Synchrony matters more than species richness in plant community stability at a global scale
Enrique Valencia,Francesco de Bello,Thomas Galland,Peter B. Adler,Jan Lepš,Anna E-Vojtkó,Roel van Klink,Carlos P. Carmona,Jiří Danihelka,Jürgen Dengler,David J. Eldridge,Marc Estiarte,Ricardo García-González,Eric Garnier,Daniel Gómez‐García,Susan P. Harrison,Tomáš Herben,Ricardo Ibáñez,Anke Jentsch,Norbert Juergens,Miklós Kertész,Katja Klumpp,Frédérique Louault,Rob H. Marrs,Romà Ogaya,Gábor Ónodi,Robin J. Pakeman,Iker Pardo,Meelis Pärtel,Begoña Peco,Josep Peñuelas,Richard F. Pywell,Marta Rueda,Wolfgang Schmidt,Ute Schmiedel,Martin Schuetz,Hana Skálová,Petr Šmilauer,Marie Šmilauerová,Christian Smit,MingHua Song,Martin Stock,James Val,Vigdis Vandvik,David Ward,Karsten Wesche,Susan K. Wiser,Ben A. Woodcock,Truman P. Young,Fei-Hai Yu,Martin Zobel,Lars Götzenberger
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1920405117
IF: 11.1
2020-09-08
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Abstract:Significance The stability of ecological communities under ongoing climate and land-use change is fundamental to the sustainable management of natural resources through its effect on critical ecosystem services. Biodiversity is hypothesized to enhance stability through compensatory effects (decreased synchrony between species). However, the relative importance and interplay between different biotic and abiotic drivers of stability remain controversial. By analyzing long-term data from natural and seminatural ecosystems across the globe, we found that the degree of synchrony among dominant species was the main driver of stability, rather than species richness per se. These biotic effects overrode environmental drivers, which influenced the stability of communities by modulating the effects of richness and synchrony.
multidisciplinary sciences