Species loss drives ecosystem function in experiments, but in nature the importance of species loss depends on dominance
Species loss drives ecosystem function in experiments, but in nature the importance of species loss depends on dominance
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/geb.13137
复制
发表时间：
2020-06-28
影响因子：
6.4
通讯作者：
Winfree, Rachael
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Genung, Mark A.;Fox, Jeremy;Winfree, Rachael
目标 数十年的实验研究已经明确表明物种丰富度与生态系统功能之间存在正相关关系。然而，权威评论发现，对于物种丧失如何影响自然群落的功能，尚未达成共识。我们以相同的方式分析实验和观察数据，并测试它们是否产生相似的结果。地点北美和欧洲（实验社区）；全球（自然社区）。时间段 实验社区：1998-2013；自然群落：1982-2018。研究的主要类群实验群落：温带草原植物；自然群落：温带草原植物、热带森林树木、海带森林生产者和本土蜜蜂。方法 我们使用受 Price 方程启发的方法来分析来自全球实验和自然群落的 129 个数据集。我们测试了物种丧失对生态系统功能的影响如何随物种丧失的优势和非随机性而变化，以及这两个因素在实验和观察之间有何不同。结果 在实验和自然群落中进行的研究就物种丧失的影响得出了不同的结论。首先，在实验中，物种丧失对生态系统功能的影响比在自然界中更大。其次，物种丧失的重要性与自然界中的优势地位呈负相关，因为随着优势地位的增强，消失的物种越来越多地是那些对生态系统功能贡献不大的物种。尽管实验群落和自然群落表现出相似的优势水平，但在实验中不可能出现类似的关系，因为物种丧失的顺序是随机设计的。主要结论 物种丧失有时（但并非总是）是自然界功能丧失的主要驱动因素。物种丧失的重要性的变化并不混乱且依赖于环境；相反，它是由功能优势预测的。尽管实验和自然群落的结果在几个关键方面相似，但它们的不同之处在于，物种丧失是实验中而不是自然界中生态系统功能的一致预测因素。
Aim Decades of experimental research have conclusively shown a positive relationship between species richness and ecosystem function. However, authoritative reviews find no consensus on how species loss affects function in natural communities. We analyse experimental and observational data in an identical way and test whether they produce similar results. Location North America and Europe (experimental communities); global (natural communities). Time period Experimental communities: 1998-2013; natural communities: 1982-2018. Major taxa studied Experimental communities: temperate grassland plants; natural communities: temperate grassland plants, tropical forest trees, kelp forest producers and native bees. Methods We used an approach inspired by the Price equation to analyse 129 datasets from experimental and natural communities worldwide. We tested how the effects of species loss on ecosystem function varied with dominance and the non-randomness of species loss and, in turn, how these two factors differed between experiments and observations. Results Studies carried out in experimental and natural communities reached different conclusions regarding the effects of species loss. First, species loss had greater effects on ecosystem function in experiments than in nature. Second, the importance of species loss was negatively correlated with dominance in nature because as dominance increased, lost species were increasingly those contributing little to ecosystem function. Although experimental and natural communities exhibited similar levels of dominance, an analogous relationship was not possible in experiments because the order of species loss was randomized by design. Main conclusions Species loss was sometimes, but not always, the major driver of loss of function in nature. Variation in the importance of species loss was not messy and context dependent; instead, it was predicted by functional dominance. Although results from experimental and natural communities were similar in several key ways, they differed in that species loss was a consistent predictor of ecosystem function in experiments and not in nature.