To a first approximation, the distribution of biodiversity across the Earth can be described in terms of a relatively small number of broad-scale spatial patterns. Although these patterns are increasingly well documented, understanding why they exist constitutes one of the most significant intellectual challenges to ecologists and biogeographers. Theory is, however, developing rapidly, improving in its internal consistency, and more readily subjected to empirical challenge.

Functional diversity is a component of biodiversity that generally concerns the range of things that organisms do in communities and ecosystems. Here, we review how functional diversity can explain and predict the impact of organisms on ecosystems and thereby provide a mechanistic link between the two. Critical points in developing predictive measures of functional diversity are the choice of functional traits with which organisms are distinguished, how the diversity of that trait information is summarized into a measure of functional diversity, and that the measures of functional diversity are validated through quantitative analyses and experimental tests. There is a vast amount of trait information available for plant species and a substantial amount for animals. Choosing which traits to include in a particular measure of functional diversity will depend on the specific aims of a particular study. Quantitative methods for choosing traits and for assigning weighting to traits are being developed, but need much more work before we can be confident about trait choice. The number of ways of measuring functional diversity is growing rapidly. We divide them into four main groups. The first, the number of functional groups or types, has significant problems and researchers are more frequently using measures that do not require species to be grouped. Of these, some measure diversity by summarizing distances between species in trait space, some by estimating the size of the dendrogram required to describe the difference, and some include information about species' abundances. We show some new and important differences between these, as well as what they indicate about the responses of assemblages to loss of individuals. There is good experimental and analytical evidence that functional diversity can provide a link between organisms and ecosystems but greater validation of measures is required. We suggest that non-significant results have a range of alternate explanations that do not necessarily contradict positive effects of functional diversity. Finally, we suggest areas for development of techniques used to measure functional diversity, highlight some exciting questions that are being addressed using ideas about functional diversity, and suggest some directions for novel research.

Functional diversity is an important component of biodiversity, yet in comparison to taxonomic diversity, methods of quantifying functional diversity are less well developed. Here, we propose a means for quantifying functional diversity that may be particularly useful for determining how functional diversity is related to ecosystem functioning. This measure of functional diversity ''FD'' is defined as the total branch length of a functional dendrogram. Various characteristics of FD make it preferable to other measures of functional diversity, such as the number of functional groups in a community. Simulating species' trait values illustrates how the relative importance of richness and composition for FD depends on the effective dimensionality of the trait space in which species separate. Fewer dimensions increase the importance of community composition and functional redundancy. More dimensions increase the importance of species richness and decreases functional redundancy. Clumping of species in trait space increases the relative importance of community composition. Five natural communities show remarkably similar relationships between FD and species richness.

Summary 1.Little consensus has been reached as to general features of spatial variation in beta diversity, a fundamental component of species diversity. This could reflect a genuine lack of simple gradients in beta diversity, or a lack of agreement as to just what constitutes beta diversity. Unfortunately, a large number of approaches have been applied to the investigation of variation in beta diversity, which potentially makes comparisons of the findings difficult. 2. We review 24 measures of beta diversity for presence/absence data (the most frequent form of data to which such measures are applied) that have been employed in the literature, express many of them for the first time in common terms, and compare some of their basic properties. 3. Four groups of measures are distinguished, with a fundamental distinction arising between 'broad sense' measures incorporating differences in composition attributable to species richness gradients, and 'narrow sense' measures that focus on compositional differences independent of such gradients. On a number of occasions on which the former have been employed in the literature the latter may have been more appropriate, and there are many situations in which consideration of both kinds of measures would be valuable. 4. We particularly recommend (i) considering beta diversity measures in terms of matching/mismatching components (usually denoted a , b and c ) and thereby identifying the contribution of different sources of variation in species composition, and (ii) the use of ternary plots to express the relationship between the values of these measures and of the components, and as a way of understanding patterns in beta diversity.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species was increasingly used during the 1980s to assess the conservation status of species for policy and planning purposes. This use stimulated the development of a new set of quantitative criteria for listing species in the