Higher levels of multiple ecosystem services are found in forests with more tree species

Nature Communications

Volumn 4, Issue , 2013, Pages

  Gamfeldt, Lars ^a,b   Snäll, Tord ^a   Bagchi, Robert ^c   Jonsson, Micael ^d   Gustafsson, Lena ^a   Kjellander, Petter ^a   Ruiz Jaen, María C ^e   Fröberg, Mats ^a   Stendahl, Johan ^a   Philipson, Christopher D ^f   Mikusiński, Grzegorz ^a   Andersson, Erik ^a,g   Westerlund, Bertil ^a   Andrén, Henrik ^a   Moberg, Fredrik ^g   Moen, Jon ^d   Bengtsson, Jan ^a  

^a SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

^c DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^d UMEÅ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^e UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^f UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^g STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FOREST PRODUCT; FRUIT; SOIL CARBON; SPECIES RICHNESS;

ARTICLE; BERRY; BIODIVERSITY; BIOMASS PRODUCTION; CARBON STORAGE; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; FOREST; NONHUMAN; SOIL; TREE;

ANIMALS; BIOMASS; ECOSYSTEM; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; SPECIES SPECIFICITY; SWEDEN; TREES;

EID: 84875897914     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20411723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms2328     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Biodiversity Synthesis. World Resources Institute. 100 (Island Press, 2005).
2. Naeem, S., Bunker, D. E., Hector, A., Loreau, M. & Perrings, C. H. Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning, & Human Wellbeing, an Ecological and Economic Perspective (Oxford University Press, 2009).
3. Cardinale, B. J. et al. Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature 486, 59-67 (2012).
4. Schmid, B. et al. in Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning, & Human Wellbeing: An Ecological and Economic Perspective. (eds Naeem, S. et al.) (Oxford University Press, 2009).
5. Cardinale, B. J. et al. The functional role of producer diversity in ecosystems. Am. J. Bot. 98, 572-592 (2011).
6. Wardle, D. A. & Jonsson, M. Biodiversity effects in real ecosystems-a response to Duffy. Front. Ecol. Environ. 8, 10-11 (2010).
7. Wardle, D. A. & Zackrisson, O. Effects of species and functional group loss on island ecosystem properties. Nature 435, 806-810 (2005).
8. Reich, P. B. et al. Impacts of biodiversity loss escalate through time as redundancy fades. Science 336, 589-592 (2012).
9. Naeem, S., Bunker, D. E., Hector, A., Loreau, M. & Perrings, C. H. in Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning, & Human Wellbeing: An Ecological and Economic Perspective. (eds Naeem, S et al. Ch. 1, 3-13 Oxford University Press, 2009).
10. Grace, J. B. et al. Does species diversity limit productivity in natural grassland communities? Ecol. Lett. 10, 680-689 (2007).
11. Vila, M. et al. Species richness and wood production: a positive association in Mediterranean forests. Ecol. Lett. 10, 241-250 (2007).
12. Paquette, A. & Messier, C. The effect of biodiversity on tree productivity: from temperate to boreal forests. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 20, 170-180 (2011).
13. Hector, A. & Bagchi, R. Biodiversity and ecosystem multifunctionality. Nature 448, 188-190 (2007).
14. Gamfeldt, L., Hillebrand, H. & Jonsson, P. R. Multiple functions increase the importance of biodiversity for overall ecosystem functioning. Ecology 89, 1223-1231 (2008).
15. Zavaleta, E. S., Pasari, J. R., Hulvey, K. B. & Tilman, G. D. Sustaining multiple ecosystem functions in grassland communities requires higher biodiversity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 1443-1446 (2010).
16. Maestre, F. T. et al. Plant species richness and ecosystem multifunctionality in global drylands. Science 335, 214-218 (2012).
17. Larigauderie, A. & Mooney, H. A. The Intergovernmental science-policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: moving a step closer to an IPCC-like mechanism for biodiversity. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2, 9-14 (2010).
18. Hansen, M. C., Stehman, S. V. & Potapov, P. V. Quantification of global gross forest cover loss. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 8650-8655 (2010).
19. Frivold, L. H. & Frank, J. Growth of mixed birch-coniferous stands in relation to pure coniferous stands at similar sites in south-eastern Norway. Scand. J. Forest Res. 17, 139-149 (2002).
20. Pretzsch, H. & Schutze, G. Transgressive overyielding in mixed compared with pure stands of Norway spruce and European beech in Central Europe: evidence on stand level and explanation on individual tree level. Eur. J. Forest Res. 128, 183-204 (2009).
21. Bonan, G. B. Forests and climate change: forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests. Science 320, 1444-1449 (2008).
22. Janisch, J. E. & Harmon, M. E. Successional changes in live and dead wood carbon stores: implications for net ecosystem productivity. Tree Physiol. 22, 77-89 (2002).
23. Mace, G. M., Norris, K. & Fitter, A. H. Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multilayered relationship. Trends Ecol. Evol. 27, 19-26 (2012).
24. Cotta, H.v. Anweisung zum Waldbau (Arnoldische Buchhandlung 1828).
25. Pretzsch, H. in Forest Diversity and Function. Vol. Ecological Studies (eds Scherer-Lorenzen, M., Körner, C. & Schulze, E. D.) 41-64 (Springer-Verlag, 2005).
26. Hooper, D. U. & Vitousek, P. M. Effects of plant composition and diversity on nutrient cycling. Ecol. Monogr. 68, 121-149 (1998).
27. Duffy, J. E., Richardson, J. P. & Canuel, E. A. Grazer diversity effects on ecosystem functioning in seagrass beds. Ecol. Lett. 6, 637-645 (2003).
28. Miina, J., Hotanen, J. P. & Salo, K. Modelling the abundance and temporal variation in the production of bilberry (Vaccinium myrtillus L.) in Finnish mineral soil forests. Silva. Fenn. 43, 577-593 (2009).
29. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. in Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010: Main Report (FAO Forestry Paper Rome, 2010).
30. Swedish Forest Agency. Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2012: Official Statistics of Sweden (Jönköping, 2012).
31. Anderson, R. C., Loucks, O. L. & Swain, A. M. Herbaceous response to canopy cover light intensity and throughfall precipitation in coniferous forests. Ecology 50, 255-263 (1969).
32. Nelson, E. et al. Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front. Ecol. Environ. 7, 4-11 (2009).
33. Raudsepp-Hearne, C., Peterson, G. D. & Bennett, E. M. Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 5242-5247 (2010).
34. Schnitzer, S. A. et al. Soil microbes drive the classic plant diversity-productivity pattern. Ecology 92, 296-303 (2010).
35. Godbold, J. A. & Solan, M. Relative importance of biodiversity and the abiotic environment in mediating an ecosystem process. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 396, 273-282 (2009).
36. Dise, N. B., Rothwell, J. J., Gauci, V., van der Salm, C. & de Vries, W. Predicting dissolved inorganic nitrogen leaching in European forests using two independent databases. Sci. Total Environ. 407, 1798-1808 (2009).
37. Bulling, M. T. et al. Marine biodiversity-ecosystem functions under uncertain environmental futures. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 365, 2107-2116 (2010).
38. Hickler, T. et al. Projecting the future distribution of European potential natural vegetation zones with a generalized, tree species-based dynamic vegetation model. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 21, 50-63 (2012).
39. Scherer-Lorenzen, M., Körner, C. & Schulze, E. D. Forest Diversity and Function Vol. 176 (Springer-Verlag, 2005).
40. Morin, X., Fahse, L., Scherer-Lorenzen, M. & Bugmann, H. Tree species richness promotes productivity in temperate forests through strong complementarity between species. Ecol. Lett. 14, 1211-1219 (2011).
41. Caspersen, J. P. & Pacala, S. W. Successional diversity and forest ecosystem function. Ecol. Res. 16, 895-903 (2001).
42. Worm, B. et al. Impacts of biodiversity loss on ocean ecosystem services. Science 314, 787-790 (2006).
43. Danovaro, R. et al. Exponential decline of deep-sea ecosystem functioning linked to benthic biodiversity loss. Curr. Biol. 18, 1-8 (2008).
44. Mora, C. et al. Global human footprint on the linkage between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning in reef fishes. PLoS Biol. 9, e1000606 (2011).
45. Ptacnik, R. et al. Diversity predicts stability and resource use efficiency in natural phytoplankton communities. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 5134-5138 (2008).
46. Isbell, F. et al. High plant diversity is needed to maintain ecosystem services. Nature 477, 199-202 (2011).
47. Foley, J. A. et al. Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature 478, 337-342 (2011).
48. Hooper, D. U. et al. A global synthesis reveals biodiversity loss as a major driver of ecosystem change. Nature 486, 105-108 (2012).
49. Shepherd, G. The Ecosystem Approach: Learning from Experience (IUCN (2008).
50. Axelsson, A.-L. et al. in National Forest Inventories-Pathways for Common Reporting. (eds Tomppo, E., Gschwantner, Th., Lawrence, M. & McRoberts, R. E.) 541-553 (Springer, 2010).
51. Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S. & Rubin, D. B. Bayesian Data Analysis 2nd edn (CRC Press, 2004).
52. Spiegelhalter, D. J., Best, N. G., Carlin, B. R. & van der Linde, A. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B Stat. Methodol. 64, 583-616 (2002).
53. Thomas, A., O'Hara, R. B., Ligges, U. & Sturtz, S. Making BUGS open. R News 6, 12-17 (2006).
54. Marklund, L. G. Biomass Functions for Pine, Spruce and Birch in Sweden (Department of Forest Survey, SLU, 1988).
55. Petersson, H. & Ståhl, G. Functions for Below-Ground Biomass of Pinus Sylvestris, Picea Abies, Betula Pendula and Betula Pubescens in Sweden (Department of Forest Resource Management and Geomatics, SLU (2006).
56. Cederlund, G., Ljungqvist, H., Markgren, G. & Stålfelt, F. Foods of moose and roe deer at Grimsö in central Sweden-results of rumen content analysis. Swed. Wildlife Res. 11, 167-247 (1980).
57. Hanley, T. A. A nutritional view of understanding and complexity in the problem of diet selection by deer (Cervidae). Oikos 79, 209-218 (1997).
58. Boman, M., Mattsson, L., Ericsson, G. R. & Kriström, B. Moose hunting values in Sweden now and two decades ago: the Swedish hunters revisited. Environ. Resource Econ. 50, 515-530 (2011).
59. National Atlas of Sweden. The Royal Swedish Academy of Agriculture and Forestry. Agriculture and Forestry in Sweden Since 1900 - a Cartographic Description 232 (Stockholm, 2011).
60. Warfvinge, P. & Sverdrup, H. Critical Loads of Acidity to Swedish Forest Soils. Methods, Data and Results 104 (Lund, 1995).