4.8 Article

Several scales of biodiversity affect ecosystem multifunctionality

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1220333110

Keywords

alpha diversity; gamma diversity; ecosystem service; Cedar Creek; beta diversity

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowships
  2. Division Of Environmental Biology
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences [1234162] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Society values landscapes that reliably provide many ecosystem functions. As the study of ecosystem functioning expands to include more locations, time spans, and functions, the functional importance of individual species is becoming more apparent. However, the functional importance of individual species does not necessarily translate to the functional importance of biodiversity measured in whole communities of interacting species. Furthermore, ecological diversity at scales larger than neighborhood species richness could also influence the provision of multiple functions over extended time scales. We created experimental landscapes based on whole communities from the world's longest running biodiversity-functioning field experiment to investigate how local species richness (alpha diversity), distinctness among communities (beta diversity), and larger scale species richness (gamma diversity) affected eight ecosystem functions over 10 y. Using both threshold-based and unique multifunctionality metrics, we found that alpha diversity had strong positive effects on most individual functions and multifunctionality, and that positive effects of beta and gamma diversity emerged only when multiple functions were considered simultaneously. Higher beta diversity also reduced the variability in multifunctionality. Thus, in addition to conserving important species, maintaining ecosystem multifunctionality will require diverse landscape mosaics of diverse communities.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available