scholarly journals BIOTIC HABITAT COMPLEXITY CONTROLS SPECIES DIVERSITY AND NUTRIENT EFFECTS ON NET BIOMASS PRODUCTION

Ecology ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 87 (1) ◽  
pp. 246-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Britas Klemens Eriksson ◽  
Anja Rubach ◽  
Helmut Hillebrand
Ecology ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 88 (4) ◽  
pp. 929-939 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerome J. Weis ◽  
Bradley J. Cardinale ◽  
Kenneth J. Forshay ◽  
Anthony R. Ives

2013 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liangjun HU ◽  
Qinfeng GUO

How species diversity relates to productivity remains a major debate. To date, however, the underlying mechanisms that regulate the ecological processes involved are still poorly understood. Three major issues persist in early efforts at resolution. First, in the context that productivity drives species diversity, how the pathways operate is poorly-explained. Second, productivity  per se varies with community or ecosystem maturity. If diversity indeed drives productivity, the criterion of choosing appropriate measures for productivity is not available. Third, spatial scaling suggests that sampling based on small-plots may not be suitable for formulating species richness-productivity relationships (SRPRs). Thus, the long-standing assumption simply linking diversity with productivity and pursuing a generalizing pattern may not be robust. We argue that productivity, though defined as ‘the rate of biomass production’, has been measured in two ways environmental surrogates and biomass production leading to misinterpretations and difficulty in the pursuit of generalizable SRPRs. To tackle these issues, we developed an integrative theoretical paradigm encompassing richer biological and physical contexts and clearly reconciling the major processes of the systems, using proper productivity measures and sampling units. We conclude that loose interpretation and confounding measures of productivity may be the real root of current SRPR inconsistencies and debate.


2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 317-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentín D. Picasso ◽  
E. Charles Brummer ◽  
Matt Liebman ◽  
Philip M. Dixon ◽  
Brian J. Wilsey

AbstractCropping systems that rely on renewable energy and resources and are based on ecological principles could be more stable and productive into the future than current monoculture systems with serious unintended environmental consequences such as soil erosion and water pollution. In nonagricultural systems, communities with higher species diversity have higher productivity and provide other ecosystem services. However, communities of well-adapted crop species selected for biomass production may respond differently to increasing diversity. Diversity effects may be due to complementarity among species (complementary resource use and facilitative interactions) or positive selection effects (e.g., species with higher productivity dominate the mixture), and these effects may change over time or across environments. Our goal was to identify the ecological mechanisms causing diversity effects in a biodiversity experiment using agriculturally relevant species, and evaluate the implications for the design of sustainable cropping systems. We seeded seven perennial forage species in a replicated field experiment at two locations in Iowa, USA, and evaluated biomass productivity of monocultures and two- to six-species mixtures over 3 years after the establishment year under management systems of contrasting intensity: one or three harvests per year. Productivity increased with seeded species richness in all environments, and the positive relationship did not change over time. Polyculture overyielding was due to complementarity among species in the community rather than to selection effects of individual species. Complementarity increased as a log-linear function of species richness in all environments, and this trend was consistent across years. Legume–grass facilitation may explain much of this complementarity effect. Although individual species with high biomass production had a major effect on productivity of mixtures, the species producing the highest biomass in monoculture changed over the years in most environments. Furthermore, transgressive overyielding was observed and was more prevalent in later years, in some environments. We conclude that choosing a single well-adapted species for maximizing productivity may not be the best alternative over the long term and that high levels of species diversity should be included in the design of productive and ecologically sound agricultural systems.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Rossi ◽  
Marie Pierrejean

Seagrass habitat complexity can determine species diversity and abundance, through, for instance, changes in the availability of microhabitats, refuge from predators or changes in the intensity and frequency of abiotic stressors. Human-related perturbations cause seagrass habitat degradation and, therefore, reduce its complexity, thereby affecting biodiversity. We have followed the epifaunal assemblages of a Zostera marina meadow and deliberately modified seagrass shoot density three times during a year to measure how epifaunal assemblages responded to habitat degradation and whether patterns of response were consistent through time. We have also measured in the laboratory how epifauna controlled epiphyte biomass, which could feedback on seagrass photosynthetic activity, growth and productivity, thereby changing its resilience to disturbances. Results have shown complex patterns, variable in time.


Sociobiology ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 819 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasmine Antonini ◽  
Rodrigo Assunção Silveira ◽  
Márcio Oliveira ◽  
Cristiane Martins ◽  
Reisla Oliveira

Habitat structure and complexity may broadly affect the diversity and composition of a variety of fauna in terrestrial systems. Here we investigated responses of orchid bee assemblages to habitat complexity, with the aim of assessing complexity as a useful surrogate for species diversity of this group. We test the following hypotheses: (i) There is a greater species richness and abundance of orchid bee in sites with high habitat complexity than lower habitat complexity; (ii) High habitat complexity sites have a different species composition of orchid bee than lower habitat complexity sites. For the purposes of our study, we defined habitat complexity as the heterogeneity in the arrangement in physical structure of habitat (vegetation), although there are a large range of operational definitions in the literature. As result, orchid bee species richness was higher in high complexity areas while community composition was not affected by habitat complexity, because Euglossa melanotricha and E. leucotricha were the dominant species, occurring in both environments. Habitat complexity, measured as a function of differences in multiple strata in forests, may be of great worth as a surrogate for the diversity of a range of arthropod groups including orchid bees. 


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Rossi ◽  
Marie Pierrejean

Seagrass habitat complexity can determine species diversity and abundance, through, for instance, changes in the availability of microhabitats, refuge from predators or changes in the intensity and frequency of abiotic stressors. Human-related perturbations cause seagrass habitat degradation and, therefore, reduce its complexity, thereby affecting biodiversity. We have followed the epifaunal assemblages of a Zostera marina meadow and deliberately modified seagrass shoot density three times during a year to measure how epifaunal assemblages responded to habitat degradation and whether patterns of response were consistent through time. We have also measured in the laboratory how epifauna controlled epiphyte biomass, which could feedback on seagrass photosynthetic activity, growth and productivity, thereby changing its resilience to disturbances. Results have shown complex patterns, variable in time.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 497-508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janine Schweier ◽  
Clara Arranz ◽  
Charles A. Nock ◽  
Dirk Jaeger ◽  
Michael Scherer-Lorenzen

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document