Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2003 Aug 22;270(1525):1713–1719. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2003.2423

Why does grassland productivity increase with species richness? Disentangling species richness and composition with tests for overyielding and superyielding in biodiversity experiments.

John M Drake 1
PMCID: PMC1691425  PMID: 12964999

Abstract

The causal relationship between the biodiversity of natural and modified environments and their net primary production has been a topic of significant scientific controversy and scrutiny. Early theoretical and empirical results indicated that production was sometimes significantly correlated with species richness when species richness was directly manipulated in experimental systems. Possible mechanisms for this phenomenon include statistical sampling effects, complementary resource use and mutualistic interactions. However, the interpretation of experimental results has sometimes confounded species richness with species composition, and disentangling the effects of species diversity from species identity has proved a formidable challenge. Here, I present a statistical method that is based on simple probability models and does not rely on the species composition of individual plots to distinguish among three phenomena that occur in biodiversity-production experiments: underyielding, overyielding and (a new concept) superyielding. In some cases, distinguishing these phenomena will provide evidence for underlying mechanisms. As a proof-of-concept, I first applied this technique to a simulated dataset, indicating the strengths of the method with both clear and ambiguous cases. I then analysed data from the BIODEPTH experimental biodiversity manipulations. No evidence of either overyielding or superyielding was detected in the BIODEPTH experiment.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (143.3 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Callaway Ragan M., Brooker R. W., Choler Philippe, Kikvidze Zaal, Lortie Christopher J., Michalet Richard, Paolini Leonardo, Pugnaire Francisco I., Newingham Beth, Aschehoug Erik T. Positive interactions among alpine plants increase with stress. Nature. 2002 Jun 20;417(6891):844–848. doi: 10.1038/nature00812. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Cardinale Bradley J., Palmer Margaret A., Collins Scott L. Species diversity enhances ecosystem functioning through interspecific facilitation. Nature. 2002 Jan 24;415(6870):426–429. doi: 10.1038/415426a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Hector A, Schmid B, Beierkuhnlein C, Caldeira MC, Diemer M, Dimitrakopoulos PG, Finn JA, Freitas H, Giller PS, Good J. Plant diversity and productivity experiments in european grasslands. Science. 1999 Nov 5;286(5442):1123–1127. doi: 10.1126/science.286.5442.1123. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Loreau M. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: a mechanistic model. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 May 12;95(10):5632–5636. doi: 10.1073/pnas.95.10.5632. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Loreau M., Hector A. Partitioning selection and complementarity in biodiversity experiments. Nature. 2001 Jul 5;412(6842):72–76. doi: 10.1038/35083573. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Tilman D., Lehman C. L., Thomson K. T. Plant diversity and ecosystem productivity: theoretical considerations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Mar 4;94(5):1857–1861. doi: 10.1073/pnas.94.5.1857. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES