Quantifying the evidence for biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning and services

Abstract

Concern is growing about the consequences of biodiversity loss for ecosystem functioning, for the provision of ecosystem services, and for human well being. Experimental evidence for a relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem process rates is compelling, but the issue remains contentious. Here, we present the first rigorous quantitative assessment of this relationship through meta-analysis of experimental work spanning 50 years to June 2004. We analysed 446 measures of biodiversity effects (252 in grasslands), 319 of which involved primary producer manipulations or measurements. Our analyses show that: biodiversity effects are weaker if biodiversity manipulations are less well controlled; effects of biodiversity change on processes are weaker at the ecosystem compared with the community level and are negative at the population level; productivity-related effects decline with increasing number of trophic links between those elements manipulated and those measured; biodiversity effects on stability measures (ÔinsuranceÕ effects) are not stronger than biodiversity effects on performance measures. For those ecosystem services which could be assessed here, there is clear evidence that biodiversity has positive effects on most. Whilst such patterns should be further confirmed, a precautionary approach to biodiversity management would seem prudent in the meantime.

A Review of the Elements of Human Well-Being with an Emphasis on the Contribution of Ecosystem Services

“…The consequences of biodiversity loss for ecosystem functioning, for the provision of ecosystem services, and for human well-being is a growing concern. Experimental evidence for a relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem process rates is compelling (Balvanera et al 2006). Marine biodiversity loss is increasingly impairing the ocean's capacity to provide food, maintain water quality, and recover from perturbations (Worm et al 2006).…”

Trait‐based approaches to analyze links between the drivers of change and ecosystem services: Synthesizing existing evidence and future challenges

“…Direct drivers of change include land‐use change, climate change, invasive alien species, overexploitation, and pollution (Pereira, Navarro, & Martins, 2012; Vitousek, Mooney, Lubchenco, & Melillo, 1997). The loss of biodiversity may alter ecosystem functioning and the delivery of ecosystem services, with major repercussions on human well‐being (Balvanera et al., 2006; Dirzo et al., 2014; Hanski et al., 2012; Mace, Norris, & Fitter, 2012). Although biodiversity is assumed to be critical for providing ecosystem services (Cardinale et al., 2012; De Bello et al., 2010; Harrison et al., 2014), our understanding about the links between biodiversity and individual ecosystem services remains incomplete (Balvanera et al., 2014; Bennett et al., 2015; Isbell et al., 2011; Suding et al., 2008).…”

Biodiversity explains maximum variation in productivity under experimental warming, nitrogen addition, and grazing in mountain grasslands

“…The relationship between plant biodiversity and ecosystem function has been a major research topic in ecology for several decades, and while there is general empirical support for a positive effect of biodiversity on function from manipulative experiments (Balvanera et al., 2006; Cardinale et al., 2006; Tilman, Isbell, & Cowles, 2014), there is a lack of clarity about how anthropogenic changes in plant biodiversity might affect biomass production in more natural systems (Zavaleta & Hulvey, 2007). Inconsistent biodiversity effects on productivity could result from how biodiversity is measured, the confounding effect of environmental heterogeneity, and the nature of the anthropogenic impacts.…”