No abstract

The purpose of this review is to clarify the concepts of bias, precision and accuracy as they are commonly defined in the biostatistical literature, with our focus on the use of these concepts in quantitatively testing the performance of point estimators (specifically species richness estimators). We first describe the general concepts underlying bias, precision and accuracy, and then describe a number of commonly used unscaled and scaled performance measures of bias, precision and accuracy (e.g. mean error, variance, standard deviation, mean square error, root mean square error, mean absolute error, and all their scaled counterparts) which may be used to evaluate estimator performance. We also provide mathematical formulas and a worked example for most performance measures. Since every measure of estimator performance should be viewed as suggestive, not prescriptive, we also mention several other performance measures that have been used by biostatisticians or ecologists. We then outline several guidelines of how to test the performance of species richness estimators: the detailed description of data simulation models and resampling schemes, the use of real and simulated data sets on as many different estimators as possible, mathematical expressions for all estimators and performance measures, and the presentation of results for each scaled performance measure in numerical tables with increasing levels of sampling effort. We finish with a literature review of promising new research related to species richness estimation, and summarize the results of 14 studies that compared estimator performance, which confirm that with most data sets, non‐parametric estimators (mostly the Chao and jackknife estimators) perform better than other estimators, e.g. curve models or fitting species‐abundance distributions.

Studies of experimental grassland communities have demonstrated that plant diversity can stabilize productivity through species asynchrony, in which decreases in the biomass of some species are compensated for by increases in others. However, it remains unknown whether these findings are relevant to natural ecosystems, especially those for which species diversity is threatened by anthropogenic global change. Here we analyse diversity-stability relationships from 41 grasslands on five continents and examine how these relationships are affected by chronic fertilization, one of the strongest drivers of species loss globally. Unmanipulated communities with more species had greater species asynchrony, resulting in more stable biomass production, generalizing a result from biodiversity experiments to real-world grasslands. However, fertilization weakened the positive effect of diversity on stability. Contrary to expectations, this was not due to species loss after eutrophication but rather to an increase in the temporal variation of productivity in combination with a decrease in species asynchrony in diverse communities. Our results demonstrate separate and synergistic effects of diversity and eutrophication on stability, emphasizing the need to understand how drivers of global change interactively affect the reliable provisioning of ecosystem services in real-world systems.

Standardized sampling from many sites worldwide was used to address an important ecological problem.

Niche dimensionality provides a general theoretical explanation for biodiversity-more niches, defined by more limiting factors, allow for more ways that species can coexist. Because plant species compete for the same set of limiting resources, theory predicts that addition of a limiting resource eliminates potential trade-offs, reducing the number of species that can coexist. Multiple nutrient limitation of plant production is common and therefore fertilization may reduce diversity by reducing the number or dimensionality of belowground limiting factors. At the same time, nutrient addition, by increasing biomass, should ultimately shift competition from belowground nutrients towards a one-dimensional competitive trade-off for light. Here we show that plant species diversity decreased when a greater number of limiting nutrients were added across 45 grassland sites from a multi-continent experimental network. The number of added nutrients predicted diversity loss, even after controlling for effects of plant biomass, and even where biomass production was not nutrient-limited. We found that elevated resource supply reduced niche dimensionality and diversity and increased both productivity and compositional turnover. Our results point to the importance of understanding dimensionality in ecological systems that are undergoing diversity loss in response to multiple global change factors.

Terrestrial ecosystem productivity is widely accepted to be nutrient limited(1). Although nitrogen (N) is deemed a key determinant of aboveground net primary production (ANPP)(2,3), the prevalence of co-limitation by N and phosphorus (P) is increasingly recognized(4-8). However, the extent to which terrestrial productivity is co-limited by nutrients other than N and P has remained unclear. Here, we report results from a standardized factorial nutrient addition experiment, in which we added N, P and potassium (K) combined with a selection of micronutrients (K+μ), alone or in concert, to 42 grassland sites spanning five continents, and monitored ANPP. Nutrient availability limited productivity at 31 of the 42 grassland sites. And pairwise combinations of N, P, and K+μ co-limited ANPP at 29 of the sites. Nitrogen limitation peaked in cool, high latitude sites. Our findings highlight the importance of less studied nutrients, such as K and micronutrients, for grassland productivity, and point to significant variations in the type and degree of nutrient limitation. We suggest that multiple-nutrient constraints must be considered when assessing the ecosystem-scale consequences of nutrient enrichment.

There is increasing evidence that areas of outstanding conservation importance may coincide with dense human settlement or impact. We tested the generality of these findings using 1 degree-resolution data for sub-Saharan Africa. We find that human population density is positively correlated with species richness of birds, mammals, snakes, and amphibians. This association holds for widespread, narrowly endemic, and threatened species and looks set to persist in the face of foreseeable population growth. Our results contradict earlier expectations of low conflict based on the idea that species richness decreases and human impact increases with primary productivity. We find that across Africa, both variables instead exhibit unimodal relationships with productivity. Modifying priority-setting to take account of human density shows that, at this scale, conflicts between conservation and development are not easily avoided, because many densely inhabited grid cells contain species found nowhere else.

This paper stresses that the mechanism of coexistence is the key to understanding the relationship between species richness and community productivity. Using model plant communities, we explored two general kinds of mechanisms based on resource heterogeneity and recruitment limitation, with and without any trade‐off between reproductive and competitive abilities. We generated different levels of species richness by changing model parameters, in particular the number of species in the regional pool, the degree of recruitment limitation, and the level of heterogeneity. Different diversity–productivity patterns are obtained with different coexistence mechanisms, indicating there is no reason to expect any general relationship between species richness and productivity. We discuss these results in the context of the within‐site and across‐site aspects of the relationship between species richness and productivity. Furthermore, we extend these results to hypothesize the relationship between species richness and productivity for other coexistence mechanisms not explicitly considered here.