Three decades of research have demonstrated that biodiversity can promote the functioning of ecosystems. Yet, it is unclear whether the positive effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning will persist under various types of global environmental change drivers. We conducted a meta‐analysis of 46 factorial experiments manipulating both species richness and the environment to test how global change drivers (i.e. warming, drought, nutrient addition or CO2 enrichment) modulated the effect of biodiversity on multiple ecosystem functions across three taxonomic groups (microbes, phytoplankton and plants). We found that biodiversity increased ecosystem functioning in both ambient and manipulated environments, but often not to the same degree. In particular, biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning were larger in stressful environments induced by global change drivers, indicating that high‐diversity communities were more resistant to environmental change. Using a subset of studies, we also found that the positive effects of biodiversity were mainly driven by interspecific complementarity and that these effects increased over time in both ambient and manipulated environments. Our findings support biodiversity conservation as a key strategy for sustainable ecosystem management in the face of global environmental change.
Multispecies tree planting has long been applied in forestry and landscape restoration in the hope of providing better timber production and ecosystem services; however, a systematic assessment of its effectiveness is lacking. We compiled a global dataset of matched single-species and multispecies plantations to evaluate the impact of multispecies planting on stand growth. Average tree height, diameter at breast height, and aboveground biomass were 5.4, 6.8, and 25.5% higher, respectively, in multispecies stands compared with single-species stands. These positive effects were mainly the result of interspecific complementarity and were modulated by differences in leaf morphology and leaf life span, stand age, planting density, and temperature. Our results have implications for designing afforestation and reforestation strategies and bridging experimental studies of biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships with real-world practices.
The biotic mechanisms underlying ecosystem functioning and stability have been extensively—but separately—explored in the literature, making it difficult to understand the relationship between functioning and stability. In this study, we used community models to examine how complementarity and selection, the two major biodiversity mechanisms known to enhance ecosystem biomass production, affect ecosystem stability. Our analytic and simulation results show that although complementarity promotes stability, selection impairs it. The negative effects of selection on stability operate through weakening portfolio effects and selecting species that have high productivity but low tolerance to perturbations (“risk‐prone” species). In contrast, complementarity enhances stability by increasing portfolio effects and reducing the relative abundance of risk‐prone species. Consequently, ecosystem functioning and stability exhibit either a synergy, if complementarity effects prevail, or trade‐off, if selection effects prevail. Across species richness levels, ecosystem functioning and stability tend to be positively related, but negative relationships can occur when selection co‐varies with richness. Our findings provide novel insights for understanding the functioning‐stability relationship, with potential implications for both ecological research and ecosystem management.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.