Productivity is a poor predictor of plant species richness

Peter B. Adler; Eric W. Seabloom; Elizabeth T. Borer; Helmut Hillebrand; Yann Hautier; Andy Hector; W. Stanley Harpole; Lydia R. O'Halloran; James B. Grace; T. Michael Anderson; Jonathan D. Bakker; Lori A. Biederman; Cynthia S. Brown; Yvonne M. Buckley; Laura B. Calabrese; Cheng Jin Chu; Elsa E. Cleland; Scott L. Collins; Kathryn L. Cottingham; Michael J. Crawley; Ellen I. Damschen; Kendi F. Davies; Nicole M. DeCrappeo; Philip A. Fay; Jennifer Firn; Paul Frater; Eve I. Gasarch; Daniel S. Gruner; Nicole Hagenah; Janneke Hille Ris Lambers; Hope Humphries; Virginia L. Jin; Adam D. Kay; Kevin P. Kirkman; Julia A. Klein; Johannes M H Knops; Kimberly J. La Pierre; John G. Lambrinos; Wei Li; Andrew S. MacDougall; Rebecca L. McCulley; Brett A. Melbourne; Charles E. Mitchell; Joslin L. Moore; John W. Morgan; Brent Mortensen; John L. Orrock; Suzanne M. Prober; David A. Pyke; Anita C. Risch; Martin Schuetz; Melinda D. Smith; Carly J. Stevens; Lauren L. Sullivan; Gang Wang; Peter D. Wragg; Justin P. Wright; Louie H. Yang

doi:10.1126/science.1204498

Productivity is a poor predictor of plant species richness

Peter B. Adler, Eric W. Seabloom, Elizabeth T. Borer, Helmut Hillebrand, Yann Hautier, Andy Hector, W. Stanley Harpole, Lydia R. O'Halloran, James B. Grace, T. Michael Anderson, Jonathan D. Bakker, Lori A. Biederman, Cynthia S. Brown, Yvonne M. Buckley, Laura B. Calabrese, Cheng Jin Chu, Elsa E. Cleland, Scott L. Collins, Kathryn L. Cottingham, Michael J. CrawleyEllen I. Damschen, Kendi F. Davies, Nicole M. DeCrappeo, Philip A. Fay, Jennifer Firn, Paul Frater, Eve I. Gasarch, Daniel S. Gruner, Nicole Hagenah, Janneke Hille Ris Lambers, Hope Humphries, Virginia L. Jin, Adam D. Kay, Kevin P. Kirkman, Julia A. Klein, Johannes M H Knops, Kimberly J. La Pierre, John G. Lambrinos, Wei Li, Andrew S. MacDougall, Rebecca L. McCulley, Brett A. Melbourne, Charles E. Mitchell, Joslin L. Moore, John W. Morgan, Brent Mortensen, John L. Orrock, Suzanne M. Prober, David A. Pyke, Anita C. Risch, Martin Schuetz, Melinda D. Smith, Carly J. Stevens, Lauren L. Sullivan, Gang Wang, Peter D. Wragg, Justin P. Wright, Louie H. Yang

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

474 Scopus citations

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.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	1750-1753
Number of pages	4
Journal	Science
Volume	333
Issue number	6050
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204498
State	Published - Oct 23 2011

Access

10.1126/science.1204498

OpenUrl availability

Full text

Cite this

Adler, P. B., Seabloom, E. W., Borer, E. T., Hillebrand, H., Hautier, Y., Hector, A., Stanley Harpole, W., O'Halloran, L. R., Grace, J. B., Michael Anderson, T., Bakker, J. D., Biederman, L. A., Brown, C. S., Buckley, Y. M., Calabrese, L. B., Chu, C. J., Cleland, E. E., Collins, S. L., Cottingham, K. L., ... Yang, L. H. (2011). Productivity is a poor predictor of plant species richness. Science, 333(6050), 1750-1753. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204498

Adler, PB, Seabloom, EW , Borer, ET, Hillebrand, H, Hautier, Y, Hector, A, Stanley Harpole, W, O'Halloran, LR, Grace, JB, Michael Anderson, T, Bakker, JD, Biederman, LA, Brown, CS, Buckley, YM, Calabrese, LB, Chu, CJ, Cleland, EE, Collins, SL, Cottingham, KL, Crawley, MJ, Damschen, EI, Davies, KF, DeCrappeo, NM, Fay, PA, Firn, J, Frater, P, Gasarch, EI, Gruner, DS, Hagenah, N, Lambers, JHR, Humphries, H, Jin, VL, Kay, AD, Kirkman, KP, Klein, JA, Knops, JMH, La Pierre, KJ, Lambrinos, JG, Li, W, MacDougall, AS, McCulley, RL, Melbourne, BA, Mitchell, CE, Moore, JL, Morgan, JW, Mortensen, B, Orrock, JL, Prober, SM, Pyke, DA, Risch, AC, Schuetz, M, Smith, MD, Stevens, CJ, Sullivan, LL, Wang, G, Wragg, PD, Wright, JP & Yang, LH 2011, 'Productivity is a poor predictor of plant species richness', Science, vol. 333, no. 6050, pp. 1750-1753. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204498

@article{5ff0e330a56d4acb9fcb014a821eaef2,

title = "Productivity is a poor predictor of plant species richness",

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.",

author = "Adler, {Peter B.} and Seabloom, {Eric W.} and Borer, {Elizabeth T.} and Helmut Hillebrand and Yann Hautier and Andy Hector and {Stanley Harpole}, W. and O'Halloran, {Lydia R.} and Grace, {James B.} and {Michael Anderson}, T. and Bakker, {Jonathan D.} and Biederman, {Lori A.} and Brown, {Cynthia S.} and Buckley, {Yvonne M.} and Calabrese, {Laura B.} and Chu, {Cheng Jin} and Cleland, {Elsa E.} and Collins, {Scott L.} and Cottingham, {Kathryn L.} and Crawley, {Michael J.} and Damschen, {Ellen I.} and Davies, {Kendi F.} and DeCrappeo, {Nicole M.} and Fay, {Philip A.} and Jennifer Firn and Paul Frater and Gasarch, {Eve I.} and Gruner, {Daniel S.} and Nicole Hagenah and Lambers, {Janneke Hille Ris} and Hope Humphries and Jin, {Virginia L.} and Kay, {Adam D.} and Kirkman, {Kevin P.} and Klein, {Julia A.} and Knops, {Johannes M H} and {La Pierre}, {Kimberly J.} and Lambrinos, {John G.} and Wei Li and MacDougall, {Andrew S.} and McCulley, {Rebecca L.} and Melbourne, {Brett A.} and Mitchell, {Charles E.} and Moore, {Joslin L.} and Morgan, {John W.} and Brent Mortensen and Orrock, {John L.} and Prober, {Suzanne M.} and Pyke, {David A.} and Risch, {Anita C.} and Martin Schuetz and Smith, {Melinda D.} and Stevens, {Carly J.} and Sullivan, {Lauren L.} and Gang Wang and Wragg, {Peter D.} and Wright, {Justin P.} and Yang, {Louie H.}",

year = "2011",

month = oct,

day = "23",

doi = "10.1126/science.1204498",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "333",

pages = "1750--1753",

journal = "Science",

issn = "0036-8075",

publisher = "American Association for the Advancement of Science",

number = "6050",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Productivity is a poor predictor of plant species richness

AU - Adler, Peter B.

AU - Seabloom, Eric W.

AU - Borer, Elizabeth T.

AU - Hillebrand, Helmut

AU - Hautier, Yann

AU - Hector, Andy

AU - Stanley Harpole, W.

AU - O'Halloran, Lydia R.

AU - Grace, James B.

AU - Michael Anderson, T.

AU - Bakker, Jonathan D.

AU - Biederman, Lori A.

AU - Brown, Cynthia S.

AU - Buckley, Yvonne M.

AU - Calabrese, Laura B.

AU - Chu, Cheng Jin

AU - Cleland, Elsa E.

AU - Collins, Scott L.

AU - Cottingham, Kathryn L.

AU - Crawley, Michael J.

AU - Damschen, Ellen I.

AU - Davies, Kendi F.

AU - DeCrappeo, Nicole M.

AU - Fay, Philip A.

AU - Firn, Jennifer

AU - Frater, Paul

AU - Gasarch, Eve I.

AU - Gruner, Daniel S.

AU - Hagenah, Nicole

AU - Lambers, Janneke Hille Ris

AU - Humphries, Hope

AU - Jin, Virginia L.

AU - Kay, Adam D.

AU - Kirkman, Kevin P.

AU - Klein, Julia A.

AU - Knops, Johannes M H

AU - La Pierre, Kimberly J.

AU - Lambrinos, John G.

AU - Li, Wei

AU - MacDougall, Andrew S.

AU - McCulley, Rebecca L.

AU - Melbourne, Brett A.

AU - Mitchell, Charles E.

AU - Moore, Joslin L.

AU - Morgan, John W.

AU - Mortensen, Brent

AU - Orrock, John L.

AU - Prober, Suzanne M.

AU - Pyke, David A.

AU - Risch, Anita C.

AU - Schuetz, Martin

AU - Smith, Melinda D.

AU - Stevens, Carly J.

AU - Sullivan, Lauren L.

AU - Wang, Gang

AU - Wragg, Peter D.

AU - Wright, Justin P.

AU - Yang, Louie H.

PY - 2011/10/23

Y1 - 2011/10/23

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80053140747&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80053140747&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1126/science.1204498

DO - 10.1126/science.1204498

M3 - Article

C2 - 21940895

AN - SCOPUS:80053140747

SN - 0036-8075

VL - 333

SP - 1750

EP - 1753

JO - Science

JF - Science

IS - 6050

ER -

Productivity is a poor predictor of plant species richness

Abstract

Access

OpenUrl availability

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this