evolutionary underpinnings of multitrophic BEF relationships. We outline that FAIR data (meeting the standards of findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability) and reproducible processing will be key to advance this field of research by making it more integrative. Finally, we show how these BEF insights may be implemented for ecosystem management, society, and policy. Given that human well-being critically depends on the multiple services provided by diverse, multitrophic communities, integrating the approaches of evolutionary Eisenhauer et al.

show abstract

“…We emphasise also that all types of vegetation projects on the ERF register have potential for reducing biodiversity loss at landscape to global scales through increasing habitat availability, connectivity and landscape diversity (Manning et al . 2019). Here, we focus on the effect of alpha diversity on carbon sequestration and additional ecosystem functions, given this is the scale of most projects.…”

Section: Carbon Initiatives and Biodiversity: Win‐win Or Trade‐off?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential benefits of biodiversity to Australian vegetation projects registered with the Emissions Reduction Fund—is there a carbon‐biodiversity trade‐off?

Standish¹,

Prober²

2020

Eco Management Restoration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global assessments show biodiversity has already declined beyond 'safe limits' across most biomes, calling for large-scale conservation and restoration interventions. At the same time, the potential and emerging catastrophic impacts of accelerated climate change have led to increasing investment in climate change mitigation efforts through maintaining or sequestering carbon in vegetation biomass, particularly woodlands and forests. This raises the challenge of whether these climate change mitigation investments can concurrently contribute to ameliorating the biodiversity crisis. However, the assumption of industry observers is that tree monocultures will sequester more carbon than biodiverse plantings, that is, there is a carbon-biodiversity trade-off. Here, we review experimental and observational evidence to examine whether a biodiversity trade-off is necessary to maximise carbon credits. We apply the findings to the four types of Australian vegetation projects that have been registered with the Australian Government's Emissions Reduction Fund since 2012: avoided deforestation, managed regeneration, farm forestry and tree planting. We find limited evidence in the biodiversity-ecosystem function literature for a trade-off between biodiversity and carbon stored in above-ground vegetation biomass; rather we find evidence for neutral or positive relationships. Further, additional benefits of plant diversity to carbon storage, rarely accounted for in vegetation projects, include increased soil carbon storage, stability and ecological resilience to disturbances. Our findings suggest opportunities for enhancing biodiversity in vegetation projects, for example through more diverse plantings, or manipulation of herbivores or plant propagules in avoided deforestation and managed regeneration projects. More research is needed to understand the contribution of faunal diversity to ecosystem functions and to manage fire in vegetation projects. We conclude that vegetation projects can aim to benefit biodiversity without compromising carbon credits.

show abstract

Transferring biodiversity-ecosystem function research to the management of ‘real-world’ ecosystems

Abstract: Contents 1. Introduction 2 2. Small-grain and highly-controlled experiments (Cluster A) 4 2.1 What can be transferred 9

Cited by 75 publications

References 175 publications

When history matters: The overlooked role of priority effects in grassland overyielding

When history matters: The overlooked role of priority effects in grassland overyielding

A multitrophic perspective on biodiversity–ecosystem functioning research

Potential benefits of biodiversity to Australian vegetation projects registered with the Emissions Reduction Fund—is there a carbon‐biodiversity trade‐off?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About