Accelerating rates of species extinction have prompted a growing number of researchers to manipulate the richness of various groups of organisms and examine how this aspect of diversity impacts ecological processes that control the functioning of ecosystems. We summarize the results of 44 experiments that have manipulated the richness of plants to examine how plant diversity affects the production of biomass. We show that mixtures of species produce an average of 1.7 times more biomass than species monocultures and are more productive than the average monoculture in 79% of all experiments. However, in only 12% of all experiments do diverse polycultures achieve greater biomass than their single most productive species. Previously, a positive net effect of diversity that is no greater than the most productive species has been interpreted as evidence for selection effects, which occur when diversity maximizes the chance that highly productive species will be included in and ultimately dominate the biomass of polycultures. Contrary to this, we show that although productive species do indeed contribute to diversity effects, these contributions are equaled or exceeded by species complementarity, where biomass is augmented by biological processes that involve multiple species. Importantly, both the net effect of diversity and the probability of polycultures being more productive than their most productive species increases through time, because the magnitude of complementarity increases as experiments are run longer. Our results suggest that experiments to date have, if anything, underestimated the impacts of species extinction on the productivity of ecosystems.biodiversity ͉ ecosystem function ͉ extinction ͉ productivity ͉ sampling effect

The coexistence of competing species depends on the balance between their fitness differences, which determine their competitive inequalities, and their niche differences, which stabilise their competitive interactions. Darwin proposed that evolution causes species' niches to diverge, but the influence of evolution on relative fitness differences, and the importance of both niche and fitness differences in determining coexistence have not yet been studied together. We tested whether the phylogenetic distances between species of green freshwater algae determined their abilities to coexist in a microcosm experiment. We found that niche differences were more important in explaining coexistence than relative fitness differences, and that phylogenetic distance had no effect on either coexistence or on the sizes of niche and fitness differences. These results were corroborated by an analysis of the frequency of the co-occurrence of 325 pairwise combinations of algal taxa in > 1100 lakes across North America. Phylogenetic distance may not explain the coexistence of freshwater green algae.

Abstract. Ecological surprises, substantial and unanticipated changes in the abundance of one or more species that result from previously unsuspected processes, are a common outcome of both experiments and observations in community and population ecology. Here, we give examples of such surprises along with the results of a survey of well-established field ecologists, most of whom have encountered one or more surprises over the course of their careers. Truly surprising results are common enough to require their consideration in any reasonable effort to characterize nature and manage natural resources. We classify surprises as dynamic-, pattern-, or intervention-based, and we speculate on the common processes that cause ecological systems to so often surprise us. A long-standing and still growing concern in the ecological literature is how best to make predictions of future population and community dynamics. Although most work on this subject involves statistical aspects of data analysis and modeling, the frequency and nature of ecological surprises imply that uncertainty cannot be easily tamed through improved analytical procedures, and that prudent management of both exploited and conserved communities will require precautionary and adaptive management approaches.

The frequently observed positive correlation between species diversity and community biomass is thought to depend on both the degree of resource partitioning and on competitive dominance between consumers, two properties that are also central to theories of species coexistence. To make an explicit link between theory on the causes and consequences of biodiversity, we define in a precise way two kinds of differences among species: niche differences, which promote coexistence, and relative fitness differences, which promote competitive exclusion. In a classic model of exploitative competition, promoting coexistence by increasing niche differences typically, although not universally, increases the "relative yield total", a measure of diversity's effect on the biomass of competitors. In addition, however, we show that promoting coexistence by decreasing relative fitness differences also increases the relative yield total. Thus, two fundamentally different mechanisms of species coexistence both strengthen the influence of diversity on biomass yield. The model and our analysis also yield insight on the interpretation of experimental diversity manipulations. Specifically, the frequently reported "complementarity effect" appears to give a largely skewed estimate of resource partitioning. Likewise, the "selection effect" does not seem to isolate biomass changes attributable to species composition rather than species richness, as is commonly presumed. We conclude that past inferences about the cause of observed diversity-function relationships may be unreliable, and that new empirical estimates of niche and relative fitness differences are necessary to uncover the ecological mechanisms responsible for diversity-function relationships.

The frequently observed positive correlation between species diversity and community biomass is thought to depend on both the degree of resource partitioning and on competitive dominance between consumers, two properties that are also central to theories of species coexistence. To make an explicit link between theory on the causes and consequences of biodiversity, we define in a precise way two kinds of differences among species: niche differences, which promote coexistence, and relative fitness differences, which promote competitive exclusion. In a classic model of exploitative competition, promoting coexistence by increasing niche differences typically, although not universally, increases the "relative yield total", a measure of diversity's effect on the biomass of competitors. In addition, however, we show that promoting coexistence by decreasing relative fitness differences also increases the relative yield total. Thus, two fundamentally different mechanisms of species coexistence both strengthen the influence of diversity on biomass yield. The model and our analysis also yield insight on the interpretation of experimental diversity manipulations. Specifically, the frequently reported "complementarity effect" appears to give a largely skewed estimate of resource partitioning. Likewise, the "selection effect" does not seem to isolate biomass changes attributable to species composition rather than species richness, as is commonly presumed. We conclude that past inferences about the cause of observed diversity-function relationships may be unreliable, and that new empirical estimates of niche and relative fitness differences are necessary to uncover the ecological mechanisms responsible for diversity-function relationships.