Skip to main content
UKPMC Funders Author Manuscripts logoLink to UKPMC Funders Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Apr 26.
Published in final edited form as: J Plant Physiol. 2014 Sep 16;172:82–91. doi: 10.1016/j.jplph.2014.07.022

Global biodiversity, stoichiometry and ecosystem function responses to human-induced C-N-P imbalances

Jofre Carnicer a,c,d,*, Jordi Sardans b,c, Constanti Stefanescu b,c,e, Andreu Ubach d, Mireia Bartrons b,c, Dolores Asensio b,c, Josep Peñuelas b,c
PMCID: PMC6485510  EMSID: EMS62913  PMID: 25270104

Abstract

Global change analyses usually consider biodiversity as a global asset that needs to be preserved. Biodiversity is frequently analysed mainly as a response variable affected by diverse environmental drivers. However, recent studies highlight that gradients of biodiversity are associated with gradual changes in the distribution of key dominant functional groups characterized by distinctive traits and stoichiometry, which in turn often define the rates of ecosystem processes and nutrient cycling. Moreover, pervasive links have been reported between biodiversity, food web structure, ecosystem function and species stoichiometry. Here we review current global stoichiometric gradients and how future distributional shifts in key functional groups may in turn influence basic ecosystem functions (production, nutrient cycling, decomposition) and therefore could exert a feed-back effect on stoichiometric gradients. The C-N-P stoichiometry of most primary producers (phytoplankton, algae, plants) has been linked to functional trait continua (i.e. to major axes of phenotypic variation observed in inter-specific analyses of multiple traits). In contrast, the C-N-P stoichiometry of higher-level consumers remains less precisely quantified in many taxonomic groups. We show that significant links are observed between trait continua across trophic levels. In spite of recent advances, the future reciprocal feedbacks between key functional groups, biodiversity and ecosystem functions remain largely uncertain. The reported evidence, however, highlights the key role of stoichiometric traits and suggests the need of a progressive shift towards an ecosystemic and stoichiometric perspective in global biodiversity analyses.

Keywords: stoichiometry, biodiversity, species richness, ecosystem function

Introduction: Global changes in biodiversity and Earth system stoichiometry

During the last centuries human activities have significantly altered both global biodiversity patterns and nutrient cycling, increasing the availability of nitrogen and carbon in the biosphere and causing widespread biodiversity declines (Rockström et al., 2009; Elser et al., 2009; Butchart et al., 2010; Erisman et al., 2013). Critically, the ongoing human-induced increases in carbon and nitrogen are not paralleled by a proportional increase in phosphorus input. As a result, these changes are producing an unprecedented human-induced imbalance between C- N- and P stoichiometry in earth’s life system (Peñuelas et al., 2012, 2013a). Here we analyse how increased C-N-P imbalances in the earth system may alter global biodiversity patterns and their effect on ecosystem functions.

Fossil fuel combustion and crop fertilization have changed the global nitrogen cycle, leading to a significant increase in atmospheric N deposition at the global scale (Vitousek et al., 1997; Rockström et al., 2009; Canfield et al., 2010; Peñuelas et al., 2013a). N inputs of anthropogenic origin into the Biosphere have been estimated in 165–259 Tg N yr-1. Notably, this quantity is roughly equivalent to the total amount of N fixed in the biosphere by natural processes (Elser et al., 2009; Peñuelas et al., 2012. 2013a). Due to the continuous anthropogenic inputs of N into the system, atmospheric N deposition has continuously increased from 32 Tg N yr-1 in 1860 to the current levels of 112-116 Tg yr-1 (Peñuelas et al., 2012, 2013a). Both reduced and oxygenated forms of inorganic N in the atmosphere are continuously introduced in terrestrial ecosystems, mainly through dry deposition, wet deposition or cloud water deposition processes (Throop and Lerdau, 2004; Elser et al., 2009). Generally, the concentrations in N deposition of the reduced (NHx) and oxygenated (NOy) forms usually depend on the relative importance of agricultural and fossil fuel combustion activities at the regional scale (Throop and Lerdau, 2004; Sutton et al., 2007).

Human-induced imbalances on environmental C-N-P stoichiometry can impact biodiversity through multiple processes, including fertilization, eutrophication and acidification of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, increasing susceptibility to pests and environmental stresses, altering competitive and mutualistic relationships or by causing direct toxic effects on plants (Johnson, 1993; Olsson and Tyler, 2004; Elser et al., 2009; Bobbink et al., 2010; Stevens et al., 2010; Payne et al., 2013). For example, in the case of terrestrial plants increased ammonium availability can be toxic and cause very poor root and shoot development, especially in habitats with nitrate as the dominant N form (Bobbink et al., 2010). Likewise, the deposition of nitric acid frequently alters soil chemistry and leads to the depletion of essential cations (Mg, Ca, K) and can decrease soil pH and mobilize aluminum (Al) into the soil solution (Throop and Lerdau, 2004; Bobbink et al., 2010). Soil acidification in turn reduces biodiversity by producing toxicity effects due to exceedance of biological thresholds to soil pH and due to the release of toxic ions such as Al3+ (Bobbink et al., 2010; Jones et al., 2014). Similarly, the rates of N mineralization and nitrification tend to increase with N deposition (Throop and Lerdau 2004), but mineralization rates can also decline after soils become N saturated leading to reduced nitrification and promoting the accumulation of litter (Throop and Lerdau, 2004; Bobbink et al., 2010; Jones et al., 2014). N deposition can result in both reduced demographic performance of plants and reduced resistence to pathogens and insect pests, and can also in turn increase leaf N content and promote herbivory (Bobbink et al., 2010). Moreover, N deposition can alter shoot/root ratios and influence the susceptibility of plants to drought and frost (Bobbink et al., 2010). Finally, changes on soil pH also influence P availability and affect plant growth (Kooijman et al., 1998; Jones et al., 2014). In sum, the available evidence highlights that multiple ecological processes have been largely impacted by increased N deposition rates and growing C-N-P imbalances.

High levels of nitrogen deposition have been reported mainly on terrestrial soils and lakes in densely populated areas of the Northern Hemisphere and several populated coasts across the globe (e.g. China, South America, North Atlantic and Baltic Sea coasts), causing important declines in biodiversity in these areas (Bobbink et al., 2010; Stevens et al., 2010; Kim et al., 2011; Payne et al., 2013). In contrast, phosphorus deposition, mainly caused by mineral aerosols (e.g. dust and wildfire ashes) but also by anthropogenic combustion that seems now to represent 30% of the global atmospheric P source (Wang et al., 2014), has been globally quantified in about 3–4 Tg P yr−1(Wang et al., 2014). These quantities are roughly one order of magnitude smaller than global nitrogen deposition. Phosphorus fertilizers are less volatile and are not widely distributed by large-scale deposition processes, being mainly transported to nearby ecosystems after their application (Peñuelas et al., 2013a). Therefore, major phosphorus fertilizer impacts have been mainly concentrated in some estuarine areas and in soils and streams located nearby intensively fertilized areas (Peñuelas et al., 2009, 2013a).

During the XXI century current high levels of nitrogen deposition in populated temperate regions of the Northern Hemisphere are expected to expand into tropical regions (Peñuelas et al., 2013a). Tilman et al. (2001) predicted a further 2.4- to 2.7-fold increase in agriculturally driven eutrophication with N and P by the year 2050. These global changes in N and P availability and in N:P ratio could alter the capacity of the biosphere to fix carbon and global nutrient cycling dynamics (Hessen et al., 2004). By the end of the 21st century, for example, recent biogeochemical modelling analyses suggest, that phophorus and nitrogen availability could still limit the projected increase in carbon storage in response to increasing atmospheric CO2 concentrations (Peñuelas et al., 2013).

The reported increased C-N-P imbalances are promoting shifts on both terrestrial and marine biodiversity (Bobbink et al., 2010; Peñuelas et al., 2012, 2013a). However, it is important to bear in mind that biodiversity gradients are tightly associated with changes in the spatial distribution of major functional groups (e.g. Carnicer and Díaz-Delgado 2008; Kissling et al., 2011; Weber and Deutch 2010; Stefenescu et al., 2011; Carnicer et al., 2013; Coll et al., 2013; Barton et al., 2013; Carnicer et al., 2014a). Crucially, these groups have contrasting stoichiometric and functional traits, and may in turn influence the rates of ecosystem processes and nutrient cycling, therefore producing reciprocal feebacks among biodiversity composition, stoichiometry and ecosystem dynamics (Hessen et al., 2004; Weber and Deutch, 2010, 2012). Nowadays, a large number of studies highlight the need to account for the interactions between biodiversity, species‘ functional traits, stoichiometry, nutrient cycling dynamics and ecosystem functions (Schulze and Mooney 1993; Naeem et al., 1994, 1995, 2009; Tilman 1997; Chapin et al., 2000; Kinzig et al., 2001; Hessen et al., 2004; Hooper et al., 2005; Loreau 2010; Butchart et al., 2010; Carnicer et al., 2012; Barton et al., 2013; Erisman et al., 2013). Moreover, evolutionary processes and phenotypically plastic responses need to be integrated also in the study of coupled feedbacks between biodiversity, nutrient cycling dynamics and global C-N-P imbalances (e.g. Elser et al., 2000b). To effectively integrate stoichiometry in global biodiversity analyses, the quantification of stoichiometric traits across several taxonomic and trophic groups will be possibly required. Although major axes of stoichiometric variation have been quantified in some groups like plants, marine bacteria and phytoplankton (Wright et al., 2004; Litchman and Klausmeier, 2008; Lauro et al., 2009; Reich, 2014), we still lack a precise description of the patterns of variation in stoichiometric traits in other taxonomic groups.

The consequences of increased C-N-P imbalances on the reciprocal feedbacks between biodiversity, ecosystem properties and nutrient cycling remain, though, largely uncertain. To explore how increased C-N-P imbalances in the earth system may alter global biodiversity, we develop the following objectives: 1) to briefly enumerate and overview the main hypotheses explaining inter-specific differences in C-N-P content; 2) to synthesize the major axes of variation observed in inter-specific comparisons of stoichiometric and functional traits in diverse taxonomic groups; 3) to review the global-scale gradients in C-N-P stoichiometry of major taxonomic and functional groups and explore how they may evolve in response to major global change drivers; and 4) to analyse the major interactions between biodiversity and ecosystem functions that may occur in the face of the increased C-N-P imbalances. Below we devote a section each to these four objectives.

1. Biodiversity and inter-specific differences in C-N-P content

The impacts of increased global C-N-P imbalances on biodiversity will depend on the specific traits of each taxon (Elser et al., 1996; Hessen et al., 2004; Carnicer et al., 2012). For example, variation in species’ C-N-P stoichiometry has been significantly linked to organism growth rate (Elser et al., 1996; Sterner and Elser, 2002), body mass and allometry (Elser et al., 1996; Vanni et al., 2002; Woods et al., 2003, 2004; Mulder and Elser, 2009), taxonomic, phylogenetic and trophic group (Fagan et al., 2002; Hambäck et al., 2009; González et al., 2011), ontogenetic stage (Elser et al., 1996; Sterner and Elser, 2002), environment seasonality and the associated demand for storage in life history style (Hood and Sterner, 2010), investments in reproduction (Ventura and Catalan, 2005; Fujita et al., 2013), structural tissues and differential tissue allocation (Elser et al., 1996; Vanni et al., 2002; Woods et al., 2004; Gónzalez et al., 2011) and genome and cell size (Hessen et al., 2010) (Table 1). Apart from all these species-specific factors, environmental factors also co-determine species stoichiometry. These environmental factors are diverse and include temperature (Woods et al., 2003; Reich and Oleksyn, 2004; Sun et al., 2013), substrate age (Walker and Syers, 1976; Reich and Oleksyn, 2004) and resource stoichiometry (Woods et al., 2002; Schade et al., 2003; Hessen et al., 2004; Small and Pringle, 2010). Overall, the available evidence supports that species-specific C-N-P stoichiometry is determined by multiple traits and environmental factors (Table 1). In spite of this overwhelming complexity of factors, both experimental and theoretical evidence suggests that species are adapted to species-specific optimal environmental C-N-P ratios (reviewed in Ågren et al., 2012).

Table 1.

A non-exhaustive summary of the different hypotheses associated with large-scale gradients in species’ stoichiometry.

Hypothesis Description References
Optimality, fitness maximisation and trade-offs between diverse life history, functional, stoichiometric and biochemical traits. Fitness maximisation, trade-offs and the operation of natural selection drives the evolution of stoichiometric traits. The evolution of metabolic networks is constrained by elementary mass balance and thermodynamic laws Parker and Maynard Smith, 1990; Klausmeier et al., 2004; Orth et al., 2010; Loladze and Elser, 2011; Daines et al., 2014
Growth rate hypothesis Differences in organism C-N-P stoichiometry reflect increased allocation to P-rich ribosomal RNA at higher growth rates Elser et al. 1996; Sterner and Elser, 2002; Loladze and Elser, 2011
Substrate age hypothesis Tropical soils are often older, more leached, and have lower fertility, which can lead to reduced organism N and P with increased temperature across geographic gradients Walker and Syers, 1976; Reich and Oleksyn, 2004
Temperature–plant physiology hypothesis Plants grown at low temperaturas develop greater leaf N and P content, to offset reduced rates of biochemical reactions caused by the diminished efficiency of N-rich enzymes and P-rich RNA Woods et al., 2003; Reich and Oleksyn, 2004
Endothermy Nutritional requirements of endotherms and ectotherms deviate largely and significantly affect whole organism stoichiometry Klaassen and Nolet, 2008; Wilkinson and Ruxton, 2013
Temperature–biogeochemistry hypothesis Low temperatures depress decomposition and mineralization of organic matter, reduce the availability of N and P, and significantly alter the stoichiometry of species Reich and Oleksyn, 2004
Trophic position, Herbivory Trophic position is associated with significant changes in C-N-P stoichiometry. Heterotrophs are often less rich in C than autotrophs and need to excrete/egest excess C, and this may come at a considerable metabolic cost Elser et al., 1996; Fagan et al., 2002; Urabe et al., 2002; Hall et al., 2007; Daines et al., 2014
Taxonomic composition, evolutionary constraints and niche conservatism Systematic differences in macronutrient composition (C-N-P) are phylogenetically conserved Quigg et al., 2003; Woods et al., 2003, 2004
Regional differences in the species composition Regional differences in the species composition of the plankton community drive the N/P ratio of biological nutrient removal across geographic gradients Weber and Deutsch, 2010
Body mass and allometry RNA tissue content, structural tissues and organism N/P ratios show allometric relationships that are determined by species-specific evolutionary processes and the emergence of contrasting life history strategies. Peters, 1983; Elser, 1996; Sterner and Elser, 2002; Mulder and Elser, 2009
Ontogenetic stage Ontogenetic changes are associated with changes in biochemical and cellular composition and other allocation decisions, producing changes in body N/P ratio and C-N-P stoichiometry. Elser et al., 1996; Sterner and Elser, 2002
Structural material and differential allocation on tissues Tissues significantly differ in nutrient composition. Inter- and intra-specific differences in allocation and tissue structures motivate significant changes in body C-N-P stoichiometry Elser et al., 1996; Vanni et al., 2002
Differential investments in basic life-history functions (reproduction, storage, defense) Differential investments in basic life-history functions (reproduction, storage, defense) alter body stoichiometry Ventura and Catalan, 2005; Tao et al., 2010.
Active regulation of nutrient uptake, excretion, N2 fixation, reabsorption Diverse physiological processes actively regulate body nutrient content and determine stoichiometry Sterrner and Elser, 2002; Sardans et al., 2012a,b; Sardans and Peñuelas. 2012
Species-specific P and N storage strategies Species develop evolutionary strategies and adaptations to store limiting resources, affecting in turn body stoichiometry Martin and van Mooy, 2012; Daines et al., 2014
Resource supply stoichiometry Resource supply stoichiometry affects the stoichiometric composition of consumers through diverse metabolic and ecophysiological processes, phenotypically plastic responses and long-term adaptive responses Elser et al., 1996; Sterner et al., 1997; 1998; Hillebrand and Kahlert, 2001; Sterner and Elser, 2002; Woods et al., 2002; Schade et al., 2003; Klausmeier et al., 2004; Elser et al., 2006; Acquisti et al., 2009; Small and Pringle, 2010; Frost et al., 2010.
Genome and cell size Genome and cell size affect multiple traits and the elemental compostion of whole cells and organisms Hessen et al., 2010; Kozlowski et al., 2003
Stoichiometric plasticity and stoichiometric homeostasis Phenotypically plastic responses and regulatory physiological and biochemical processes can modify organism C-N-P stoichiometry Hessen et al., 2004; Persson et al., 2010
Spatiotemporal gradients in conditions and resources (light, nutrients, rainfall, Fe, Si, other conditions and resources) The spatiotemporal variation of conditions and resources signififcantly infuences organism stoichiometry Urabe and Sterner, 1996; Sterner et al., 1997, 1998; Klausmeier et al., 2004; Diehl 2007; Martiny et al., 2013; Barton et al., 2013
Topographic gradients associated with changes in N deposition, gradients in temperature and rainfall and other factors Topography correlates with the clinal variation of environmental conditions, resources and ecological processes that induce changes in organism stoichiometry Bobbink et al., 2010
Environmental filtering The demographic performance and local persistence of populations depend on trait-environment interactions. These interactions filter some species and can influence the observed stoichiometric patterns at the species or community level. Carnicer et al., 2008; Carnicer et al., 2012; Daines et al., 2014
Long-term periodic variations in nutrient cycling dynamics Long-term periodic variations in nutrient cycling dynamics at geological time-scales alter Earth diversity, and the evolution of species’ stoichiometry. Tyrrell 1999; Lenton and Watson, 2000; Handoh and Lenton, 2003; Lenton and Klausmeier, 2007
Biogeochemical niche Pant species occupy different biogeochemical niches, and differ significantly in key physiological, structural and stoichiometric traits Peñuelas et al., 2008, 2010
Species richness Species richness and functional groups richness affect community stoichiometry, and alter C/P and N/P ratios. Community composition affects the biochemical niche of species across functional groups Abbas et al. 2013; Urbina et al., 2014

2. Trait continua, stoichiometry and major inter-specific axes of phenotypic variation

Diverse stoichiometric and life history traits have been measured across many species allowing comparative approaches at the inter-specific level. These analyses revealed the existence of adaptive trait continua, that is, suites of traits that tend to co-vary along a main axis of variation at the inter-specific level in plants (Grime et al., 1997; Wright et al., 2004; Chave et al., 2009; Peñuelas et al., 2010; Donovan et al., 2011; Carnicer et al., 2014b), mammals (Bielby et al., 2007), birds (Sæther et al., 2011), fishes (Jeschke and Kokko, 2009), phytoplankton (Litchman and Klausmeier, 2008), marine bacteria (Lauro et al., 2009) and butterflies (Carnicer et al., 2012, 2013a). These continua often range from specialized to more generalist species and/or from slow to fast life strategies (Wright et al., 2004; Bielby et al., 2007; Sæther et al., 2011; Carnicer et al. 2012, 2013a). Trait continua quantify and summarize life history, functional trait and stoichiometric variation at the inter-specific level in multi-specific assemblages. It has been suggested that the mechanistic origin of these taxon-specific trait continua may rely on the evolutionary emergence of contrasting stoichiometric and life-history strategies that, in particular ecological contexts, maximize fitness by acquiring a different set of traits allowing for sustained population performance (Carnicer et al 2012, 2013a). Therefore, trait continua synthesise the observed phenotypic space for a given taxonomic group in local, regional or global assemblages.

The variation in stoichiometric traits along these major functional trait axes (i.e. variation of C-N-P tissue content, C/N/P ratios) is relatively well described in some groups like plants (Wright et al., 2004; Reich, 2014), marine bacteria (Lauro et al., 2009) and some groups of phytoplankton (Litchman and Klausmeier, 2008). In contrast, for many terrestrial heterotroph groups (e.g. primary consumers, predators and detritivores) the inter-specific variation in C-N-P tissue content remains yet poorly quantified (but see Fagan et al., 2002; Denno and Fagan, 2003; Fagan and Denno, 2004; Woods et al., 2003, 2004; Martinson et al., 2008; Mulder and Elser, 2009; Bishop et al., 2010; Hämback et al., 2009; González et al., 2011; Lemoine et al., 2014). As a general rule, available studies suggest that there is a significant decrease in P content with body size in most heterotroph groups (Woods et al., 2004; Hämback et al., 2009; González et al., 2011). In addition, contrasting N, P values have been reported between primary consumers and higher trophic levels in some taxonomic groups (Fagan et al., 2002; González et al., 2011; but see Woods et al., 2004). Likewise, significant differences in body N and P contents are observed between major insect orders. For example, Lepidoptera show the highest potential for P limitation because they have the lowest N and highest P concentrations when compared with other insect orders (Fagan et al., 2002; Woods et al., 2004). P limitation significantly affects many aspects of insect performance, like survival, development, growth rate, body size and sexual and oviposition behavior (reviewed in Tao and Hunter, 2012). In contrast, other orders such as Hemiptera are considered to be mainly N limited. Like in the case of phosphorus, nitrogen limitation often significantly determines insect demographic performance and improved performance of herbivorous insects has been observed after increased nitrogen deposition (Throop and Lerdau, 2004). This may be expected considering that insect body N concentrations are on average 10 times higher than those of their host plants (Tao and Hunter 2012). In addition, recent studies highlight that species-specific demands for nutrients and the defensive responses of host plants combine to determine the responses of herbivores to P availability under N deposition (Tao and Hunter 2012).

Across multiple trophic levels, deciphering the relationships between major axes of variation in stoichiometric and functional traits emerges as a new reserach challenge. For example, a major axis of trait variation has been recently described in Mediterranean and temperate butterflies in Europe (Carnicer et al. 2012, 2013a; Dapporto and Dennis, 2013). In this group, traits and species-specific habitat measures covary along a main axis, ranging from multivoltine trophic generalists with high dispersal capacity to univoltine (i.e. one generation per year), trophic specialist species with low dispersal capacity (table 2). This trait continuum is closely associated with the observed distributions of butterfly species along an altitudinal species richness gradient (Figure 1, and see Carnicer et al 2012, 2013a). In addition, the position of species along the trait continuum is significantly associated with inter-specific differences in patterns of spatial genetic variability (FST and genetic distances), population responses to the impacts of global change and local turnover dynamics (Figure 1, Carnicer et al 2012, 2013a). However, the putative relationships of this trait continuum with stoichiometric traits in other trophic levels remains largely unexplored. As highlighted in Figure 2, major axes of phenotypic trait variation in butterflies can be significantly associated with leaf stoichiometric variation at lower trophic levels (host plants). Notably, leaf P and N concentration are two traits integrated in the leaf economics spectrum (Wright et al., 2004), a major axis of phenotyic variation between terrestrial plant species. Overall, Figure 2 illustrates that, across tropic levels, significant relationships hold between major life history axes (PCA 1) and stoichiometric traits (leaf N and P concentration). These results suggest that the consideration of stoichiometric and functional traits across multiple tropic levels might allow a better understanding of the strucuture, dynamics and stoichiometric constraints operating in plant-insect food webs.

Table 2.

Summary of the PCA analysis for species-specific traits (number of host-plants, dispersal capacity and flight period length) and habitat variables (habitat aridity breadth, habitat winter temperature breadth) for 169 Butterflies in Catalonia, Spain. A major axis of life history variation was observed, ranging from multivoltine trophic generalists with high dispersal capacity to univoltine (i.e. one generation per year), trophic specialist species with low dispersal capacity (see supplementary methods for further details). The values for the factors (habitat aridity breadth, habitat winter temperature breadth, number of host-plants, dispersal capacity, flight period length) are the loadings on PCA axis 1.

PCA 1
Eigenvalue 2.97
Explained variance 59.49
Habitat aridity breadth 0.50
Habitat winter temperature breadth 0.48
Number of host-plants 0.37
Dispersal capacity 0.42
Flight-period length 0.45

Figure 1.

Figure 1

The adaptive trait continuum in Mediterranean butterflies. This functional trait continuum is described by the scores along the PCA axis 1 of 169 butterfly species (see Table 2, Carnicer et al 2013a and supplementary methods for further details). A) Observed distribution of major functional groups along an altitudinal gradient (modified from Stefanescu et al 2011). S: total butterfly species richness, Disp4: species richness of highly dispersive species; Disp3: species richness of high-medium dispersive species; Disp2: species richness of medium-low dispersive species; Disp1: species richness of low dispersive species. B) Observed relationship of the adaptive trait continuum (PCA) with genetic variability (FST). C) Observed relationship of the adaptive trait continuum (PCA) with regional population trends. Population trends were estimated as the slope of log-linear regression of abundances from the period 1994-2008 using TRIM software and were available for 78 species.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Observed relationships between the adaptive trait continuum of Mediterranean butterflies (PCA) and A) leaf P content; B) Leaf N content of the host plants. See supplementary methods for further details.

3. Global gradients in organism C-N-P stoichiometry

Large-scale gradients of both nutrient availability in the environment and organism C-N-P tissue concentration have been reported for several groups (Reich and Oleksyn, 2004; Lambers et al., 2007, Sardans et al 2013, Daines et al 2014). For example, global-scale gradients in C-N-P tissue concentration and C-N-P ratios have been reported in plants, marine bacteria, phytoplankton, insects, mycorrhiza activity and plant litter (Reich and Oleksyn, 2004; Lambers et al., 2007; Manzoni et al., 2008; Sun et al., 2013; Sardans et al., 2013; Daines et al., 2014). In marine ecosystems, lower organism N/P and C/P ratios are observed at high latitudes, in cold nutrient-rich environments, whereas higher C/N/P ratios dominate at low latitudes. High-latitude marine environments experience low temperatures and high nutrient concentrations, are often iron-limited and also experience seasonal blooms and limitation of phytoplankton growth by light availability (Weber and Deutch, 2010, 2012; Moore et al., 2013; Martiny et al., 2013; Daines et al., 2014). The opposite conditions (warm, oligotrophic, widespread N-limitation and P co-limitation in some localities) are generally observed at low latitudes and subtropical gyres. In contrast, equatorial regions are characterized by intermediate temperatures and nutrient concentrations due to upwelling processes (Martiny et al., 2013; Daines et al., 2014). These large-scale gradients in temperature and nutrient availability are in turn associated with gradients in species’ stoichiometric values. For example, Martiny et al. (2013) reported C-N-P ratios of 195:28:1 in warm, nutrient-depleted low latitude gyres, 137:18:1 in warm, nutrient-rich upwelling zones and 78:13:1 in cold, nutrient rich high-latitude regions. The taxonomic composition of a community also significantly influences its elemental stoichiometry (Elser et al., 2000; Sterner and Elser, 2002). For example, communities dominated by diatoms have a lower N/P and C/P ratio and are more common in cold and nutrient-rich environments, located at high latitudes (Martiny et al., 2013). In contrast, communities located in subtropical oligotrophic gyres are dominated by N2-fixing cyanobacteria and other diazotrophs and, as a result, have higher C/P and N/P ratios and smaller sizes (Martiny et al., 2013; Barton et al., 2013). N/P ratios of phytoplankton show both significant differences between different phylogenetic groups and substantial intra-specific variation due to local acclimatation and phenotypic plasticity (Weber and Deutch, 2010). In line with this, phytoplankton N/P ratios often depart from the Redfield ratio (16:1; Redfield, 1934), and observed inter-specific differences in N/P ratios span more than one order of magnitude (Weber and Deutch, 2010).

Several studies have analysed the stoichiometry of primary and secondary consumers in marine and freshwater food webs (Elser and Hassett, 1994; Dobberfuhl and Elser, 2000; Vanni et al., 2002). These studies report significant differences in C-N-P content between autothroph and heterotrophs that in turn influence nutrient recycling rates and productivity (Elser and Urabe, 1999; Vanni et al., 2002; Hessen et al., 2004). Herbivores tend to have higher N and P contents relative to C (Elser et al., 2000a). Stoichiometric differences between trophic levels are in turn associated with different stoichiometric plasticity between primary consumers (more plastic) and secondary consumers (less stoichiometric plasticity) (Hessen et al., 2004; Persson et al., 2010). Some pioneering studies have also quantified the stoichiometry of detritivore and benthic groups (Cross et al., 2003; Martinson et al., 2008; Alves et al., 2010). The future distribution of the diverse marine taxonomic, trophic and functional groups in the face of global change and increased C-N-P imbalance remain yet largely uncertain. Global change model projections for the oceans mostly predict greater stratification of the water column, weaker nutrient delivery to the surface and acidification (Sarmiento et al., 2004; Caldeira and Wickett, 2005; Barton et al., 2013). This may possibly expand the oligotrophic areas and facilitate the expansion of communities dominated by smaller phytoplankton, mainly dominated by N2-fixing cyanobacteria, other heterotrophic bacteria and generalist mixotrophs (bacteria that combine autotrophic and heterotrophic nutrition), small-sized zooplankton (Barton et al., 2013), and, if increased overfishing persists, gelatinous zooplankton (Richardson et al., 2009; Condon et al., 2012).

In the case of terrestrial plants, Reich and Oleksyn (2004) have reported a significant latitudinal increase in both leaf P and N concentration and a latitudinal decrease in N/P ratio. Similarly, Yuan et al (2011) reported latitudinal gradients for N and P in root tissues. Plant functional types (i.e. ruderals, stress-tolerants, competitive) significantly differ in their N, P concentration and N/P ratios (Grime, 1977). McJannet et al (1995) reported significant differences in N, P tissue concentration between plant functional strategies, with lower N, P and N/P ratios in ruderal species. Similarly, Willby et al (2001) reported that stress-tolerant plants (S) had consistently lower nutrient concentration and higher N/P ratios whereas ruderal plants (R) displayed the opposite pattern. Competitor (C) and competitor-stress tolerator plants (CS) were intermediate to R and S. In line with this, the abundance of the different functional types of plants and mychorrhizas varies along N/P gradients, and intermediate N/P ratios are associated with an increase of the number of different strategies that coexist (Lambers et al., 2007). As a result, species richness of herbaceous plants is usually higher at intermediate N/P ratios (Fujita et al., 2013). Low N/P ratio environments tend to favour ruderal plant types, fast growing species with long roots, and species associated with N fixers. Likewise, intermediate N/P ratios and high local productivity are often associated with a predominance of competitor plant types (Fujita et al., 2013). In other words, species with resource-acquisitive traits, such as high leaf N and P concentrations, high SLA and short leaf lifespan reach higher abundances or occur more frequently in sites with higher nutrient and/or water availability (Adler et al., 2013). Finally, oligotrophic and high N/P ratio environments favour slow-growing species, and stress-tolerant plant types (S) with specialized P uptake traits like cluster roots, arbuscular mycorrhizae or high phosphatase activity (Lambers et al., 2007; Fujita et al., 2013). For example, the numbers of stress-tolerant and endangered species is higher at high N/P ratios (Fujita et al., 2013) and in low fertilized sites (Bobbink et al., 2010). These species are characterized by specific suites of traits, such as small investment in sexual reproduction, low seed number and seed investment, late start of flowering, short flowering period, perennial form, vegetative reproduction, low specific leaf area (SLA), high leaf dry matter content, low canopy height and low or absent association with N fixers. Crucially, plants can invest a high percentage of total phosphorus in reproduction (50-60%) (Fujita et al., 2013 and cites there in) and this results in signififcantly reduced investment in plant reproductive organs in phosphorus-limited environments with high N/P ratios (Fujita et al., 2013). In trees, deciduous species have higher leaf N and P than evergreens with similar leaf lifespan (Reich and Oleksyn, 2004). Deciduous trees make up a greater fraction of all species in temperate than in tropical zones thus contributing to higher leaf N and P in temperate forests (Reich and Oleksyn, 2004).

The response of plant functional groups to increased global C-N-P imbalance has been explored in diverse experimental studies (Silvertown et al., 2006; Bobbink et al., 2010). Available empirical evidence suggests different demographic responses between plant functional groups to increased imbalance in C-N-P supply. For example, long-term plant fertilization experiments report increases in the abundance of grasses, and significant reductions of the cover of legumes and broadleaved herbs (Silvertown, 2006). Similarly, in a wide range of artic, alpine and temperate ecosystems, lichens, mosses, and epiphytic species tend to be the most sensitive elements of ecosystems to increased N availability and deposition (reviewed in Bobbink et al., 2010). In contrast, in several terrestrial ecosystems grasses and sedges are often benefited from increased N deposition and altered C/N/P ratios (Bobbink et al., 2010).

In contrast to aquatic communities and terrestrial plant communities, large-scale gradients of N, P tissue concentration in terrestrial primary and secondary consumers remain yet poorly quantified (Bertram et al., 2008; Hambäck et al., 2009; El-Sabaawi et al., 2012; Sun et al., 2013). The same applies to the stoichiometric differences in N, P concentration between major terrestrial groups of primary consumers, predators and detritivores (Fagan et al., 2002; Denno and Fagan, 2003; Woods et al., 2003, 2004; Martinson et al., 2008; Mulder and Elser, 2009; Bishop et al., 2010; Gónzalez et al., 2011; Lemoine et al., 2014).

In plants, aquatic communities, and secondary conumers the available empirical evidence suggests that several hypotheses jointly contribute to explain large-scale trends in N, P tissue content. Firstly, high nitrogen and phosphorus concentration may be adaptive at low temperatures (temperature–physiology hypothesis; Körner et al., 1986; Woods et al., 2003; Reich and Oleksyn, 2004; Table 1). Plants experimentally grown at low temperatures typically contain greater leaf N and P and this may be related to the diminished efficiency of N-rich enzymes and P-rich RNA at low temperatures (Reich and Oleksyn, 2004). The temperature-physiology hypothesis holds in diverse taxa, incuding both primary and secondary consumers (e.g. Woods et al. 2003, 2004, Reich and Oleksyn, 2004; Martiny et al., 2013). For example, cold-acclimated poikilotherms contain on average more nitrogen and phosphorus, protein and RNA than warm-acclimated conspecifics (Woods et al., 2003). Similarly, phytoplankton and plants show large-scale N-P gradients that have been significantly associated with spatial changes in ambient temperature (Reich and Oleksyn, 2004; Martiny et al., 2013). Secondly, large-scale gradients in N and P tissue content in terrestrial groups are also influenced by substrate age and fertility (Substrate age and substrate composition hypothesis, Reich and Oleksyn, 2004, Table 1). In terrestrial ecosystems tropical soils are on average older and more leached, and have lower fertility (Walker and Syers, 1976; Reich and Oleksyn, 2004). Similarly, while in the Mediterranean biome the soils in South Africa and Australia are geologically older and tend to be nutrient poor, in the Mediterranean basin, Chile and California soils often have higher nutrient contents (Ochoa-Hueso et al., 2011). Available evidence suggests that climate, substrate nutrient content and soil age gradients jointly contribute to the clinal variation of N and P content in organism tissues in several taxa (Reich and Oleksyn, 2004; Martiny et al., 2013). Moreover, mountain ranges and altitudinal gradients significantly influence soil nutrient content and regional variability in soil and organism tissue stoichiometry. For example, wet N deposition is often higher at high altitudes due to the increased importance of cloud water deposition, producing altitudinal gradients in N deposition (Bobbink et al., 2010). On the other hand, cold temperatures can slow down biogeochemical processes and result in decreased leaf N and P content at high latitudes (temperature–biogeochemistry hypothesis, Reich and Oleksyn, 2004). In addition, cold temperatures at high latitudes, such as artic zones, can promote a dominance of NH4+ over NO3 in soil biogeochemistry (Bobbink et al., 2010).

In spite of all this empirical evidence describing large-scale stoichiometric gradients, the patterns for many groups and elements remain unquantified and therefore unveiled, specially at higher trophic levels.

4. Biodiversity, ecosystem function and global unbalanced C-N-P stoichiometry

Substantial loss of species richness has been reported with increased N deposition and associated C-N-P imbalances in a wide range of habitats and taxa. For example, a decrease in plant richness has been observed in acid grasslands, sand dune and mixed grasslands, heath, bog, woodlands and forests (Stevens et al., 2004; Jones et al., 2004; 2014; Maskell et al., 2010; Dupré et al., 2010; Bobbink et al. 2010; Ceulemans, 2013). Similar trends have been observed in N-addition experiments, field surveys along N-deposition gradients and meta-analyses (Carroll et al., 2003; Stevens et al., 2004; Clark and Tilman, 2008; Dupré et al., 2010; De Schrijver et al., 2011; Isbell et al. 2013b). Crucially, a large number of studies now highlight an important role of biodiversity per se in determining basic ecosystem functions, such as productivity, nutrient cycling and decomposition rates. For example, studies highlight that loss of biodiversity can reduce biomass production efficiency, and alter nutrient cycling and decomposition rates (Tilman and Downing, 1994; Naeem et al., 1994; Tilman et al., 1996; Hector et al., 1999; Loreau et al., 2001; Reich et al., 2001; Loreau et al., 2001; Hooper et al., 2005; Cardinale et al., 2012; Reich et al., 2012). Morover, other studies demonstrate that biodiversity can also increase the stability of ecosystem functions (Cardinale et al., 2006; Tilman et al., 2006; Hector and Bagchi, 2007; Zavaleta et al., 2010; Isbell et al., 2011; Cardinale et al., 2012; Reich et al., 2012; Sapijanskas et al., 2014). Several non-mutually exclusive mechanisms are possibly involved, for example recent studies show that biodiversity enhances ecosystem functioning by niche complementarity effects, compensatory dynamics associated with inter-specific trait differences, and phenotypically plastic responses (Loreau et al., 2010; Cardinale et al., 2012; Sapijanskas et al., 2014).

In line with all these trends, empirical studies are unveiling a key role for top predators, mega-herbivores and disturbance regimes (fire or other abrupt events) in mediating links between biodiversity and ecosystem function. For example, the loss of top predators and/or megaherbivores (and the associated trophic casacades) influence the dynamics of wildfire, carbon sequestration, invasive species, biogeochemical cycles and diseases (Schindler et al., 1997; Gill et al., 2009; Smith et al., 2010; Lavery et al., 2010; Pershing et al., 2010; Estes et al., 2011; Rule et al., 2012; Wolf et al., 2013; Doughty et al., 2013). For example, interactions between top predatios, diseases, herbivory, plant communities, and fire produce large-scale changes in the strucuture of vegetation and associated communities (McLaren and Peterson, 1994; Crooks and Soulé, 1999; Sinclair et al., 2003; Croll et al., 2005; Holdo et al., 2009; Estes et al., 2011; Leganeux et al., 2014). Similarly, the absence of natural predators, loss of native predators and reduced top-down control facilitates the performance of invasive species (Estes et al., 2011). Of note, current biodiversity loss is characterized by the extinction of megaherbivores and top consumers and larger-bodied animals in general (Estes et al., 2011).

Increased C-N-P imbalances can substantially alter ecosystem functions and their relationships with biodiversity. For example, the C sequestration and C storage capacity of of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems depends on changes in the C-N-P stoichiometric ratios of the system components, the total supply of nutrients from external sources, and the relative distribution of C-N-P elements between system components (Hessen et al., 2004; Peñuelas et al., 2013a). On the other hand, changes in food web structure, and in the composition of herbivores and predators can also alter carbon sequestration and promote source-sink shifts (e.g. Schindler et al., 1997; Lavery et al., 2010; Pershing et al., 2010). In oceans, the sequestration of CO2 occurs due to the under-saturation water pCO2 with respect to the atmosphere (the “Solubility pump”) and subsequent transport to depth waters (Hessen et al., 2004; Barton et al., 2013). Deposition of N and other macronutrients from the atmosphere may have important effects on the biological pump over long time scales. Changes in C/nutrient ratios of export organic matter and in nitrogen-fixing and denitrification processes can significantly alter C sequestration in oceans (Hessen et al., 2004; Barton et al., 2013). Moreover, biodiversity loss of top herbivores (e.g. whales) may significantly alter nutrient recycling processes, biotic pump processes and carbon uptake (Roman and McCarthy, 2010; Lavery et al., 2010; Pershing et al., 2010). At much larger temporal scales, positive feedbacks and compensatory negative feedbacks link ocean productivity, phosphorus availability, anoxia and the suppression of Organic matter-P and Fe-P burial (Handoh and Lenton, 2003). Million-year periodic changes in ocean N-P nutrient availability have been associated with major shifts on Earth biodiversity (Handoh and Lenton, 2003). In terrestrial systems, changes in litter C/N and C/P ratios determine nutrient release and immobilization, and decomposer carbon-use efficiency. Higher nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations are usually associated with more rapid decomposition rates (Manzoni et al., 2008, 2010). In addition, biodiversity loss and changes in the structure food webs can significantly influence decomposition processes and alter litter C-N-P ratios (Frank and Groffman, 1998; Mulder and Elser, 2009; Cardinale et al., 2012).

Overall, all this empirical evidence suggests that human-induced global C-N-P imbalances may produce multiple interactions and feedbacks between biodiversity and basic ecosystem functions. During the next decades, ecosystem functions will simultaneously respond to increased C-N-P imbalances and global warming, changes in the geographic distribution of functional groups, invasive species, the loss of top predators and mega-bervivores, altered disturbance regimes and habitat destruction and alteration, among other drivers (Peñuelas and Carnicer 2010, Carnicer and Peñuelas 2012, Peñuelas et al., 2013b). Moreover, recent assesments suggest that the impacts of biodiversity loss on ecosystem function are of comparable magnitude to the impacts of drought, climate warming, ozone, acidification, elevated CO2, herbivory, fire and pollution (Tilman et al., 2012; Hooper et al., 2012).

Supplementary Material

Supplementary methods

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by VENI-NWO 863.11.021 and the Spanish Government projects CGC2010-17172 and Consolider Ingenio Montes (CSD2008-00040) and by the Catalan Government project SGR 2009-458.

References

  1. Abbas M, Ebeling A, Oelmann Y, Ptacnik R, Roscher C, Weigelt A, Weisser WW, Wilcke W, Hillebrand H. Biodiversity effects on plant stoichiometry. PloS one. 2013;8:e58179. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058179. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Adler PB, Fajardo A, Kleinhesselink AR, Kraft NJB. Trait-based tests of coexistence mechanisms. Ecol Letters. 2013;16:1294–1306. doi: 10.1111/ele.12157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Alves JM, Caliman A, Guariento RD, Figueiredo-Barros MP, Carneiro LS, Farjalla VF, Bozelli RL, Esteves FA. Stoichiometry of benthic invertebrate nutrient recycling: inter-specific variation and the role of body mass. Aquat Ecol. 2010;44:421–430. [Google Scholar]
  4. Ågren GI, Wetterstedt JÅM, Billberger MFK. Nutrient limitation on terrestrial plant growth – modeling the interaction between nitrogen and phosphorus. New Phytol. 2012;194:953–960. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04116.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Acquisti C, Elser JJ, Kumar S. Ecological nitrogen-limitation shapes the DNA composition of plant genomes. Mol Biol Evol. 2009;25:953–956. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msp038. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Barton AD, Pershing AJ, Litchman E, Record NR, Edwards KF, Finkel ZV, Kiorboe T, Ward BA. The biogeography of marine plankton traits. Ecol Letters. 2013;16:522–534. doi: 10.1111/ele.12063. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bertram SM, Bowen M, Kyle M, Schade JD. Extensive natural intraspecific variation in stoichiometric (C: N: P) composition in two terrestrial insect species. J Insect Sci. 2008;5:1–7. doi: 10.1673/031.008.2601. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bishop JG, O’Hara NB, Titus JH, Apple JL, Gill RA, Wynn L. NP co-limitation of primary production and response of arthropods to N and P in early primary succession on Mount St. Helens volcano. PloS one. 2010;5(10):e13598. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013598. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Bobbink R, Hicks K, Galloway J, Spranger T, Alkemade R, Ashmore M, Bustamante M, Cinderby S, Davidson E, Dentener F, Emmett B, et al. Global assessment of nitrogen deposition effects on terrestrial plant diversity: a synthesis. Ecological Applications. 2010;20:30–59. doi: 10.1890/08-1140.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Butchart SH, Walpole M, Collen B, van Strien A, Scharlemann JP, Almond RE, Baillie JEM, Bomhard B, Brown C, Bruno J, Carpenter KE, et al. Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science. 2010;328:1164–1168. doi: 10.1126/science.1187512. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Bryant JP, Chapin FS, Klein DR. Carbon nutrient balance of boreal plants in relation to vertebrate herbivory. Oikos. 1983;40:357–368. [Google Scholar]
  12. Bielby J, Mace GM, Bininda-Emonds ORP, Cardillo M, Gittleman JL, Jones KE, Orme CDL, Purvis A. The fast–slow continuum in mammalian life-history: an empirical reevaluation. Am Nat. 2007;169:748–757. doi: 10.1086/516847. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Caldeira K, Wickett ME. Ocean model predictions of chemistry changes: from carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere and ocean. J Geophys Res. 2005;110:CO9S04. [Google Scholar]
  14. Canfield DE, Glazer AN, Falkowski PG. The evolution and future of Earth’s nitrogen cycle. Science. 2010;330:192–196. doi: 10.1126/science.1186120. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Cardinale BJ, Srivastava DS, Duffy JE, Wright JP, Downing AL, Sankaran M, Jouseau C. Effects of biodiversity on the functioning of trophic groups and ecosystems. Nature. 2006;443:989–992. doi: 10.1038/nature05202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Cardinale BJ, Duffy JE, Gonzalez A, Hooper DU, Perrings C, Venail P, Narwani A, Mace GM, Tilman D, Wardle DA, Kinzig AP, et al. Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature. 2012;486:59–67. doi: 10.1038/nature11148. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Carnicer J, Díaz-Delgado R. Geographic differences between functional groups in patterns of bird species richness in North America. Acta Oecologica. 2008;33:253–264. [Google Scholar]
  18. Carnicer J, Brotons L, Sol D, de Cáceres M. Random sampling, abundance–extinction dynamics and niche-immigration constraints explain the generation of species richness gradients. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2008;17:352–362. [Google Scholar]
  19. Carnicer J, Brotons L, Stefanescu C, Peñuelas J. Biogeography of species richness gradients: linking adaptive traits, demography and diversification. Biological Reviews. 2012;87:457–459. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2011.00210.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Carnicer J, Penuelas J. The world at a crossroads: Financial scenarios for sustainability. Energy Policy. 2012;48:611–617. [Google Scholar]
  21. Carnicer J, Stefanescu C, Vila R, Dinca V, Font X, Peñuelas J. A unified framework for diversity gradients: the adaptive trait continuum. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2013a;22:6–18. [Google Scholar]
  22. Carnicer J, Brotons L, Herrando S, Sol D. Improved tests of area-heterogeneity trade-offs. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 2013b;110:E2858–E2860. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1222681110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Carnicer J, Coll M, Pons X, Ninyerola M, Vayreda J, Peñuelas J. Large-scale recruitment limitation in Mediterranean pines: the role of Quercus ilex and forest successional advance as key regional drivers. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2014a;23:371–384. [Google Scholar]
  24. Carnicer J, Barbeta A, Sperlich D, Coll M, Peñuelas J. Contrasting trait syndromes in angiosperms and conifers are associated with different responses of tree growth to temperature on a large scale. Frontiers Plant Sci. 2014b;4:409. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2013.00409. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Carroll JA, Caporn SJM, Johnson D, Morecroft MD, Lee JA. The interactions between plant growth, vegetation structure and soil processes in semi-natural acidic and calcareous grasslands receiving long-term inputs of simulated pollutant nitrogen deposition. Environ Pollut. 2003;121:363–376. doi: 10.1016/s0269-7491(02)00241-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Chave J, Coomes D, Jansen S, Lewis SL, Swenson NG, Zanne AE. Towards a worldwide wood economics spectrum. Ecol Letters. 2009;12:351–366. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01285.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Clark CM, Tilman D. Loss of plant species after chronic low level nitrogen deposition to prairie grasslands. Nature. 2008;451:712–715. doi: 10.1038/nature06503. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Coll M, Peñuelas J, Ninyerola M, Pons X, Carnicer J. Multivariate effect gradients driving forest demographic responses in the Iberian Peninsula. For Ecol Manag. 2013;303:195–209. [Google Scholar]
  29. Condon RH, Graham WM, Duarte CM, Pitt CA, Lucas CH, Haddock SHD, Sutherland KR, Robinson KL, Dawson MN, Decker MB, Mills CE, et al. Questioning the rise of gelatinous zooplankton in the World’s oceans. Bioscience. 2012;62:160–169. [Google Scholar]
  30. Croll DA, Maron JL, Estes JA, Danner EM, Byrd GV. Introduced predators transform subarctic islands from grassland to tundra. Science. 2005;307:1959–1961. doi: 10.1126/science.1108485. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Crooks KR, Soulé ME. Mesopredator release and avifaunal extinctions in a fragmented system. Nature. 1999;400:563–566. [Google Scholar]
  32. Cross WF, Benstead JP, Rosemond AD, Wallace JB. Consumer - resource stoichiometry in detritus - based streams. Ecol Letters. 2003;6:721–732. [Google Scholar]
  33. Daines SJ, Clark JR, Lenton TM. Multiple environmental controls on phytoplankton growth strategies determine adaptive responses of the N: P ratio. Ecol Letters. 2014;17:414–425. doi: 10.1111/ele.12239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Dapporto L, Dennis RLH. The generalist-specialist continuum: testing predictions for distribution and trends in British butterflies. Biological Conservation. 2013;157:229–236. [Google Scholar]
  35. Denno RF, Fagan WF. Might nitrogen limitation promote omnivory among carnivorous arthropods? Ecology. 2003;84:2522–2531. doi: 10.1890/09-2080.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. De Schrijver A, De Frenne P, Ampoorter E, Van Nevel L, Demey A, Wuyts K, Verheyen K. Cumulative nitrogen input drives species loss in terrestrial ecosystems. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2011;20:803–816. [Google Scholar]
  37. Diehl S. Paradoxes of enrichment: effects of increased light versus nutrient supply on pelagic producer-grazer systems. Am Nat. 2007;169:E173–E191. doi: 10.1086/516655. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Dobberfuhl DR, Elser JJ. Elemental stoichiometry of lower food web components in arctic and temperate lakes. J Plankton Res. 2000;22:1341–1354. [Google Scholar]
  39. Donovan LA, Maherali H, Caruso CM, Huber H, de Kroon H. The evolution of the worldwide leaf economics spectrum. Trends Ecol Evol. 2011;26:88–95. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2010.11.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Doughty CE, Wolf A, Malhi Y. The legacy of the Pleistocene megafauna extinctions on nutrient availability in Amazonia. Nature Geosci. 2013;6:7611–764. [Google Scholar]
  41. Dupré C, Stevens CJ, Ranke T, Bleeker A, Peppler-Lisbach C, Gowing DJG, Dise NB, Dorland E, Bobbink R, Diekmann M. Changes in species richness and composition in European acidic grasslands over the past 70 years: the contribution of cumulative atmospheric nitrogen deposition. Global Change Biol. 2010;16:344–357. [Google Scholar]
  42. El-Sabaawi RW, Zandonà E, Kohler TJ, Marshall MC, Moslemi JM, Travis J, López-Sepulcre A, Ferriére R, Pringle CM, Thomas SA, Reznick DN, et al. Widespread intraspecific organismal stoichiometry among populations of the Trinidadian guppy. Func Ecology. 2012;26:666–676. [Google Scholar]
  43. Elser JJ, Hassett RP. A stoichiometric analysis of zooplankton-phytoplankton interactions in marine and freshwater ecosystems. Nature. 1994;370:211–213. [Google Scholar]
  44. Elser JJ, Dobberfuhl D, MacKay NA, Schampel JH. Organism size, life history, and N:P stoichiometry: towards a unified view of cellular and ecosystem processes. Bioscience. 1996;46:674–684. [Google Scholar]
  45. Elser JJ, Urabe J. The stoichiometry of consumer-driven nutrient recycling: theory, observations and consequences. Ecology. 1999;80:735–751. [Google Scholar]
  46. Elser JJ, Fagan WF, Denno RF, Dobberfuhl DR, Folarin A, Huberty A, Interlandi S, Kilham S, McCauley E, Schulz KL, Siemann EH, et al. Nutritional constraints in terrestrial and freshwater food webs. Nature. 2000a;408:578–580. doi: 10.1038/35046058. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Elser JJ, O’Brien WJ, Dobberfuhl DR, Dowling TE. The evolution of ecosystem processes: growth rate and elemental stoichiometry of a key herbivore in temperate and arctic habitatas. J Evol Biol. 2000b;13:845–853. [Google Scholar]
  48. Elser JJ, Fagan WF, Subramanian S, Kumar S. Signatures of ecological resource availability in the animal and plant proteomes. Mol Biol Evol. 2006;23:1946–1951. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msl068. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Elser JJ, Andersen T, Baron JS, Bergstrom AK, Jansson M, Kyle M, Nydick KR, Steger L, Hessen DO. Shifts in lake N:P stoichiometry and nutrient limitation driven by atmospheric Nitrogen deposition. Science. 2009;326:835–837. doi: 10.1126/science.1176199. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Erisman JW, Galloway JN, Seitzinger S, Bleeker A, Dise NB, Petrescu AR, Leach AM, de Vries W. Consequences of human modification of the global nitrogen cycle. Phil Trans R Soc B. 2013;368:20130116. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0116. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Estes JA, Terborgh J, Brashares JS, Power ME, Berger J, Bond WJ, Carpenter SR, Essington TE, Holt RD, Jackson JBC, Marquis RJ, et al. Trophic Downgrading of Planet Earth. Science. 2011;333:301–306. doi: 10.1126/science.1205106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Fagan WF, Siemann E, Mitter C, Denno RF, Huberty AF, Woods HA, Elser JJ. Nitrogen in insects: implications for trophic complexity and species diversification. Am Nat. 2002;160:784–802. doi: 10.1086/343879. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Fagan WF, Denno RF. Stoichiometry of actual vs. potential predator-prey interactions: insights into nitrogen limitation for arthropod predators. Ecol Letters. 2004;7:876–883. [Google Scholar]
  54. Frank DA, Groffman PM. Ungulate vs. landscape control of soil C and N processes in grasslands of Yellowstone National Park. Ecology. 1998;79:2229–2241. [Google Scholar]
  55. Frost PC, Ebert D, Larson JH, Marcus MA, Wagner ND, Zalewski A. Transgenerational effects of poor elemental food quality on Daphnia magna. Oecologia. 2010;162:865872. doi: 10.1007/s00442-009-1517-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Fujita Y, Venterink HO, Van Bodegom PM, Douma JC, Heil GW, Hölzel N, Jablonska E, Kotowski W, Okruzko T, Pawlikowski P, de Ruiter PC, et al. Low investment in sexual reproduction threatens plants adapted to phosphorus limitation. Nature. 2013;505:82–86. doi: 10.1038/nature12733. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Gill JL, Williams JW, Jackson ST, Lininger KB, Robinson GS. Pleistocene megafaunal collapse, novel plant communities, and enhanced fire regimes in North America. Science. 2009;326:1100–1103. doi: 10.1126/science.1179504. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. González AL, Fariña JM, Kay AD, Pinto R, Marquet PA. Exploring patterns and mechanisms of inter-specific and intraspecific variation in body elemental composition of desert consumers. Oikos. 2011;120:1247–1255. [Google Scholar]
  59. Grime JP. Evidence for the existence of three primary strategies in plants and its relevance to ecological and evolutionary theory. Am Nat. 1977;111:1169–1194. [Google Scholar]
  60. Grime JP, Thompson K, Hunt R, Hodgson JG, Cornelissen JHC, Rorison IH, Hendry GAF, Ashenden TW, Askew AP, Band SR, Booth RE, et al. Integrated screening validates primary axes of specialisation in plants. Oikos. 1997;79:259–281. [Google Scholar]
  61. Hall SR, Leibold MA, Lytle DA, Smith VH. Grazers, producer stoichiometry, and the light: nutrient hypothesis revisited. Ecology. 2007;88:1142–1152. doi: 10.1890/06-0923. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Hambäck PA, Gilbert J, Schneider K, Martinson HM, Kolb G, Fagan WF. Effects of body size, trophic mode and larval habitat on Diptera stoichiometry: a regional comparison. Oikos. 2009;118:615–623. [Google Scholar]
  63. Handoh IC, Lenton TM. Periodic mid-Cretaceous oceanic anoxic events linked by oscillations of the phosphorus and oxygen biogeochemical cycles. Glob Biogeochem Cycles. 2003;17:1–11. [Google Scholar]
  64. Hector A, Schmid B, Beierkuhnlein C, Caldeira MC, Diemer M, Dimitrakopoulos PG, Finn JA, Freitas H, Giller PS, Good J, Harris R, et al. Plant diversity and productivity experiments in European grasslands. Science. 1999;286:1123–1127. doi: 10.1126/science.286.5442.1123. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Hector A, Bagchi R. Biodiversity and ecosystem multifunctionality. Nature. 2007;448:188–190. doi: 10.1038/nature05947. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Herms DA, Mattson WJ. The dilemma of plants – to grow or defend. Quart Rev Biol. 1992;67:283–335. [Google Scholar]
  67. Hessen DO, Agren GI, Anderson TR, Elser JJ, De Ruiter PC. Carbon sequestration in Ecosystems: the role of stoichiometry. Ecology. 2004;85:1179–1192. [Google Scholar]
  68. Hessen DO, Jeyasingh PD, Neiman M, Weider LJ. Genome streamlining and the elemental costs of growth. Trends Ecol Evol. 2010;25:75–80. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2009.08.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Hillebrand H, Kahlert M. Effect of grazing and nutrient supply on periphyton biomass and nutrient stoichiometry in habitats of different productivity. Limnol Oceanogr. 2001;46:1881–1898. [Google Scholar]
  70. Holdo RM, Sinclair AR, Dobson AP, Metzger KL, Bolker BM, Ritchie ME, Holt RD. A disease-mediated trophic cascade in the Serengeti and its implications for ecosystem C. PLoS biology. 2009;7:e1000210. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000210. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Hood JM, Sterner RW. Diet mixing: do animals integrate growth or resources across temporal heterogeneity? Am Nat. 2010;176:651–663. doi: 10.1086/656489. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Hooper DU, Chapin FS, Ewel JJ, Hector A, Inchausti P, Lavorel S, Lawton JH, Lodge DM, Loreau M, Naeem S, Schmid B, et al. Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a consensus of current knowledge. Ecological Monographs. 2005;75:3–35. [Google Scholar]
  73. Hooper DU, Adair EC, Cardinale BJ, Byrnes JEK, Hungate BA, Matulich KL, Gonzalez A, Duffy JE, Gamfeldt L, O’Connor M. A global synthesis reveals biodiversity loss as a major driver of ecosystem change. Nature. 2012;486:105–108. doi: 10.1038/nature11118. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Isbell F, Calcagno V, Hector A, Connolly J, Harpole WS, Reich PB, Scherer-Lorenzen M, Schmid B, Tilman D, van Ruijven J, Weigelt A, et al. High plant diversity is needed to maintain ecosystem services. Nature. 2011;477:199–202. doi: 10.1038/nature10282. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Isbell F, Reich PB, Tilman D, Hobbie SE, Polasky S, Binder S. Nutrient enrichment, biodiversity loss, and consequent declines in ecosystem productivity. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 2013;110:11911–11916. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1310880110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  76. Isbell F, Tilman D, Polasky S, Binder S, Hawthorne P. Low biodiversity state persists two decades after cessation of nutrient enrichment. Ecol Letters. 2013b;16:454–460. doi: 10.1111/ele.12066. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. Jeschke JM, Kokko H. The roles of body size and phylogeny in fast and slow life histories. Evol Ecol. 2009;23:867–878. [Google Scholar]
  78. Jones L, Provins A, Holland M, Mills G, Hayes F, Emmett B, Halla J, Sheppardd L, Smithd R, Suttond M, Hickse K, et al. Can fertilization of soil select less mutualistic mycorrhizae? Ecol Appl. 1993;3:749–757. doi: 10.2307/1942106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. Jones MLM, Wallace HL, Norris D, Brittain SA, Haria S, Jones RE, Rhind PM, Reynolds BR, Emmett BA. Changes in vegetation and soil characteristics in coastal sand dunes along a gradient of atmospheric nitrogen deposition. Plant Biology. 2004;6:598–605. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-821004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. Jones L, Provins A, Harper-Simmonds L, Holland M, Mills G, Hayes F, Emmett BA, Hall J, Sheppard LJ, Smith R, Sutton M, et al. A review and application of the evidence for nitrogen impacts on ecosystem services. Ecosys Services. 2014;7:76–88. [Google Scholar]
  81. Klaassen M, Nolet BA. Stoichiometry of endothermy: shifting the quest from nitrogen to carbon. Ecol Letters. 2008;11:785–792. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01180.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. Klausmeier CA, Litchman E, Daufresne T, Levin S. Optimal nitrogen-to-phosphorus stoichiometry of phytoplankton. Nature. 2004;429:171–174. doi: 10.1038/nature02454. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  83. Kozlowski J, Konarzewski M, Gawelczyk AT. Cell size as a link between noncoding DNA and metabolic rate scaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100:14080–14085. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2334605100. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  84. Kim TW, Lee K, Najjar RG, Jeong HD, Jeong HJ. Increasing N abundance in the northwestern Pacific Ocean due to atmospheric nitrogen deposition. Science. 2011;334:505–509. doi: 10.1126/science.1206583. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  85. Kinzig AP, Pacala SW, Tilman D. The functional consequences of biodiversity: empirical progress and theoretical extensions. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press; 2001. [Google Scholar]
  86. Kissling WD, Sekercioglu CH, Jetz W. Bird dietary guild richness across latitudes, environments and biogeographic regions. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2011;21:328–340. [Google Scholar]
  87. Kooijman AM, Dopheide JCR, Sevink J, Takken I, Verstraten JM. Nutrient limitations and their implications on the effects of atmospheric deposition in coastal dunes; lime-poor and lime-rich sites in the Netherlands. J Ecol. 1998;86:511–526. [Google Scholar]
  88. Koricheva J, Larsson S, Haukioja E, Keinanen M. Regulation of woody plant secondary metabolism by resource availability: hypothesis testing by means of meta-analysis. Oikos. 1998;83:212–226. [Google Scholar]
  89. Körner C. The nutritional status of plants from high altitudes. Oecologia. 1989;81:379–391. doi: 10.1007/BF00377088. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  90. Lauro FM, McDougald D, Thomas T, Williams TJ, Egan S, Rice S, DeMaere MZ, Ting L, Ertan H, Johnson J, Ferriera S, et al. The genomic basis of trophic strategy in marine bacteria. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 2009;106:15527–15533. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0903507106. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  91. Lambers H, Raven JA, Shaver GR, Smith SE. Plant nutrient-acquisition strategies change with soil age. Trends Ecol Evol. 2007;23:95–103. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2007.10.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  92. Lavery TJ, Roudnew B, Gill P, Seymour J, Seuront L, Johnson G, Mitchell JG, Smetacek V. Iron defecation by sperm whales stimulates carbon export in the Southern Ocean. Proc R Soc Lond B. 2010;277:3527–31. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2010.0863. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  93. Legagneux P, Gauthier G, Lecomte N, Schmidt NM, Reid D, Cadieux MC, Berteaux D, Bêty J, Krebs CJ, Ims RA, Yoccoz NG, et al. Arctic ecosystem structure and functioning shaped by climate and herbivore body size. Nature Climate Change. 2014;4:379–383. [Google Scholar]
  94. Lemoine NP, Giery ST, Burkepile DE. Differing nutritional constraints of consumers across ecosystems. Oecologia. 2014;174:1367–1376. doi: 10.1007/s00442-013-2860-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  95. Lenton TM, Klausmeier CA. Biotic stoichiometric controls on the deep ocean N:P ratio. Biogeosciences. 2007;4:353–367. [Google Scholar]
  96. Lenton TM, Watson AJ. Redfield revisited, 1. Regulation of nitrate, phosphate, and oxygen in the ocean. Global Biogeochem Cycles. 2000;14:225–248. [Google Scholar]
  97. Litchman E, Klausmeier CA. Trait-based community ecology of phytoplankton. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Sys. 2008;39:615–639. [Google Scholar]
  98. Loreau M, Naeem S, Inchausti P, Bengtsson J, Grime JP, Hector A, Hooper DU, Huston MA, Raffaelli D, Schmid B, Tilman D, et al. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning : current knowledge and future challenges. Science. 2001;294:804–808. doi: 10.1126/science.1064088. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  99. Loreau M. From populations to ecosystems: theoretical foundations for a new ecological synthesis. Princeton University Press; New Jersey: 2010. [Google Scholar]
  100. Manzoni S, Jackson RB, Trofymov JA, Porporato A. The global stoichiometry of litter nitrogen mineralization. Science. 2008;321:684–686. doi: 10.1126/science.1159792. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  101. Manzoni S, Trofymow JA, Jackson RB, Porporato A. Stoichiometric controls on carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus dynamics in decomposing litter. Ecol Monogr. 2010;80:89–106. [Google Scholar]
  102. Martiny AC, Pham CT, Primeau FW, Vrugt JA, Moore JK, Levin SA, Lomas MW. Strong latitudinal patterns in the elemental ratios of marine plankton and organic matter. Nature Geoscience. 2013;6:279–283. [Google Scholar]
  103. Martinson HM, Schneider K, Gilbert J, Hines JE, Hambäck PA, Fagan WF. Detritivory: stoichiometry of a neglected trophic level. Ecol Research. 2008;23:487–491. [Google Scholar]
  104. Maskell LC, Smart SM, Bullock JM, Thompson K, Stevens CJ. Nitrogen deposition causes widespread loss of species richness in British habitats. Glob Change Biol. 2010;16:671–679. [Google Scholar]
  105. McLaren BE, Peterson RO. Wolves, moose, and tree rings on Isle Royale. Science. 1994;266:1555–1558. doi: 10.1126/science.266.5190.1555. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  106. Moore CM, Mills MM, Arrigo KR, Berman-Frank I, Bopp L, Boyd PW, Galbraith ED, Geider RJ, Guieu C, Jaccard SL, Jickells TD, et al. Processes and patterns of oceanic nutrient limitation. Nature Geosci. 2013;6:701–710. [Google Scholar]
  107. Mulder C, Elser JJ. Soil acidity, ecological stoichiometry and allometric scaling in grassland food webs. Global Change Biology. 2009;15:2730–2738. [Google Scholar]
  108. Naeem S, Thompson LJ, Lawler SP, Lawton JH, Woodfin RM. Declining biodiversity can alter the performance of ecosystems. Nature. 1994;368:734–737. [Google Scholar]
  109. Naeem S, Thompson LJ, Lawler SP, Lawton JH, Woodfin RM. Empirical evidence that declining species diversity may alter the performance of terrestrial ecosystems. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B. 1995;347:249–262. [Google Scholar]
  110. Naeem S, Bunker DE, Hector A, Loreau M, Perrings C. Biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, and human wellbeing: an ecological and economic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009. [Google Scholar]
  111. Ochoa-Hueso R, Allen EB, Branquinho C, Cruz C, Dias T, Fenn ME, Manrique E, Pérez-Corona ME, Sheppard LJ, Stock WD. Nitrogen deposition effects on Mediterranean-type ecosystems: an ecological assessment. Environ Pollut. 2011;159:2265–2279. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2010.12.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  112. Olsson PA, Tyler G. Occurrence of non-mycorrhizal plant species in south Swedish rocky habitats is related to exchangeable soil phosphate. J Ecology. 2004;92:808–815. [Google Scholar]
  113. Orth JD, Thiele I, Palsson BØ. What is flux balance analysis? Nature Biotechnology. 2010;28:245–248. doi: 10.1038/nbt.1614. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  114. Parker GA, Maynard Smith J. Optimality theory in evolutionary biology. Nature. 1990;348:27–33. [Google Scholar]
  115. Payne RJ, Dise NB, Stevens CJ, Gowing DJ BEGIN partners. Impact of nitrogen deposition at the species level. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 2013;110:984–987. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1214299109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  116. Peñuelas J, Sardans J, Ogaya R, Estiarte M. Nutrient stoichiometric relations and biogeochemical niche in coexisting plant species: effect of simulated climate change. Polish J Ecol. 2008;56:613–622. [Google Scholar]
  117. Peñuelas J, Sardans J, Alcañiz JM, Poch JM. Increased eutrophication and nutrient imbalances in the agricultural soil of NE Catalonia, Spain. J Environ Biol. 2009;30:841–846. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  118. Peñuelas J, Sardans J, Llusià J, Owen S, Carnicer J, Giambelluca TW, Rezende EL, Waite M, Niinemets Ü. Faster returns on “leaf economics” and different biogeochemical niche in invasive compared with native plant species. Global Change Biol. 2010;16:2171–2185. [Google Scholar]
  119. Peñuelas J, Carnicer J. Climate change and peak oil: the urgent need for a transition to a non-carbon-emitting society. Ambio. 2010;39:85–90. doi: 10.1007/s13280-009-0011-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  120. Peñuelas J, Sardans J, Rivas-Ubach A, Janssens IA. The human-induced imbalance between C, N and P in Earth’s life system. Global Change Biol. 2012;18:3–6. [Google Scholar]
  121. Peñuelas J, Poulter B, Sardans J, Ciais P, van der Velde M, Bopp L, Olivier Boucher O, Godderis Y, Hinsinger P, Llusia J, Nardin E, et al. Human-induced nitrogen–phosphorus imbalances alter natural and managed ecosystems across the globe. Nature Communications. 2013;4:2934. doi: 10.1038/ncomms3934. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  122. Penuelas J, Sardans J, Estiarte M, Ogaya R, Carnicer J, Coll M, Jump AS. Evidence of current impact of climate change on life: a walk from genes to the biosphere. Glob Change Biol. 2013b;19:2303–2338. doi: 10.1111/gcb.12143. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  123. Pershing AJ, Christensen LB, Record NR, Sherwood GD, Stetson PB. The impact of whaling on the ocean carbon cycle: why bigger was better. PLoS One. 2010;5:e12444. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0012444. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  124. Persson J, Fink P, Goto A, Hood JM, Jonas J, Kato S. To be or not to be what you eat: regulation of stoichiometric homeostasis among autotrophs and heterotrophs. Oikos. 2010;119:741–751. [Google Scholar]
  125. Peters RH. The ecological implications of body size. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1983. [Google Scholar]
  126. Raubenheimer D, Simpson SJ. Integrative models of nutrient balancing: application to insects and vertebrates. Nutr Res Rev. 1997;10:151–179. doi: 10.1079/NRR19970009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  127. Redfield AC. On the proportions of organic derivatives in sea water and their relation to the composition of plankton. University Press of Liverpool; 1934. pp. 176–192. [Google Scholar]
  128. Reich PB, Knops J, Tilman D, Craine J, Ellsworth D, Tjoelker M, Lee T, Wedin D, Naeem S, Bahauddin D, Hendrey G, et al. Plant diversity enhances ecosystem responses to elevated CO2 and nitrogen deposition. Nature. 2001;410:809–812. doi: 10.1038/35071062. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  129. Reich PB, Oleksyn J. Global patterns of plant leaf N and P in relation to temperature and latitude. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 2004;101:11001–11006. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0403588101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  130. Reich PB, Tilman D, Isbell F, Mueller K, Hobbie SE, Flynn DF, Eisenhauer N. Impacts of biodiversity loss escalate through time as redundancy fades. Science. 2012;336:589–592. doi: 10.1126/science.1217909. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  131. Reich PB. The world - wide ‘fast–slow’plant economics spectrum: a traits manifesto. J Ecology. 2014;102:75–301. [Google Scholar]
  132. Richardson AJ, Bakun A, Hays GC, Gibbons MJ. The jellyfish joyride: causes, consequences and management responses to a more gelatinous future. Trends Ecol Evol. 2009;24:312–322. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2009.01.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  133. Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson Å, Chapin FS, Lambin EF, Lenton TM, Scheffer M, Folke C, Schellnhuber HJ, Nykvist B, et al. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature. 2009;461:472–475. doi: 10.1038/461472a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  134. Roman J, McCarthy JJ. The whale pump: marine mammals enhance primary productivity in a coastal basin. PLoS One. 2010;5:e13255. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013255. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  135. Rule S, Brook BW, Haberle SG, Turney CS, Kershaw AP, Johnson CN. The aftermath of megafaunal extinction: ecosystem transformation in Pleistocene Australia. Science. 2012;335:1483–1486. doi: 10.1126/science.1214261. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  136. Sapijanskas J, Paquette A, Potvin C, Kunert N, Loreau M. Tropical tree diversity enhances light capture through crown plasticity and spatial and temporal niche differences. Ecology. 2014 on line early view. [Google Scholar]
  137. Sardans J, Rivas-Ubach A, Peñuelas J. The elemental stoichiometry of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems and its relationships with organismic lifestyle and ecosystem structure and function: a review. Biogeochemistry. 2012a;111:1–39. [Google Scholar]
  138. Sardans J, Rivas-Ubach A, Peñuelas J. The C:N:P stoichiometry of organisms and ecosystems in a changing world: a review and perspectives. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst. 2012b;14:33–47. [Google Scholar]
  139. Sardans J, Peñuelas J. The role of plants in the effects of global change on nutrient availability and stoichiometry in the plant-soil system. Plant Physiology. 2012;160:1741–1761. doi: 10.1104/pp.112.208785. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  140. Sarmiento JL, Slater R, Barber R, Bopp L, Doney SC, Hirst AC, Kleypas J, Matear R, Mikolajewicz U, Monfray P, Soldatov V, et al. Response of ocean ecosystems to climate warming. Global Biogeochem Cycles. 2004:18–GB3003. [Google Scholar]
  141. Sæther B-E, Grøtan V, Engen S, Noble DG, Freckleton RP. Rarity, life history and scaling of the dynamics in time and space of British birds. J Animal Ecol. 2011;80:215–224. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2010.01751.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  142. Schade JD, Kyle M, Hobbie SE, Fagan WF, Elser JJ. Stoichiometric tracking of soil nutrients by a desert insect herbivore. Ecol Letters. 2003;6:96–101. [Google Scholar]
  143. Schindler DE, Carpenter SR, Cole JJ, Kitchell JF, Pace ML. Influence of food web structure on carbon exchange between lakes and the atmosphere. Science. 1997;277:248–251. [Google Scholar]
  144. Schulze E-D, Mooney HA. Biodiversity and ecosystem function. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1993. [Google Scholar]
  145. Silvertown J, Poulton P, Johnston E, Edwards G, Heard M, Biss PM. The Park Grass Experiment 1856–2006: its contribution to ecology. J Ecol. 2006;94:801–814. [Google Scholar]
  146. Sinclair ARE, Mduma S, Brashares JS. Patterns of predation in a diverse predator–prey system. Nature. 2003;425:288–290. doi: 10.1038/nature01934. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  147. Small GE, Pringle CM. Deviation from strict homeostasis across multiple trophic levels in an invertebrate consumer assemblage exposed to high chronic phosphorus enrichment in a Neotropical stream. Physiol Ecol. 2010;162:581–590. doi: 10.1007/s00442-009-1489-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  148. Smith FA, Elliott SM, Lyons SK. Methane emissions from extinct megafauna. Nature Geosci. 2010;3:374–375. [Google Scholar]
  149. Stefanescu C, Carnicer J, Peñuelas J. Determinants of species richness in generalist and specialist Mediterranean butterflies: the negative synergistic forces of climate and habitat change. Ecography. 2011;34:353–363. [Google Scholar]
  150. Sterner RW, Elser JJ, Fee EJ, Guildford SJ, Chrzanowski TH. The light: nutrient ratio in lakes: the balance of energy and materials affects ecosystem structure and process. Am Nat. 1997;150:663–684. doi: 10.1086/286088. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  151. Sterner RW, Clasen J, Lampert W, Weisse T. Carbon: phosphorus stoichiometry and food chain production. Ecol Letters. 1998;1:146–150. [Google Scholar]
  152. Sterner RW, Elser JJ. Ecological stoichiometry: the biology of elements from molecules to the biosphere. Princeton University Press; 2002. [Google Scholar]
  153. Stevens CJ, Dise NB, Mountford JO, Gowing DJ. Impact of nitrogen deposition on the species richness of grasslands. Science. 2004;303:1876–1879. doi: 10.1126/science.1094678. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  154. Stevens CJ, Dupré C, Dorland E, Gaudnik C, Gowing DJG, Bleeker A, Diekmann M, Alard D, Bobbink R, Fowler D, Corcket E, et al. Nitrogen deposition threatens species richness of grasslands across Europe. Environ Pollut. 2010;158:2940–2945. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2010.06.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  155. Sun X, Zhou X, Small GE, Sterner R, Kang H, Liu C. Energy storage and C:N:P variation in a holometabolous insect (Circulio davidi Fairmaire) larva across a climate gradient. J Insect Physiol. 2013;59:408–415. doi: 10.1016/j.jinsphys.2013.01.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  156. Sutton MA, Nemitz E, Erisman JW, Beier C, Butterbach B, Cellier P, De Vries W, Cotrufo F, Skibau , Di Marco C, Jones S, et al. Challenges in quantifying biosphere-atmosphere exchange of nitrogen species. Environ Pollut. 2007;150:125–139. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2007.04.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  157. Tao L, Hunter MD. Does anthropogenic nitrogen deposition induce phosphorus limitation in herbivorous insects? Global Change Biol. 2012;18:1843–1853. [Google Scholar]
  158. Throop HL, Lerdau MT. Effects of nitrogen deposition on insect herbivory: implications for community and ecosystem processes. Ecosystems. 2004;7:109–133. [Google Scholar]
  159. Tilman D, Downing JA. Biodiversity and stability in grasslands. Nature. 1994;367:363–365. [Google Scholar]
  160. Tilman D, Wedin D, Knops J. Productivity and sustainability influenced by biodiversity in grassland ecosystems. Nature. 1996;379:718–720. [Google Scholar]
  161. Tilman D, Knops J, Wedin D, Reich PB, Richie M, Seimann E. The influence of functional diversity and composition on ecosystem processes. Science. 1997;277:1300–1302. [Google Scholar]
  162. Tilman D, Fargione J, Wolff B, D’Antonio C, Dobson A, Howarth R, Schindler D, Schlesinger W, Simberloff D, Swackhamer D. Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change. Science. 2001;292:281–284. doi: 10.1126/science.1057544. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  163. Tilman D, Reich PB, Knops JM. Biodiversity and ecosystem stability in a decade-long grassland experiment. Nature. 2006;441:629–632. doi: 10.1038/nature04742. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  164. Tilman D, Reich PB, Isbell F. Biodiversity impacts ecosystem productivity as much as resources, disturbance, or herbivory. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 2012;109:10394–10397. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1208240109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  165. Tyrrell T. The relative influences of nitrogen and phosphorus on oceanic primary production. Nature. 1999;400:525–531. [Google Scholar]
  166. Urabe J, Sterner RW. Regulation of herbivore growth by the balance of light and nutrients. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 1996;93:8465–8469. doi: 10.1073/pnas.93.16.8465. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  167. Urbina I, Sardans J, Beierkuhnlein C, Jentsch A, Kreyling J, Peñuelas J. Community composition affects the biogeochemical niche of species across functional groups. Submitted to Ecology
  168. Urabe J, Kyle M, Makino W, Yoshida T, Andersen T, Elser JJ. Reduced light increases herbivore production due to stoichiometric effects of light/nutrient balance. Ecology. 2002;83:619–627. [Google Scholar]
  169. Vanni MJ, Flecker AS, Hood JM, Headworth JL. Stoichiometry of nutrient recycling by vertebrates in a tropical stream: linking spcies identity and ecosystem processes. Ecol Letters. 2002;5:285–293. [Google Scholar]
  170. Ventura M, Catalan J. Reproduction as one of the main causes of temporal variability in the elemental composition of zooplankton. Limnol Oceanogr. 2005;50:2043–2056. [Google Scholar]
  171. Vitousek PM, Mooney HA, Lubchenco J, Melillo JM. Human domination of Earth’s ecosystems. Science. 1997;277:494–499. [Google Scholar]
  172. Walker TW, Syers JK. The fate of phosphorus during pedogenesis. Geoderma. 1976;15:1–19. [Google Scholar]
  173. Wang R, Balkanski Y, Boucher O, Ciais P, Peñuelas J, Tao S. Closure of the global atmospheric phosphorus budget. Submitted to Nature Geoscience
  174. Wardle DA. Communities and Ecosystems: Linking the Aboveground and Belowground Components. Princeton University Press; 2002. [Google Scholar]
  175. Weber TS, Deutsch C. Ocean nutrient ratios governed by plankton biogeography. Nature. 2010;467:550–554. doi: 10.1038/nature09403. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  176. Weber T, Deutsch C. Oceanic nitrogen reservoir regulated by plankton diversity and ocean circulation. Nature. 2012;489:419–422. doi: 10.1038/nature11357. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  177. Wilkinson DM, Ruxton GD. High C/N ratio (not low-energy content) of vegetation may have driven gigantism in sauropod dinosaurs and perhaps omnivory and/or endothermy in their juveniles. Func Ecol. 2013;27:131–135. [Google Scholar]
  178. Willby NJ, Pulford ID, Flowers TH. Tissue nutrient signatures predict herbaceous - wetland community responses to nutrient availability. New Phytologist. 2001;152:463–481. doi: 10.1046/j.0028-646X.2001.00274.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  179. Wolf A, Doughty CE, Malhi Y. Lateral diffusion of nutrients by mammalian herbivores in terrestrial ecosystems. PloS one. 2013;8:e71352. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0071352. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  180. Woods HA, Perkins MC, Elser JJ, Harrison JF. Absorption and storage of phosphorus by larval Manduca sexta. J Insect Physiol. 2002;48:555–564. doi: 10.1016/s0022-1910(02)00060-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  181. Woods HA, Makino W, Cotner JB, Hobbie SE, Harrison JF, Acharya K, Elser JJ. Temperature and the chemical composition of poikilothermic organisms. Funct Ecol. 2003;17:237–245. [Google Scholar]
  182. Woods HA, Fagan WF, Elser JJ, Harrison JF. Allometric and phylogenetic variation in insect phosphorus content. Funct Ecol. 2004;18:103–109. [Google Scholar]
  183. Wright IJ, Reich PB, Westoby M, Ackerly DD, Baruch Z, Bongers F, Cavender-Bares J, Chapin T, Cornelissen JH, Diemer M, Flexas J, et al. The worldwide leaf economics spectrum. Nature. 2004;428:821–827. doi: 10.1038/nature02403. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  184. Yuan ZY, Chen HY, Reich PB. Global-scale latitudinal patterns of plant fine-root nitrogen and phosphorus. Nature communications. 2011;2:344. doi: 10.1038/ncomms1346. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  185. Zavaleta ES, Pasari JR, Hulvey KB, Tilman GD. Sustaining multiple ecosystem functions in grassland communities requires higher biodiversity. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2010;107:1443–1446. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0906829107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary methods

RESOURCES