Limits...
Revisiting spatial scale in the productivity-species richness relationship: fundamental issues and global change implications.

McBride PD, Cusens J, Gillman LN - AoB Plants (2014)

Bottom Line: It has become increasingly clear that at small scales productivity-species richness relationships (PSRs) are variable, while at macro scales relationships are typically positive.Better understanding the effects of scale on PSRs contributes to the debate on the relationship between species richness and productivity, which in turn allows us to better predict how both long- and short-term biodiversity patterns and ecosystem functioning might be altered under global change scenarios.This gives focus on future research to clarify causal pathways between species richness and productivity with appropriate attention to scale as an important focusing element.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Institute for Applied Ecology New Zealand, School of Applied Science, Auckland University of Technology, Private Bag 92006, Auckland, New Zealand.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Relationship between modelled NPP and plant species richness across size classes of global terrestrial ecoregions: (A) small ecoregions between 103 and 104 km2 (N = 117); (B) medium ecoregions between 104 and 105 km2 (N = 339); (C) large ecoregions between 105 and 106 km2 (N = 302); and (D) the largest ecoregion subset (>105.5 km2) (N = 115). Data sources as in the Fig. 1 caption.
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4231355&req=5

PLU057F2: Relationship between modelled NPP and plant species richness across size classes of global terrestrial ecoregions: (A) small ecoregions between 103 and 104 km2 (N = 117); (B) medium ecoregions between 104 and 105 km2 (N = 339); (C) large ecoregions between 105 and 106 km2 (N = 302); and (D) the largest ecoregion subset (>105.5 km2) (N = 115). Data sources as in the Fig. 1 caption.

Mentions: We performed several checks to ensure that comparisons across size classes were not confounded by other variables. First, Kier et al. (2005) provide data quality measures for their estimates, depending on what type of information was used to derive them. In the case of the ‘poor’ and ‘very poor’ estimates, species richness values are indirect and some have been partially derived with climate information. The distribution of the four quality categories was unequal across our size classes, with higher average quality in the largest size class (105–106 km2), and lower average quality in the middle size class. Therefore, we compared analyses on the top and bottom two quality categories, and found that results were close to identical [see Supporting Information]. Second, the analysis would be weakened if a full range of productivity was not represented in each of the size classes. However, the range of productivity in all bins was similar (Figs 1 and 2). Third, we included realm and biome information in analyses to account for the possible confounding influence from these sources, whether through historical effects or from differences caused by sampling biases (i.e. more direct and accurate estimates of species richness in well-studied northern temperate ecoregions).Figure 1.


Revisiting spatial scale in the productivity-species richness relationship: fundamental issues and global change implications.

McBride PD, Cusens J, Gillman LN - AoB Plants (2014)

Relationship between modelled NPP and plant species richness across size classes of global terrestrial ecoregions: (A) small ecoregions between 103 and 104 km2 (N = 117); (B) medium ecoregions between 104 and 105 km2 (N = 339); (C) large ecoregions between 105 and 106 km2 (N = 302); and (D) the largest ecoregion subset (>105.5 km2) (N = 115). Data sources as in the Fig. 1 caption.
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4231355&req=5

PLU057F2: Relationship between modelled NPP and plant species richness across size classes of global terrestrial ecoregions: (A) small ecoregions between 103 and 104 km2 (N = 117); (B) medium ecoregions between 104 and 105 km2 (N = 339); (C) large ecoregions between 105 and 106 km2 (N = 302); and (D) the largest ecoregion subset (>105.5 km2) (N = 115). Data sources as in the Fig. 1 caption.
Mentions: We performed several checks to ensure that comparisons across size classes were not confounded by other variables. First, Kier et al. (2005) provide data quality measures for their estimates, depending on what type of information was used to derive them. In the case of the ‘poor’ and ‘very poor’ estimates, species richness values are indirect and some have been partially derived with climate information. The distribution of the four quality categories was unequal across our size classes, with higher average quality in the largest size class (105–106 km2), and lower average quality in the middle size class. Therefore, we compared analyses on the top and bottom two quality categories, and found that results were close to identical [see Supporting Information]. Second, the analysis would be weakened if a full range of productivity was not represented in each of the size classes. However, the range of productivity in all bins was similar (Figs 1 and 2). Third, we included realm and biome information in analyses to account for the possible confounding influence from these sources, whether through historical effects or from differences caused by sampling biases (i.e. more direct and accurate estimates of species richness in well-studied northern temperate ecoregions).Figure 1.

Bottom Line: It has become increasingly clear that at small scales productivity-species richness relationships (PSRs) are variable, while at macro scales relationships are typically positive.Better understanding the effects of scale on PSRs contributes to the debate on the relationship between species richness and productivity, which in turn allows us to better predict how both long- and short-term biodiversity patterns and ecosystem functioning might be altered under global change scenarios.This gives focus on future research to clarify causal pathways between species richness and productivity with appropriate attention to scale as an important focusing element.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Institute for Applied Ecology New Zealand, School of Applied Science, Auckland University of Technology, Private Bag 92006, Auckland, New Zealand.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus