4.8 Article

The geography of biodiversity change in marine and terrestrial assemblages

Journal

SCIENCE
Volume 366, Issue 6463, Pages 339-+

Publisher

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/science.aaw1620

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. sChange working group through sDiv
  2. synthesis center of iDiv
  3. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research Halle-Jena-Leipzig - German Research Foundation [FZT 118]
  4. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig
  5. U.S. National Science Foundation [1400911]
  6. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia, Portugal [POPH/FSE SFRH/BD/90469/2012]
  7. Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation
  8. Leverhulme Trust Fellowship
  9. ERC [250189, 727440]
  10. Liber Ero Chair in Biodiversity Conservation
  11. Direct For Biological Sciences
  12. Div Of Biological Infrastructure [1400911] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  13. European Research Council (ERC) [250189, 727440] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Human activities are fundamentally altering biodiversity. Projections of declines at the global scale are contrasted by highly variable trends at local scales, suggesting that biodiversity change may be spatially structured. Here, we examined spatial variation in species richness and composition change using more than 50,000 biodiversity time series from 239 studies and found clear geographic variation in biodiversity change. Rapid compositional change is prevalent, with marine biomes exceeding and terrestrial biomes trailing the overall trend. Assemblage richness is not changing on average, although locations exhibiting increasing and decreasing trends of up to about 20% per year were found in some marine studies. At local scales, widespread compositional reorganization is most often decoupled from richness change, and biodiversity change is strongest and most variable in the oceans.

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