Attenzione: i dati modificati non sono ancora stati salvati. Per confermare inserimenti o cancellazioni di voci è necessario confermare con il tasto SALVA/INSERISCI in fondo alla pagina
IRIS
1. Biodiversity is an important component of natural ecosystems, with higher species richness often correlating with an increase in ecosystem productivity. Yet, this relationship varies substantially across environments, typically becoming less pronounced at high levels of species richness. However, species richness alone cannot reflect all important properties of a community, including community evenness, which may mediate the relationship between biodiversity and productivity. If the evenness of a community correlates negatively with richness across forests globally, then a greater number of species may not always increase overall diversity and productivity of the system. Theoretical work and local empirical studies have shown that the effect of evenness on ecosystem functioning may be especially strong at high richness levels, yet the consistency of this remains untested at a global scale.
2. Here, we used a dataset of forests from across the globe, which includes composition, biomass accumulation and net primary productivity, to explore whether productivity correlates with community evenness and richness in a way that evenness appears to buffer the effect of richness. Specifically, we evaluated whether low levels of evenness in speciose communities correlate with the attenuation of the richness–productivity relationship.
3. We found that tree species richness and evenness are negatively correlated across forests globally, with highly speciose forests typically comprising a few dominant and many rare species. Furthermore, we found that the correlation between diversity and productivity changes with evenness: at low richness, uneven communities are more productive, while at high richness, even communities are more productive.
4. Synthesis. Collectively, these results demonstrate that evenness is an integral component of the relationship between biodiversity and productivity, and that the attenuating effect of richness on forest productivity might be partly explained by low evenness in speciose communities. Productivity generally increases with species richness, until reduced evenness limits the overall increases in community diversity. Our research suggests that evenness is a fundamental component of biodiversity–ecosystem function relationships, and is of critical importance for guiding conservation and sustainable ecosystem management decisions.
Evenness mediates the global relationship between forest productivity and richness
Hordijk Iris; Maynard;Daniel S. ; Hart;Simon P. ; Lidong;Mo; ter Steege;Hans; Liang;Jingjing; de‐Miguel;Sergio; Nabuurs;Gert‐Jan; Reich;Peter B. ; Abegg;Meinrad; Adou Yao;C. Yves; Alberti;Giorgio; Almeyda Zambrano;Angelica M. ; Alvarado;Braulio V. ; Esteban;Alvarez‐Davila; Alvarez‐Loayza;Patricia; Alves;Luciana F. ; Ammer;Christian; Antón‐Fernández;Clara; Araujo‐Murakami;Alejandro; Arroyo;Luzmila; Avitabile;Valerio; Aymard C;Gerardo A. ; Baker;Timothy; Bałazy;Radomir; Banki;Olaf; Barroso;Jorcely; Bastian;Meredith L. ; Bastin;Jean‐Francois; Birigazzi;Luca; Birnbaum;Philippe; Bitariho;Robert; Boeckx;Pascal; Bongers;Frans; Bouriaud;Olivier; Brancalion;Pedro H. S. ; Brandl;Susanne; Brienen;Roel; Broadbent;Eben N. ; Bruelheide;Helge; Bussotti;Filippo; Cazzolla Gatti;Roberto; César;Ricardo G. ; Cesljar;Goran; Chazdon;Robin; Chen;Han Y. H. ; Chisholm;Chelsea; Cienciala;Emil; Clark;Connie J. ; Clark;David B. ; Colletta;Gabriel; Coomes;David; Cornejo Valverde;Fernando; Corral‐Rivas;Jose J. ; Crim;Philip; Cumming;Jonathan; Dayanandan;Selvadurai; de Gasper;André L. ; Decuyper;Mathieu; Derroire;Géraldine; DeVries;Ben; Djordjevic;Ilija; Iêda;Amaral; Dourdain;Aurélie; Nestor Laurier;Engone Obiang; Enquist;Brian; Eyre;Teresa; Fandohan;Adandé Belarmain; Fayle;Tom M. ; Ferreira;Leandro V. ; Feldpausch;Ted R. ; Finér;Leena; Fischer;Markus; Fletcher;Christine; Frizzera;Lorenzo; Gamarra;Javier G. P. ; Gianelle;Damiano; Glick;Henry B. ; Harris;David; Hector;Andrew; Hemp;Andreas; Hengeveld;Geerten; Hérault;Bruno; Herbohn;John; Hillers;Annika; Honorio Coronado;Eurídice N. ; Hui;Cang; Cho;Hyunkook; Ibanez;Thomas; Bin Jung;Il; Imai;Nobuo; Jagodzinski;Andrzej M. ; Jaroszewicz;Bogdan; Johanssen;Vivian; Joly;Carlos A. ; Jucker;Tommaso; Karminov;Viktor; Kartawinata;Kuswata; Kearsley;Elizabeth; Kenfack;David; Kennard;Deborah; Kepfer‐Rojas;Sebastian; Keppel;Gunnar; Khan;Mohammed Latif; Killeen;Timothy; Hyun Seok;Kim; Kitayama;Kanehiro; Köhl;Michael; Korjus;Henn; Kraxner;Florian; Laarmann;Diana; Lang;Mait; Lewis;Simon; Lu;Huicui; Lukina;Natalia; Maitner;Brian; Malhi;Yadvinder; Marcon;Eric; Marimon;Beatriz Schwantes; Marimon‐Junior;Ben Hur; Marshall;Andrew Robert; Martin;Emanuel; Martynenko;Olga; Meave;Jorge A. ; Melo‐Cruz;Omar; Mendoza;Casimiro; Merow;Cory; Stanislaw;Miscicki; Mendoza;Abel Monteagudo; Moreno;Vanessa; Mukul;Sharif A. ; Mundhenk;Philip; Nava‐Miranda;Maria G. ; Neill;David; Neldner;Victor; Nevenic;Radovan; Ngugi;Michael; Niklaus;Pascal A. ; Oleksyn;Jacek; Ontikov;Petr; Ortiz‐Malavasi;Edgar; Pan;Yude; Paquette;Alain; Parada‐Gutierrez;Alexander; Parfenova;Elena; Park;Minjee; Parren;Marc; Parthasarathy;Narayanaswamy; Peri;Pablo L. ; Pfautsch;Sebastian; Phillips;Oliver L. ; Picard;Nicolas; Piedade;Maria Teresa; Piotto;Daniel; Pitman;Nigel C. A. ; Polo;Irina; Poorter;Lourens; Poulsen;Axel Dalberg; Poulsen;John R. ; Pretzsch;Hans; Ramirez Arevalo;Freddy; Restrepo‐Correa;Zorayda;Rodeghiero Mirco;Rolim;Samir; Roopsind;Anand; Rovero;Francesco; Rutishauser;Ervan; Saikia;Purabi; Salas‐Eljatib;Christian; Schall;Peter; Schepaschenko;Dmitry; Scherer‐Lorenzen;Michael; Schmid;Bernhard; Schöngart;Jochen; Searle;Eric B. ; Šebeň;Vladimír; Serra‐Diaz;Josep M. ; Sheil;Douglas; Shvidenko;Anatoly; Silva‐Espejo;Javier; Silveira;Marcos; Singh;James; Sist;Plinio; Slik;Ferry; Sonké;Bonaventure; Souza;Alexandre F. ; Stereńczak;Krzysztof; Svenning;Jens‐Christian; Svoboda;Miroslav; Swanepoel;Ben; Targhetta;Natalia; Tchebakova;Nadja; Thomas;Raquel; Tikhonova;Elena; Umunay;Peter; Usoltsev;Vladimir; Valencia;Renato; Valladares;Fernando; van der Plas;Fons; Tran;Do Van; Van Nuland;Michael E. ; Vasquez Martinez;Rodolfo; Verbeeck;Hans; Viana;Helder; Vibrans;Alexander C. ; Vieira;Simone; von Gadow;Klaus; Wang;Hua‐Feng; Watson;James; Werner;Gijsbert D. A. ; Wiser;Susan K. ; Wittmann;Florian; Wortel;Verginia; Zagt;Roderick; Zawila‐Niedzwiecki;Tomasz; Zhang;Chunyu; Zhao;Xiuhai; Zhou;Mo; Zhu;Zhi‐Xin; Zo‐Bi;Irie Casimir; Crowther;Thomas W.
2023-01-01
Abstract
1. Biodiversity is an important component of natural ecosystems, with higher species richness often correlating with an increase in ecosystem productivity. Yet, this relationship varies substantially across environments, typically becoming less pronounced at high levels of species richness. However, species richness alone cannot reflect all important properties of a community, including community evenness, which may mediate the relationship between biodiversity and productivity. If the evenness of a community correlates negatively with richness across forests globally, then a greater number of species may not always increase overall diversity and productivity of the system. Theoretical work and local empirical studies have shown that the effect of evenness on ecosystem functioning may be especially strong at high richness levels, yet the consistency of this remains untested at a global scale.
2. Here, we used a dataset of forests from across the globe, which includes composition, biomass accumulation and net primary productivity, to explore whether productivity correlates with community evenness and richness in a way that evenness appears to buffer the effect of richness. Specifically, we evaluated whether low levels of evenness in speciose communities correlate with the attenuation of the richness–productivity relationship.
3. We found that tree species richness and evenness are negatively correlated across forests globally, with highly speciose forests typically comprising a few dominant and many rare species. Furthermore, we found that the correlation between diversity and productivity changes with evenness: at low richness, uneven communities are more productive, while at high richness, even communities are more productive.
4. Synthesis. Collectively, these results demonstrate that evenness is an integral component of the relationship between biodiversity and productivity, and that the attenuating effect of richness on forest productivity might be partly explained by low evenness in speciose communities. Productivity generally increases with species richness, until reduced evenness limits the overall increases in community diversity. Our research suggests that evenness is a fundamental component of biodiversity–ecosystem function relationships, and is of critical importance for guiding conservation and sustainable ecosystem management decisions.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione
Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11572/376951
Citazioni
ND
ND
ND
social impact
Conferma cancellazione
Sei sicuro che questo prodotto debba essere cancellato?
simulazione ASN
Il report seguente simula gli indicatori relativi alla propria produzione scientifica in relazione alle soglie ASN 2021-2023 del proprio SC/SSD. Si ricorda che il superamento dei valori soglia (almeno 2 su 3) è requisito necessario ma non sufficiente al conseguimento dell'abilitazione. La simulazione si basa sui dati IRIS e sugli indicatori bibliometrici alla data indicata e non tiene conto di eventuali periodi di congedo obbligatorio, che in sede di domanda ASN danno diritto a incrementi percentuali dei valori. La simulazione può differire dall'esito di un’eventuale domanda ASN sia per errori di catalogazione e/o dati mancanti in IRIS, sia per la variabilità dei dati bibliometrici nel tempo. Si consideri che Anvur calcola i valori degli indicatori all'ultima data utile per la presentazione delle domande.
La presente simulazione è stata realizzata sulla base delle specifiche raccolte sul tavolo ER del Focus Group IRIS coordinato dall’Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia e delle regole riportate nel DM 589/2018 e allegata Tabella A. Cineca, l’Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia e il Focus Group IRIS non si assumono alcuna responsabilità in merito all’uso che il diretto interessato o terzi faranno della simulazione. Si specifica inoltre che la simulazione contiene calcoli effettuati con dati e algoritmi di pubblico dominio e deve quindi essere considerata come un mero ausilio al calcolo svolgibile manualmente o con strumenti equivalenti.