Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Diversity and productivity of plant communities across the Inland Northwest, USA

  • Community Ecology
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

No definitive explanation for the form of the relationship between species diversity and ecosystem productivity exists nor is there agreement on the mechanisms linking diversity and productivity across scales. Here, we examine changes in the form of the diversity–productivity relationship within and across the plant communities at three observational scales: plots, alliances, and physiognomic vegetation types (PVTs). Vascular plant richness data are from 4,760 20 m2 vegetation field plots. Productivity estimates in grams carbon per square meter are from annual net primary productivity (ANPP) models. Analyses with generalized linear models confirm scale dependence in the species diversity–productivity relationship. At the plot focus, the observed diversity–productivity relationship was weak. When plot data were aggregated to a focus of vegetation alliances, a hump-shaped relationship was observed. Species turnover among plots cannot explain the observed hump-shaped relationship at the alliance focus because we used mean plot richness across plots as our index of species richness for alliances and PVTs. The sorting of alliances along the productivity gradient appears to follow regional patterns of moisture availability, with alliances that occupy dry environments occurring within the increasing phase of the hump-shaped pattern, alliances that occupy mesic to hydric environments occurring near the top or in the decreasing phase of the curve, and alliances that occupy the wettest environments having the fewest species and the highest ANPP. This pattern is consistent with the intermediate productivity theory but appears to be inconsistent with the predictions of water–energy theory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrams PA (1995) Monotonic or unimodal diversity–productivity gradient: what does competition theory predict? Ecology 76:2019–2027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey RG, Avers PE, King T, McNab WH (1994) Ecoregions and subregions of the United States (map). USDA Forest Service; 1:7,500,000 with supplementary table of map unit descriptions. Washington DC

  • Barbour MG, Glenn-Lewin D, Loucks O (2000) Progress towards North American vegetation classification at physiognomic and floristic levels. In: White PS, Micina L, Lepš J (eds) Vegetation science in retrospect and perspective, Proceedings of the 41st IAVS symposium. Opulus, Grangärde, pp 111–114

  • Bond M, Chase JM (2002) Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning at local and regional spatial scales. Ecol Lett 5:467–470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapin FS, Zavaleta ES, Eviner VT, Naylor RL, Vitousek PM, Reynolds HL, Hooper DU, Lavorel S, Sala OE, Hobbie SE, Mack MC, Diaz S (2000) Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature 405:234–242

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chase JM, Leibold MA (2002) Spatial scale dictates the productivity–biodiversity relationship. Nature 416:427–430

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cliff AD, Ord JK, (1981) Spatial processes models and applications. Pion Limited, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Connell JH, Orias L (1964) The ecological regulation of species diversity. Am Nat 98:399–414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cramer W, Kicklighter DW, Bondeau A, Moore A III, Churkina G, Nemry B, Ruimy A, Schloss AL (1999) Comparing global models of terrestrial net primary productivity (NPP): overview and key results. Global Change Biol 5:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawley MJ (1993) GLIM for ecologists. Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Curtis JT (1959) The vegetation of Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison

    Google Scholar 

  • Daubenmire RF (1956) Climate as a determinant of vegetation in eastern Washington. Ecol Monogr 26:131–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grace JB (1999) The factors controlling species density in herbaceous plant communities: an assessment. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 2:1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grace JB (2001) The roles of community biomass and species pools in the regulation of plant diversity. Oikos 92:193–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grime JP (1973a) Competitive exclusion in herbaceous vegetation. Nature 242:344–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grime JP (1973b) Control of species density in herbaceous vegetation. J Environ Manage 1:151–167

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross KL, Willig MR, Gough L, Inouye R, Cox SB (2000) Patterns of species density and productivity at different spatial scales in herbaceous plant communities. Oikos 89:417–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossman DH, Faber-Langendoen D, Weakley AS, Anderson M, Bourgeron P, Crawford R, Goodin K, Landaal S, Metzler K, Patterson K, Pyne M, Reid M, Sneddon L (1998) International classification of ecological communities: terrestrial vegetation of the United States, vol I, The National Vegetation Classification System: development, status, and applications. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia, USA

  • Guo Q, Berry WL (1998) Species richness and biomass: dissection of the hump-shaped relationships. Ecology 79:2555–2559

    Google Scholar 

  • Haining R (1990) Spatial data analysis in the social and environmental sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins BA, Porter EE (2003) Does herbivore density depend on plant diversity? The case of California butterflies. Am Nat 161:40–49

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins BA, Field R, Cornell HV, Currie DJ, Guégan J-F, Kaufman DM, Kerr JT, Mittelbach GG, Oberdorff T, O’Brien EM, Porter EE, Turner JRG (2003) Energy, water, and broad-scale geographic patterns of species richness. Ecology 84:3105–3117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hector A, Schmid B (1999) Plant diversity and productivity experiments in European grasslands. Science 286:1123–1127

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Huston MA (1997) Hidden treatments in ecological experiments: re-evaluating the ecosystem function of biodiversity. Oecologia 110:449–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Intermountain Fire Science Lab (1996) Net primary productivity. Missoula, Montana, USA (web resource URL: http://www.icbemp.gov/spatial/crbsum/)

  • Jennings M, Faber-Langendoen D, Peet R, Loucks O, Glenn-Lewin D, Damman A, Barbour M, Pfister R, Grossman D, Roberts D, Tart D, Walker M, Talbot S, Walker J, Hartshorn G, Waggoner G, Abrams M, Hill A, Rejmanek M (2004) Guidelines for establishing and revising associations and alliances of the U.S. National Vegetation Classification: Version 4.0. Vegetation Classification Panel of the Ecological Society of America, Washington, (web resource URL: http://esa.org/vegweb/docFiles/NVC_Guidelines-v40.pdf)

  • Kaluzny SP, Vega SC, Cardoso TP, Shelly AA (1998) S+ spatial stats. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruskal JB (1964) Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: a numerical method. Psychometrika 29:115–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leibold MA (1999) Biodiversity and nutrient enrichment in pond plankton communities. Evol Ecol Res 1:73–95

    Google Scholar 

  • McCullagh P, Nelder JA (1989) Generalized linear models. Chapman and Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • McCune B, Mefford MJ (1999) Multivariate analysis of ecological data, version 4.17. MjM Software, Gleneden Beach

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell-Olds T, Shaw RG (1987) Regression analysis of natural selection: statistical influence and biological interpretation. Evolution 41:1149–1161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mittelbach GG, Steiner CF, Scheiner S, Gross K, Reynolds HL, Waide R, Willig M, Dodson SI, and Gough L (2001) What is the observed relationship between species richness and productivity? Ecology 82(9):2381–2396

    Google Scholar 

  • Naeem S (2002) Ecosystem consequences of biodiversity loss: the evolution of a paradigm. Ecology 83:1537–1552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NatureServe (2002) NatureServe Explorer: an online encyclopedia of life, Version 1.6. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA (web resource URL: http://www.natureserve.org/explorer)

  • Neter J, Kutner MH, Nachtsheim CJ, Wasserman W (1996) Applied linear statistical models, 4th edn. R.D. Irwin, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls AO (1989) How to make biological surveys go further with generalized linear models. Biol Conserv 50:51–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien EM (1993) Climatic gradients in woody plant species richness: towards an explanation based on an analysis of southern Africa’s woody flora. J Biog 20:181–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien EM (1998) Water-energy dynamics, climate, and prediction of woody plant species richness: an interim general model. J Biog 25:379–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oksanen J (1996) Is the humped relationship between species richness and biomass an artifact due to plot size? J Ecol 84:293–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preston FW (1962) Canonical distribution of commonness and rarity: part 1. Ecology 43:185–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig ML (1995) Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Running SW (1994) Testing forest-BCG ecosystem process simulations across a climate gradient in Oregon. Ecol Appl 4:238–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Running SW, Hunt ER Jr (1993) Generalization of a forest ecosystem process model for other biomes, Biome-BGC, and an application for global-scale models. In: Ehleringer JR, Field C (eds) Scaling processes between leaf and landscape levels. Academic, London, pp 141–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheiner SM, Jones S (2002) Diversity, productivity and scale in Wisconsin vegetation. Evol Ecol Res 4:1097–1117

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheiner SM, Cox SB, Willig M, Mittelbach GG, Osenberg C, and Kaspari M (2000) Species richness-area curves and Simpson’s paradox. Evol Ecol Res 2:791–802

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulze ED, Mooney HA (1993) Biodiversity and ecosystem function. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal RR (1979) Testing statistical significance of geographic variation patterns. Syst Zool 28:627–632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D (2000) Causes, consequences and ethics of biodiversity. Nature 405:208–211

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D, Lehman CL, Thomson KT (1997) Plant diversity and ecosystem productivity: theoretical considerations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:1857–1861

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • USDA NRCS (2000) The PLANTS database. National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA (web resource URL: http://plants.usda.gov)

  • VEMAP Members (1995) Vegetation/ecosystem modeling and analysis project (VEMAP): Comparing biogeography and biogeochemistry models in a continental-scale study of terrestrial ecosystem responses to climate change and CO2 doubling. Global Biogeochem Cycles 9:407–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venables WN, Ripley BB (2002) Modern applied statistics with S. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Vincent PJ, Haworth JM (1983) Poisson regression models of species abundance. J Biogeogr 10:153–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waide.B, Willing MR, Steiner CF, Mittelbach G, Gough L, Dodson SI, Juday GP, Parmenter R (1999) The relationship between productivity and species richness. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 30:257–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White MA, Thornton PE, Running SW, Nemani RR (2000) Parameterization and sensitivity analysis of the BIOME–BGC terrestrial ecosystem model: net primary production controls. Earth Interact 4(3):1–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker RH, Niering WA (1975) Vegetation of the Santa Catalina Mountains, Arizona. V. Biomass, production, and diversity along the elevation gradient. Ecology 56:771–790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright DH, Currie DJ, Maurer BA (1993) Energy supply and patterns of species richness on local and regional scales. In: Ricklefs RE Schulter D (eds) Species diversity in ecological communities: historical and geographical perspectives. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge Mike Austin, Sandy Andelman, Robert Waide and Frank Davis for their reviews and comments, and John Harris for geostatistical advice. This research was supported by the Knowledge Network for Biocomplexity project funded by the National Science Foundation’s Knowledge and Distributed Intelligence Program (NSF; Grant# DEB 99-80154), the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, a Center funded by NSF (Grant#DEB-0072909), the University of California, and the Santa Barbara campus. Support was also provided by the U.S. Geological Survey.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Michael D. Jennings

    Present address: The Nature Conservancy, Global Priorities Group, University of Idaho, Department of Geography, Moscow, ID, 83844, USA

  2. John W. Williams

    Present address: Department of Geography, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis/Donald Bren School of Environmental Science and Management, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, USA

    Michael D. Jennings

  2. National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA

    John W. Williams

  3. Hastings Natural History Reservation, Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, 38601 E. Carmel Valley Road, Carmel Valley, Berkeley, CA, USA

    Mark R. Stromberg

Authors
  1. Michael D. Jennings
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John W. Williams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mark R. Stromberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael D. Jennings.

Additional information

Communicated by Jim Ehleringer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jennings, M.D., Williams, J.W. & Stromberg, M.R. Diversity and productivity of plant communities across the Inland Northwest, USA. Oecologia 143, 607–618 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-005-0011-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-005-0011-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation