Papers in the Biological Sciences

 

Authors

Aleksandra M. Lewandowska, German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity ResearchFollow
Antje Biermann, GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research KielFollow
Elizabeth T. Borer, University of Minnesota - Twin CitiesFollow
Miguel A. Cebrián-Piqueras, Carl von Ossietzky University of OldenburgFollow
Steven A.J. Declerck, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW)Follow
Luc De Meester, Laboratory of Aquatic Ecology, Evolution and Conservation, Leuven, BelgiumFollow
Ellen Van Donk, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW)Follow
Lars Ganfeldt, University of GothenburgFollow
Daniel S. Gruner, University of Maryland at College ParkFollow
Nicole Hagenah, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
W. Stanley Harpole, German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv)Follow
Kevin P. Kirkman, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South AfricaFollow
Christopher A. Klausmeier, Michigan State UniversityFollow
Michael Kleyer, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg
Johannes M.N. Knops, University of Nebraska - LincolnFollow
Pieter Lemmens, Laboratory of Aquatic Ecology, Evolution and Conservation, Leuven, BelgiumFollow
Eric M. Lind, University of MinnesotaFollow
Elena Litchman, Michigan State UniversityFollow
Jasmin Mantilla-Contreras, University of HildesheimFollow
Koen Martens, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences (RBINSc), BrusselsFollow
Sandra Meier, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg
Vanessa Minden, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg
Joslin L. Moore, Monash University, AustraliaFollow
Harry Olde Venterink, Vrije Universiteit BrusselFollow
Eric W. Seabloom, University of MinnesotaFollow
Ulrich Sommer, GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research KielFollow
Maren Striebel, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg
Anastasia Trenkamp, University of Hildesheim, GermanyFollow
Juliane Trinogga, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg
Jotaro Urabe, Tohoku University, JapanFollow
Wim Vyverman, Ghent University, BelgiumFollow
Dedmer B. Van de Waal, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW)Follow
Claire E. Widdicombe, Plymouth Marine Laboratory, UKFollow
Helmut Hillebrand, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg

Date of this Version

2016

Citation

Published in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 371: 20150283. doi 10.1098/rstb.2015.0283

Comments

Copyright © 2016 by the authors. Published by the Royal Society. Used by permission.

Abstract

Numerous studies show that increasing species richness leads to higher ecosystem productivity. This effect is often attributed to more efficient portioning of multiple resources in communities with higher numbers of competing species, indicating the role of resource supply and stoichiometry for biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships. Here, we merged theory on ecological stoichiometry with a framework of biodiversity–ecosystem functioning to understand how resource use transfers into primary production. We applied a structural equation model to define patterns of diversity– productivity relationships with respect to available resources. Meta-analysis was used to summarize the findings across ecosystem types ranging from aquatic ecosystems to grasslands and forests. As hypothesized, resource supply increased realized productivity and richness, but we found significant differences between ecosystems and study types. Increased richness was associated with increased productivity, although this effect was not seen in experiments. More even communities had lower productivity, indicating that biomass production is often maintained by a few dominant species, and reduced dominance generally reduced ecosystem productivity. This synthesis, which integrates observational and experimental studies in a variety of ecosystems and geographical regions, exposes common patterns and differences in biodiversity–functioning relationships, and increases the mechanistic understanding of changes in ecosystems productivity.

Knops PTRSB 2016 The influence of balanced SUPPL.pdf (670 kB)
Supplementary materials

Share

COinS