Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Productivity is a poor predictor of plant species richness

Journal article published in 2011 by Peter B. Adler, Eric W. Seabloom, Elizabeth T. Borer, Helmut Hillebrand, Yann Hautier, Yann Hautler, Andrew Hector, W. Stanley Harpole, Ws Stanley Harpole ORCID, Lydia R. O’Halloran, Lydia R. O'Halloran, James B. Grace, Tm Michael Anderson, Jonathan D. Bakker, Lori A. Biederman and other authors.
This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Question mark in circle
Preprint: policy unknown
Question mark in circle
Postprint: policy unknown
Question mark in circle
Published version: policy unknown

Abstract

For more than 30 years, the relationship between net primary productivity and species richness has generated intense debate in ecology about the processes regulating local diversity. The original view, which is still widely accepted, holds that the relationship is hump-shaped, with richness first rising and then declining with increasing productivity. Although recent meta-analyses questioned the generality of hump-shaped patterns, these syntheses have been criticized for failing to account for methodological differences among studies. We addressed such concerns by conducting standardized sampling in 48 herbaceous-dominated plant communities on five continents. We found no clear relationship between productivity and fine-scale (meters(-2)) richness within sites, within regions, or across the globe. Ecologists should focus on fresh, mechanistic approaches to understanding the multivariate links between productivity and richness.