Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: reconciling the results of experimental and observational studies
Andy HectorJasmin JoshiMichael Scherer‐LorenzenBernhard SchmidEva SpehnL. WackerM. WeilenmannE. Bazeley‐WhiteCarl BeierkuhnleinMaria C. CaldeiraPanayiotis G. DimitrakopoulosJohn A. FinnKerstin Huss‐DanellAri JumpponenPaul LeadleyMichel LoreauChrista P. H. MulderCarsten NeßhöverCecilia PalmborgD. J. READA. S. D. SiamantziourasA. C. TerryAndreas Y. Troumbis
118
Citation
40
Reference
10
Related Paper
Citation Trend
Abstract:
Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning research has been some of the most controversial of the last decade but rapid progress has been made by deriving hypotheses from the differing view points and challenging them with appropriate experimental and analytical tests (Loreau et al. 2001). Here we address some recent criticisms of the BIODEPTH project (Thompson et al. 2005) and show that: While legume species play an important role in the BIODEPTH results, patterns are not generally consistent with the multispecies sampling effect for legumes proposed by Huston & McBride (2002) as suggested in Thompson et al. (2005). The BIODEPTH results are also not consistent with transient biodiversity effects. Levels of species diversity were generally maintained over the 3 years of the project (i.e. little competitive exclusion) and diversity-productivity relationships in BIODEPTH generally strengthened during the experiments. Thompson et al. (2005) suggest that the effects of diversity on biomass production seen in the BIODEPTH project can be explained adequately by the mechanisms described by Huston & McBride (2002). Huston & McBride's proposed explanation is a complex multispecies sampling effect in which more diverse plots have a higher chance of simultaneously containing legume species, productive non-legume species and of occurring on nitrogen-limited patches. We cannot address initial soil nitrogen heterogeneity much in our experiment except at the Sheffield site where nutrients were evenly applied in solution on a sand substrate. Here, the presence of a positive diversity–productivity relationship (Fig. 1g) in the absence of soil nitrogen heterogeneity does not seem to be consistent with Huston & McBride (2002). To further examine the role of legume and non-legume species we briefly report the relationship between diversity and total plant biomass at the end of the BIODEPTH project for communities with and without nitrogen fixers (Supplementary Tables S1 and S2; data from Spehn et al. 2005). The BIODEPTH design is limited in how far it can distinguish between different aspects of diversity (including legume species) because these different aspects are collinear (Schmid et al. 2002). In a sequential statistical model the presence of legumes can be fitted before testing for additional effects of diversity although this runs the risk of attributing to legumes some of the effects of collinear aspects of diversity. Nonetheless, when we do this conservative analysis we usually do find additional significant effects of other aspects of diversity such as numbers of species and plant functional groups (Loreau & Hector 2001; Spehn et al. 2005). For total plant biomass (Fig. 1) there is a highly-significant interaction between the effects of species richness and legumes (F1,159 = 10·7, P < 0·001; Supplementary Table S1). Main effects are of limited interest and use in the presence of an interaction (but here it may be justified to cautiously examine them since they generally explain more variation than the interaction) but even when tested after legumes the residual main effect of species richness is of similar size to that of this group (Supplementary Tables S1a vs S1b). Individual site relationships vary (Supplementary Table S2) but only in Germany does the species richness effect depend on the presence of legumes (Fig. 1a; but see Scherer-Lorenzen et al. (2003) for consideration of effects on nitrate leaching as well as productivity). At other sites the species richness effects for communities with and without legumes are similar to each other (e.g. Ireland, Fig. 1e) and in Greece there is no effect of species richness on total biomass whether legumes are present or not (Fig. 1d). Therefore, with the possible exception of one site our results are not consistent with the multispecies sampling effect proposed by Huston & McBride (2002). Further detailed information on the complex effects of legume species in BIODEPTH can be found in many previously published papers (see Hector et al. 1999; Loreau & Hector 2001; Jumpponen et al. 2002; Mulder et al. 2002; Spehn et al. 2002; Gastine, Scherer-Lorenzen & Leadley 2003; Scherer-Lorenzen et al. 2003; Palmborg et al. 2005; Spehn et al. 2005). The relationship between sown species richness and total biomass (sum of above- and below-ground biomass at the end of the third growing season) for communities with (closed symbols, solid lines) and without legumes (open symbols, broken lines) in (a) Germany, (b) Portugal, (c) Switzerland, (d) Greece, (e) Ireland, (f) Sweden, (g) Sheffield, UK and (h) Silwood Park, UK. Lines are linear regression slopes from the statistical model with significant site-by-legume interaction that is presented in Supplementary Table S1. Note differences in Y axis limits and that symbols have been staggered to avoid overlap. More generally, a biodiversity experiment that deliberately omitted legumes produced results that were similar to the overall pattern from BIODEPTH: a loglinear relationship between diversity and productivity that strengthened over time and which was largely driven by complementarity effects (Van Ruijven & Berendse 2005). To date only one other biodiversity experiment without legumes exists. Grime (2001, p. 309) and colleagues found that a 12-species mixture, and a particular subset of three species that it contained, showed strong complementary nitrogen uptake (long-term results for productivity and other ecosystem processes are currently unpublished). If the results of biodiversity experiments are a feature of the first year or two as Thompson et al. suggest then they should weaken in the longer-term. While we could only maintain weeded communities at all sites for 3 years (but for up to eight at some) patterns were generally weakest in the first year and strengthened or maintained thereafter (Pfisterer et al. 2004; Spehn et al. 2005), as were those from comparable studies (Tilman et al. 2001; Hooper & Dukes 2004; Van Ruijven & Berendse 2005; Tilman, Reich & Knops 2006). The relationship between biodiversity and many ecosystem processes observed from these experiments therefore appears to strengthen over time, not weaken. Thompson et al. also argue that high diversity and productivity only coincide in biodiversity experiments in the first year or two before competitive exclusion erodes the high-diversity mixtures. In BIODEPTH we generally aimed to set our highest level of diversity at each site to approximate levels of diversity seen in unmanipulated 'reference' plots in neighbouring grasslands, in anticipation that these realistic levels of species richness would be maintained (Spehn et al. 2005). For four of the five sites with reference plots levels did indeed match relatively well (Fig. 2) and we did not observe substantial reductions in species richness. The main exception comes from the Portuguese experiment where diversity did decline substantially in the final year but due to an unusually extreme winter (see Caldeira et al. 2005). Another minor exception is the Swiss site where, although there were no reference plots, the highest level of diversity was apparently set slightly above that which could be maintained (at 32 species to complete the log2 diversity gradient) and declined slightly during the main weeded period of the experiment (Pfisterer et al. 2004). Target, observed and reference diversity levels at individual BIODEPTH fieldsites. Horizontal lines show the target (sown) levels for the highest level of diversity, 'Exp' shows average observed diversities of the same experimental plots in the third year of the experiments (with SEMs) and 'Ref' shows average diversity levels in neighbouring unmanipulated reference plots in the same year. Note that all experimental communities were at or below levels observed in the reference communities. We propose that the apparent conflict in the results of biodiversity experiments and observational biodiversity studies arises because they use different approaches (experimental vs correlational) to address different questions (within- vs across-habitat relationships) (Loreau et al. 2001; Schmid 2002). It is because the direct influence of diversity on ecosystem processes can be obscured by variation in environmental conditions (Fridley 2002; Mulder et al. 2002; Dimitrakopoulos & Schmid 2004) that it is necessary to perform biodiversity experiments and why it is not surprising that observational surveys and biodiversity manipulation experiments sometimes show different relationships (e.g. Wardle et al. 1997 vs. Wardle & Zackrisson 2005; Levine 2000). However, there are ways in which observational and experimental studies could be made more comparable. First, biodiversity experiments like BIODEPTH become more comparable to observational studies like the one at Bibury reported in Thompson et al. (2005) once the designed experiment is over and the weeding treatment that maintained the differences in diversity and composition is stopped, as has now happened at all of the BIODEPTH sites (Troumbis, Galanidis & Kokkoris 2002; Pfisterer et al. 2004; Dimitrakopoulos et al. 2005). Once weeding ceases (i.e. the simulation of species loss is stopped) the diversity–productivity relationship degrades as the diversity gradient decays through low-diversity plots gaining species and high-diversity plots losing species following exclusion by invaders. As biodiversity experiments generally attempt to remove underlying environmental heterogeneity (like soil depth at Bibury) no clear environmentally-driven pattern emerges in our experiments and species richness and productivity appear to be unrelated, at least in the first few years following the cessation of weeding (e.g. Pfisterer et al. 2004; Neßhöver 2005). On the other hand, Bibury could be made more closely comparable with BIODEPTH by creating an experimentally-controlled diversity gradient (by removing species from plots – cf. Symstad & Tilman 2001– or by synthesizing communities of differing diversity from the Bibury species pool). Indeed the herbicide application experiments that existed at Bibury prior to 1990 could serve as a removal experiment as long as the herbicide reduced diversity of the treatment plots relative to controls. More generally, comparison of experimental and observational studies may reveal something about the processes influencing diversity at different scales because biodiversity experiments show the effects of dispersal limitation in homogeneous environments while observational surveys show the effects of environmental heterogeneity in sites with presumably little variation in the propagule pool. If natural plant communities are mainly limited by dispersal of species from the pool into local areas, and competitive interactions amongst species are small and equal, we would expect surveys to show that plots with many species also have high biomass. At the largest scales plant diversity and productivity are often positively associated but the fact that regional surveys sometimes show negative or unimodal relationships suggests that interactions between environmental conditions and competition have played an important role in shaping these patterns. Such comparisons could inspire a new generation of biodiversity experiments in which the size of the effects of biodiversity are compared to those of other factors (fertility, soil depth, dispersal limitation, etc.). Nevertheless, biodiversity experiments may indicate the future impacts of species loss through processes that may impose dispersal limitation (habitat fragmentation, over-harvesting, climate change, etc.). The results of biodiversity experiments like BIODEPTH have turned out to be highly repeatable and have established that changes in biodiversity (both richness and composition) do have the potential to impact many different ecosystem processes (Loreau et al. 2001; Hooper et al. 2005; Balvanera et al. 2006; Cardinale et al. 2006; Worm et al. 2006). More generally, the first generation of biodiversity experiments has also led to new advances in relative-yield and covariance-based analytical methods (Loreau 1998; Loreau & Hector 2001), has added to the previously limited evidence for niche differentiation and complementarity effects in plant communities and has produced some unexpected results on the relationship between species traits and dominance (e.g. widespread negative selection effects (Hector et al. 2002)). We thank all our previous co-authors on earlier BIODEPTH papers for their past contributions to the project and an anonymous reviewer for useful comments. Diane Srivastava suggested the regional species pool and dispersal limitation perspective. Table S2a. Analysis of variance summary for the individual site analyses of species richness and legume effects fitting species richness first in a sequential statistical model. Labels as in Table S1. Table S2b. Analysis of variance summary for the individual site analyses of species richness and legume effects fitting legumes first in a sequential statistical model. Labels as in Table S1 and error terms as indicated in S2a. Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.Global biodiversity
Grassland ecosystem
Cite
Citations (1,217)
Ecological stability
Global biodiversity
Cite
Citations (451)
The protection of biological diversity (hereafter biodiversity) is considered one of the fundamental goals for the sustainable management of ecological systems. This paper examines how existing levels of biodiversity influence ecosystem capabilities at the local level. Specifically, it tests the effects of biodiversity and the degree of threat to biodiversity on the quality of local comprehensive plans in Florida as measured by the ability to manage ecosystems. Regression analysis indicates that high biodiversity does not stimulate planners to adopt higher quality plans. Instead, human disturbance or threats to existing levels of biodiversity are the most significant factors in driving ecosystem plan quality. Based on the results, the paper discusses implications for policy and suggests recommendations to improve proactive planning practices associated with managing ecological systems over the long term.
Measurement of biodiversity
Cite
Citations (32)
Ecosystem functioning depends on multiple interactions among physical, chemical and biological factors. Indeed, ecosystem processes (e.g., productivity and nutrient recycling) result directly from the diversity of functional traits in biotic communities, which in turn are determined by species composition and diversity. Species diversity results both from biotic introductions and from environmental pressures. As a result, changes in biodiversity in response to environmental selection pressures tend to have a direct impact on ecosystem processes. The relationships between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning have been the focus of numerous research studies for several years. Based on these studies, it appears that a low level of biodiversity allows an ecosystem to function effectively under constant conditions, but that greater biodiversity is called for in fluctuating environments. In this paper, we outline the concepts underlying the relationships between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning, and illustrate these concepts with examples from aquatic ecosystems. The importance of spatial scale will also be considered.
Ecosystem diversity
Aquatic biodiversity research
Cite
Citations (30)
Significance Empirical evidence for the response of ecosystem functioning to the combined effects of warming and biodiversity loss is scarce. We show that warming and biodiversity loss interact synergistically, impairing the functioning of microbial communities. We found that as temperatures departed from ambient conditions more species were required to maintain ecosystem functioning. Our results suggest interspecific complementarity increased under thermal stress and high-diversity communities that seemed functionally redundant at ambient temperature became more functionally unique as temperatures changed. Biodiversity may therefore be even more important than previously anticipated when considering the impacts of multiple facets of environmental change.
Complementarity (molecular biology)
Environmental change
Cite
Citations (252)
Islands are one of the important parts of the ocean country,with their high economic value and equity value.It makes sense to strengthen the management and the protection of islands.The management of islands should be based on ecosystem,island ecosystem assessment is the precondition of island ecosystem-based management.At present,there isn't an integrated indicator system for island ecosystem assessment.In this paper,first,the characteristics of island ecosystem were described.Second,the concept and content of PSR model were discussed.Third,the functions of PSR model to the assessment of island ecosystem were analysed.Finally,an indicator system for island ecosystem assessment,which based on the PSR model was built up,through the principles of indicator system establishing.What have done in this paper may offer some references to further study.
Ecosystem-Based Management
Coastal ecosystem
Ecosystem Management
Cite
Citations (5)
Abstract Organisms – especially microbes – tend to live in complex communities. While some of these ecosystems are very bio-diverse, others aren’t 1–3 , and while some are very stable over time others undergo strong temporal fluctuations 4,5 . Despite a long history of research and a plethora of data it is not fully understood what sets biodiversity and stability of ecosystems 6,7 . Theory as well as experiments suggest a connection between species interaction, biodiversity, and stability of ecosystems 8–13 , where an increase of ecosystem stability with biodiversity could be observed in several cases 7,9,14 . However, what causes these connections remains unclear. Here we show in microbial ecosystems in the lab that the concentrations of available nutrients can set the strength of interactions between bacteria. At high nutrient concentrations, extensive microbial growth leads to strong chemical modifications of the environment, causing more negative interactions between species. These stronger interactions exclude more species from the community – resulting in a loss of biodiversity. At the same time, these stronger interactions also decrease the stability of the microbial communities, providing a mechanistic link between species interaction, biodiversity and stability.
Ecological stability
Global biodiversity
Cite
Citations (20)
Ecosystem diversity
Complementarity (molecular biology)
Cite
Citations (201)
Studies can be observational or experimental. With an observational study, the investigator does not determine the assignment of subjects, and there might not be a control group. If there is a control group, assignment of the independent variable (exposure or intervention) is not under the control of the investigator. Observational studies can be rigorously conducted, but the lack of random assignment of the exposure/intervention introduces confounding and bias. Thus, the quality of evidence resulting from observational studies is lower than that of experimental randomized controlled trials (RCTs). An observational study might be performed if an RCT is unethical, impractical, or outside the control of the investigator. There are many types of prospective and retrospective observational study designs. However, an observational study design should be avoided if an experimental study is possible. Sophisticated statistical approaches can be used, but this does not elevate an observational study to the level of an RCT. Regardless of quality, an observational study cannot establish causality.
Causality
Cite
Citations (5)
Predictability
Global biodiversity
Cite
Citations (707)