Species richness is more important for ecosystem functioning than species turnover along an elevational gradient.
Journal
Nature ecology & evolution
ISSN: 2397-334X
Titre abrégé: Nat Ecol Evol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101698577
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2021
12 2021
Historique:
received:
02
02
2021
accepted:
09
08
2021
pubmed:
22
9
2021
medline:
19
1
2022
entrez:
21
9
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Many experiments have shown that biodiversity enhances ecosystem functioning. However, we have little understanding of how environmental heterogeneity shapes the effect of diversity on ecosystem functioning and to what extent this diversity effect is mediated by variation in species richness or species turnover. This knowledge is crucial to scaling up the results of experiments from local to regional scales. Here we quantify the diversity effect and its components-that is, the contributions of variation in species richness and species turnover-for 22 ecosystem functions of microorganisms, plants and animals across 13 major ecosystem types on Mt Kilimanjaro, Tanzania. Environmental heterogeneity across ecosystem types on average increased the diversity effect from explaining 49% to 72% of the variation in ecosystem functions. In contrast to our expectation, the diversity effect was more strongly mediated by variation in species richness than by species turnover. Our findings reveal that environmental heterogeneity strengthens the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning and that species richness is a stronger driver of ecosystem functioning than species turnover. Based on a broad range of taxa and ecosystem functions in a non-experimental system, these results are in line with predictions from biodiversity experiments and emphasize that conserving biodiversity is essential for maintaining ecosystem functioning.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34545216
doi: 10.1038/s41559-021-01550-9
pii: 10.1038/s41559-021-01550-9
doi:
Banques de données
figshare
['10.6084/m9.figshare.14544207']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1582-1593Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.
Références
Cardinale, B. J. et al. Effects of biodiversity on the functioning of trophic groups and ecosystems. Nature 443, 989–992 (2006).
pubmed: 17066035
doi: 10.1038/nature05202
Hooper, D. U. et al. A global synthesis reveals biodiversity loss as a major driver of ecosystem change. Nature 486, 105–108 (2012).
pubmed: 22678289
doi: 10.1038/nature11118
Cardinale, B. J. et al. Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature 489, 326–326 (2012).
doi: 10.1038/nature11373
Isbell, F. et al. Linking the influence and dependence of people on biodiversity across scales. Nature 546, 65–72 (2017).
pubmed: 28569811
pmcid: 5460751
doi: 10.1038/nature22899
Mori, A. S., Isbell, F. & Seidl, R. β-Diversity, community assembly, and ecosystem functioning. Trends Ecol. Evol. 33, 549–564 (2018).
pubmed: 29807839
doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2018.04.012
Gonzalez, A. et al. Scaling‐up biodiversity–ecosystem functioning research. Ecol. Lett. 23, 757–776 (2020).
pubmed: 31997566
pmcid: 7497049
doi: 10.1111/ele.13456
Genung, M. A., Fox, J. & Winfree, R. Species loss drives ecosystem function in experiments, but in nature the importance of species loss depends on dominance. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 29, 1531–1541 (2020).
doi: 10.1111/geb.13137
Duffy, J. E., Godwin, C. M. & Cardinale, B. J. Biodiversity effects in the wild are common and as strong as key drivers of productivity. Nature 549, 261–264 (2017).
pubmed: 28869964
doi: 10.1038/nature23886
Wardle, D. A. Do experiments exploring plant diversity–ecosystem functioning relationships inform how biodiversity loss impacts natural ecosystems? J. Veg. Sci. 27, 646–653 (2016).
doi: 10.1111/jvs.12399
Wardle, D. A., Bardgett, R. D., Callaway, R. M. & Van der Putten, W. H. Terrestrial ecosystem responses to species gains and losses. Science 332, 1273–1277 (2011).
pubmed: 21659595
doi: 10.1126/science.1197479
Hillebrand, H. & Matthiessen, B. Biodiversity in a complex world: consolidation and progress in functional biodiversity research. Ecol. Lett. 12, 1405–1419 (2009).
pubmed: 19849711
doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01388.x
Jochum, M. et al. The results of biodiversity–ecosystem functioning experiments are realistic. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1485–1494 (2020).
pubmed: 32839545
doi: 10.1038/s41559-020-1280-9
van der Plas, F. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning in naturally assembled communities. Biol. Rev. 94, 1220–1245 (2019).
pubmed: 30724447
Bannar-Martin, K. H. et al. Integrating community assembly and biodiversity to better understand ecosystem function: the Community Assembly and the Functioning of Ecosystems (CAFE) approach. Ecol. Lett. 21, 167–180 (2018).
pubmed: 29280282
doi: 10.1111/ele.12895
Leibold, M. A., Chase, J. M. & Ernest, S. K. M. Community assembly and the functioning of ecosystems: how metacommunity processes alter ecosystems attributes. Ecology 98, 909–919 (2017).
pubmed: 27984663
doi: 10.1002/ecy.1697
Tilman, D., Isbell, F. & Cowles, J. M. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 45, 471–493 (2014).
doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091917
Leibold, M. A. et al. The metacommunity concept: a framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecol. Lett. 7, 601–613 (2004).
doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00608.x
HilleRisLambers, J., Adler, P. B., Harpole, W. S., Levine, J. M. & Mayfield, M. M. Rethinking community assembly through the lens of coexistence theory. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 43, 227–248 (2012).
doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110411-160411
Stein, A., Gerstner, K. & Kreft, H. Environmental heterogeneity as a universal driver of species richness across taxa, biomes and spatial scales. Ecol. Lett. 17, 866–880 (2014).
pubmed: 24751205
doi: 10.1111/ele.12277
Grace, J. B. et al. Integrative modelling reveals mechanisms linking productivity and plant species richness. Nature 529, 390–393 (2016).
pubmed: 26760203
doi: 10.1038/nature16524
Harpole, W. S. et al. Addition of multiple limiting resources reduces grassland diversity. Nature 537, 93–96 (2016).
pubmed: 27556951
doi: 10.1038/nature19324
Legendre, P. & De Cáceres, M. Beta diversity as the variance of community data: dissimilarity coefficients and partitioning. Ecol. Lett. 16, 951–963 (2013).
pubmed: 23809147
doi: 10.1111/ele.12141
Legendre, P. Interpreting the replacement and richness difference components of beta diversity. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 23, 1324–1334 (2014).
doi: 10.1111/geb.12207
Craven, D. et al. A cross‐scale assessment of productivity–diversity relationships. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 29, 1940–1955 (2020).
doi: 10.1111/geb.13165
Barry, K. E. et al. A graphical null model for scaling biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships. J. Ecol. 109, 1549–1560 (2021).
doi: 10.1111/1365-2745.13578
Winfree, R. et al. Species turnover promotes the importance of bee diversity for crop pollination at regional scales. Science 359, 791–793 (2018).
pubmed: 29449491
doi: 10.1126/science.aao2117
Isbell, F. et al. Quantifying effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning across times and places. Ecol. Lett. 21, 763–778 (2018).
pubmed: 29493062
pmcid: 5957270
doi: 10.1111/ele.12928
Isbell, F. et al. High plant diversity is needed to maintain ecosystem services. Nature 477, 199–202 (2011).
pubmed: 21832994
doi: 10.1038/nature10282
Bell, T., Newman, J. A., Silverman, B. W., Turner, S. L. & Lilley, A. K. The contribution of species richness and composition to bacterial services. Nature 436, 1157–1160 (2005).
pubmed: 16121181
doi: 10.1038/nature03891
Fox, J. W. & Kerr, B. Analyzing the effects of species gain and loss on ecosystem function using the extended Price equation partition. Oikos 121, 290–298 (2012).
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2011.19656.x
Peters, M. K. et al. Predictors of elevational biodiversity gradients change from single taxa to the multi-taxa community level. Nat. Commun. 7, 13736 (2016).
pubmed: 28004657
pmcid: 5192166
doi: 10.1038/ncomms13736
Peters, M. K. et al. Climate–land-use interactions shape tropical mountain biodiversity and ecosystem functions. Nature 568, 88–92 (2019).
pubmed: 30918402
doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1048-z
Winfree, R., Fox, J. W., Williams, N. M., Reilly, J. R. & Cariveau, D. P. Abundance of common species, not species richness, drives delivery of a real-world ecosystem service. Ecol. Lett. 18, 626–635 (2015).
pubmed: 25959973
doi: 10.1111/ele.12424
Garnier, E. et al. Plant functional markers capture ecosystem properties during secondary succession. Ecology 85, 2630–2637 (2004).
doi: 10.1890/03-0799
Stepp, J. R., Castaneda, H. & Cervone, S. Mountains and biocultural diversity. Mt. Res. Dev. 25, 223–227 (2005).
doi: 10.1659/0276-4741(2005)025[0223:MABD]2.0.CO;2
Balehegn, M. Unintended consequences: the ecological repercussions of land grabbing in sub-Saharan Africa. Environment 57, 4–21 (2015).
The IPBES Regional Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services for Africa (Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, 2018); https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.3236178
Maitima, J. et al. The linkages between land use change, land degradation and biodiversity across East Africa. Afr. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 3, 310–325 (2009).
Clough, Y. et al. Combining high biodiversity with high yields in tropical agroforests. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 8311–8316 (2011).
pubmed: 21536873
pmcid: 3100989
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1016799108
Muhumuza, M. & Balkwill, K. Factors affecting the success of conserving biodiversity in national parks: a review of case studies from Africa. Int. J. Biodivers. 2013, 798101 (2013).
doi: 10.1155/2013/798101
Mbow, C., van Noordwijk, M., Prabhu, R. & Simons, T. Knowledge gaps and research needs concerning agroforestry’s contribution to Sustainable Development Goals in Africa. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 6, 162–170 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2013.11.030
Kangalawe, R. Y. M., Noe, C., Tungaraza, F. S. K., Naimani, G. & Mlele, M. Understanding of traditional knowledge and indigenous institutions on sustainable land management in Kilimanjaro Region, Tanzania. Open J. Soil Sci. 04, 469–493 (2014).
doi: 10.4236/ojss.2014.413046
Pretty, J., Toulmin, C. & Williams, S. Sustainable intensification in African agriculture. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 9, 5–24 (2011).
doi: 10.3763/ijas.2010.0583
Mbow, C. et al. Agroforestry solutions to address food security and climate change challenges in Africa. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 6, 61–67 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2013.10.014
Ofori, D. A. et al. Developing more productive African agroforestry systems and improving food and nutritional security through tree domestication. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 6, 123–127 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2013.11.016
Munang, R. et al. Ecosystem Based Adaptation (EBA) for Food Security in Africa—Towards a Comprehensive Strategic Framework to Upscale and Out-scale EBA-Driven Agriculture in Africa (United Nations Environment Programme, 2015).
Albrecht, A. & Kandji, S. T. Carbon sequestration in tropical agroforestry systems. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 99, 15–27 (2003).
doi: 10.1016/S0167-8809(03)00138-5
van der Plas, F. et al. Biotic homogenization can decrease landscape-scale forest multifunctionality. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 3557–3562 (2016).
pubmed: 26979952
pmcid: 4822601
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1517903113
Brown, J. H., Gillooly, J. F., Allen, A. P., Savage, V. M. & West, G. B. Toward a metabolic theory of ecology. Ecology 85, 1771–1789 (2004).
doi: 10.1890/03-9000
Allen, A. P. Global biodiversity, biochemical kinetics, and the energetic-equivalence rule. Science 297, 1545–1548 (2002).
pubmed: 12202828
doi: 10.1126/science.1072380
Nottingham, A. T. et al. Microbes follow Humboldt: temperature drives plant and soil microbial diversity patterns from the Amazon to the Andes. Ecology 99, 2455–2466 (2018).
pubmed: 30076592
doi: 10.1002/ecy.2482
Hemp, A. Continuum or zonation? Altitudinal gradients in the forest vegetation of Mt. Kilimanjaro. Plant Ecol. 184, 27–42 (2006).
doi: 10.1007/s11258-005-9049-4
Hemp, A. Vegetation of Kilimanjaro: hidden endemics and missing bamboo. Afr. J. Ecol. 44, 305–328 (2006).
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2028.2006.00679.x
Appelhans, T. et al. Eco-meteorological characteristics of the southern slopes of Kilimanjaro. Tanzan. Int. J. Climatol. 36, 3245–3258 (2016).
doi: 10.1002/joc.4552
van Genuchten, M. T. H. A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44, 892–898 (1980).
doi: 10.2136/sssaj1980.03615995004400050002x
Gebert, F., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Moretto, P. & Peters, M. K. Climate rather than dung resources predict dung beetle abundance and diversity along elevational and land use gradients on Mt. Kilimanjaro. J. Biogeogr. 47, 371–381 (2019).
doi: 10.1111/jbi.13710
Dunning, J. B. CRC Handbook of Avian Body Masses (CRC Press, 2008).
Wilman, H. et al. EltonTraits 1.0: species-level foraging attributes of the world’s birds and mammals. Ecology 95, 2027 (2014).
doi: 10.1890/13-1917.1
Kingdon, J. et al. Mammals of Africa (Bloomsbury, 2013).
Kaspari, M. & Weiser, M. D. The size–grain hypothesis and interspecific scaling in ants. Funct. Ecol. 13, 530–538 (1999).
doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2435.1999.00343.x
Cane, J. H. Estimation of bee size using intertegular span (Apoidea). J. Kans. Entomol. Soc. 60, 145–147 (1987).
Classen, A., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Kindeketa, W. J. & Peters, M. K. Integrating intraspecific variation in community ecology unifies theories on body size shifts along climatic gradients. Funct. Ecol. 31, 768–777 (2017).
doi: 10.1111/1365-2435.12786
Kendall, L. K. et al. Pollinator size and its consequences: robust estimates of body size in pollinating insects. Ecol. Evol. 9, 1702–1714 (2019).
pubmed: 30847066
pmcid: 6392396
doi: 10.1002/ece3.4835
Hódar, J. A. The use of regression equations for estimation of arthropod biomass in ecological studies. Acta Oecol. 17, 421–433 (1996).
Ensslin, A. et al. Effects of elevation and land use on the biomass of trees, shrubs and herbs at Mount Kilimanjaro. Ecosphere 6, 45 (2015).
doi: 10.1890/ES14-00492.1
Cheng, D.-L. & Niklas, K. J. Above- and below-ground biomass relationships across 1534 forested communities. Ann. Bot. 99, 95–102 (2007).
pubmed: 17085476
doi: 10.1093/aob/mcl206
Pabst, H., Gerschlauer, F., Kiese, R. & Kuzyakov, Y. Land use and precipitation affect organic and microbial carbon stocks and the specific metabolic quotient in soils of eleven ecosystems of Mt. Kilimanjaro, Tanzania. Land Degrad. Dev. 27, 592–602 (2016).
doi: 10.1002/ldr.2406
Albrecht, J. et al. Plant and animal functional diversity drive mutualistic network assembly across an elevational gradient. Nat. Commun. 9, 3177 (2018).
pubmed: 30093613
pmcid: 6085337
doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-05610-w
Classen, A. et al. Specialization of plant–pollinator interactions increases with temperature at Mt. Kilimanjaro. Ecol. Evol. 10, 2182–2195 (2020).
pubmed: 32128148
pmcid: 7042760
doi: 10.1002/ece3.6056
Mayr, A. V. et al. Climate and food resources shape species richness and trophic interactions of cavity-nesting Hymenoptera. J. Biogeogr. 47, 854–865 (2020).
doi: 10.1111/jbi.13753
Peters, M. K., Mayr, A., Röder, J., Sanders, N. J. & Steffan-Dewenter, I. Variation in nutrient use in ant assemblages along an extensive elevational gradient on Mt Kilimanjaro. J. Biogeogr. 41, 2245–2255 (2014).
doi: 10.1111/jbi.12384
Genung, M. A. et al. The relative importance of pollinator abundance and species richness for the temporal variance of pollination services. Ecology 98, 1807–1816 (2017).
pubmed: 28445588
doi: 10.1002/ecy.1876
Manly, B. F. J. Randomization, Bootstrap, and Monte Carlo Methods in Biology (Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2007).
Gelman, A. Prior distributions for variance parameters in hierarchical models (comment on article by Browne and Draper). Bayesian Anal. 1, 515–533 (2006).
doi: 10.1214/06-BA117A
Huang, A. & Wand, M. P. Simple marginally noninformative prior distributions for covariance matrices. Bayesian Anal. 8, 439–452 (2013).
doi: 10.1214/13-BA815
O’Hara, R. B. & Sillanpää, M. J. A review of Bayesian variable selection methods: what, how and which. Bayesian Anal. 4, 85–117 (2009).
Albrecht, J., Hagge, J., Schabo, D. G., Schaefer, H. M. & Farwig, N. Reward regulation in plant–frugivore networks requires only weak cues. Nat. Commun. 9, 4838 (2018).
pubmed: 30446651
pmcid: 6240120
doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-07362-z
Grace, J. B., Johnson, D. J., Lefcheck, J. S. & Byrnes, J. E. K. Quantifying relative importance: computing standardized effects in models with binary outcomes. Ecosphere 9, e02283 (2018).
doi: 10.1002/ecs2.2283
Kass, R. E. & Raftery, A. E. Bayes factors. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 90, 773–795 (1995).
doi: 10.1080/01621459.1995.10476572
Levy, R. Bayesian data–model fit assessment for structural equation modeling. Struct. Equ. Modeling 18, 663–685 (2011).
doi: 10.1080/10705511.2011.607723
Nakagawa, S. & Schielzeth, H. A general and simple method for obtaining R
doi: 10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00261.x
Nakagawa, S., Johnson, P. C. D. & Schielzeth, H. The coefficient of determination R
pubmed: 28904005
pmcid: 5636267
doi: 10.1098/rsif.2017.0213
R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing v. 4.0.3 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2020).
Oksanen, J. et al. vegan: Community ecology package. R package version 2.5-7 http://cran.r-project.org/package=vegan (2020).
Plummer, M. JAGS: A program for analysis of Bayesian graphical models using Gibbs sampling http://mcmc-jags.sourceforge.net (2003)
Plummer, M. rjags: Bayesian graphical models using MCMC. R package version 4-10 https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rjags (2016)
Statisticat, LLC. LaplacesDemon: Complete environment for Bayesian inference. R package version 16.1.4 https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=LaplacesDemon (2021)
Plummer, M., Best, N., Cowles, K. & Vines, K. CODA: convergence diagnosis and output analysis for MCMC. R N. 6, 7–11 (2006).
Epskamp, S., Cramer, A. O. J., Waldorp, L. J., Schmittmann, V. D. & Borsboom, D. qgraph: network visualizations of relationships in psychometric data. J. Stat. Softw. 48, 1–18 (2012).
doi: 10.18637/jss.v048.i04
Wood, S. N. Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R (CRC/Taylor & Francis, 2017).
Chao, A. & Jost, L. Coverage-based rarefaction and extrapolation: standardizing samples by completeness rather than size. Ecology 93, 2533–2547 (2012).
pubmed: 23431585
doi: 10.1890/11-1952.1
Hsieh, T. C., Ma, K. H. & Chao, A. iNEXT: an R package for rarefaction and extrapolation of species diversity (Hill numbers). Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 1451–1456 (2016).
doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.12613
Albrecht, J. et al. Data and code from ‘Species richness is more important for ecosystem functioning than species turnover along an elevational gradient’. Figshare https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14544207 (2021).