Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interpreting co-variation in species richness and productivity in terrestrial vegetation: Making sense of causations and correlations at multiple scales

  • Published:
Folia Geobotanica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This commentary examines conventional and recent ideas regarding the interpretation of species richness-productivity relationships (SRPR) in terrestrial vegetation. A new conceptual modelling approach — cascading graph diagrams — is used to search for maximum parsimony by distilling and clarifying synthetic linkages between several potential causes of variation and co-variation in these two vegetation attributes at three distinctly different spatial scales: global/continental scale (variation between climatic/geographic regions within a continent, or across latitudes); regional scale (variation between local communities representing different habitat (soil) fertility types or different habitat disturbance levels within a climatic/geographic region); and local community scale (variation between neighbourhood plots within a particular plant community/habitat). In contrast with a number of interpretations in recent literature, the approach developed here emphases that SRPR at each scale in terrestrial vegetation involve a “cascade” of several intermediary causational variables that have not been generally accounted for in previous studies of SRPR. Accordingly, SRPR are expected usually to be correlational, sometimes indirectly causational, but never directly causational, at any scale. Rather than suggesting that causational mechanisms “scale up”, the analysis here illustrates that several mechanistic features may be shared across scales and that in some cases, mechanisms may “scale down”. This has crucial implications for identifying testable and un-confounded hypotheses for future research and for selecting effective experimental designs and appropriate methods of data analyses for the interpretation of SRPR in natural vegetation.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aarssen L.W. (1997): High productivity in grassland ecosystems: effected by species diversity or productive species?Oikos 80: 183–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aarssen L.W. (2001): On correlations and causations between productivity and species richness in vegetation: predictions from habitat attributes.Basic Appl. Ecol. 2: 105–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aarssen L.W. &Epp G.A. (1990): Neighbour manipulations in natural vegetation: a review.J. Veg. Sci. 1: 13–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aarssen L.W. &Schamp B. (2002): Predicting distributions of species richness and species size in regional floras: applying the species pool hypothesis to the habitat templet model.Perspect. Pl. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 5: 3–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aarssen L.W., Laird R. &Pither J. (2003): Is the productivity of vegetation plots higher or lower when there are more species? Variable predictions from interaction of the “sampling effect” and “competitive dominance effect” on the habitat templet.Oikos 102: 427–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abrams P.A. (1995): Monotonic or unimodal diversity — productivity gradients: what does competition theory predict.Ecology 76: 2019–2027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell G., Lechowicz M., &Waterway M. (2000): Environmental heterogeneity and species diversity of forest sedges.J. Ecol. 88: 67–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bengtsson J., Fagerstrom T. &Rydin H. (1994): Competition and coexistence in plant communities.Trends Ecol. Evol. 9: 246–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berendse F. &Aerts R. (1987): Nitrogen-use-efficiency: a biologically meaningful definition?Funct. Ecol. 1: 293–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooker R.W. &Callaghan T.V. (1998): The balance between positive and negative plant interactions and its relationship to environmental gradients: a model.Oikos 81: 196–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown J. (1988): Species diversity. In:Myers A.A. &Giller P.S. (eds),Analytical biogeography: an integrated approach to the study of animal and plant distributions, Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 178–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callaway R.M. (1995): Positive interactions among plants.Bot. Rev. 61: 306–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chase J.M. &Leibold M.A. (2002): Spatial scale dictates the productivity-biodiversity relationship.Nature 416: 427–430.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Colwell R.K. &Lees D.C. (2000): The mid-domain effect: geometric constraints on the geography of species richness.Trends Ecol. Evol. 15: 70–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cornwell W.K. &Grubb P.J. (2003): Regional and local patterns in plant species richness with respect to resource availability.Oikos 100: 417–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane P.R. &Lidgard S. (1990): Angiosperm diversification and paleolatitudinal gradients in Cretaceous floristic diversity.Science 246: 675–678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drake J.M. (2003): Why does grassland productivity increase with species richness? Disentangling species richness and composition with tests for overyielding and superyielding in biodiversity experiments.Proc. Roy. Soc. London Ser. B, Biol. Sci. 270: 1713–1719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dynesius M. &Jansson R. (2000): Evolutionary consequences of changes in species’ geographical distributions driven by Milankovitch climate oscillations.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97: 9115–9120.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer A.G. (1960): Latitudinal variation in organic diversity.Evolution 14: 64–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaston K.J. (2000): Global patterns in biodiversity.Nature 405: 220–227.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gersani M., Brown J.S., O’Brien E., Maina G.M. &Abramsky Z. (2001): Tragedy of the commons as a result of root competition.J. Ecol. 89: 660–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grime J.P. (1979):Plant strategies and vegetation processes. Wiley, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grubb P.J. (1977): The maintenance of species richness in plant communities: the importance of the regeneration niche.Biol. Rev. 52: 107–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins B.A., Field R., Cornell H.V., Currie D.J., Guegan J-F., KaufmaN D.M., Kerr J.T., Mittelbach G.G., Oberdorff T., O’Brien E.M., Porter E.E. &TurneR J.R.G. (2003): Energy, water and broad-scale geographic patterns of species richness.Ecology 84: 3105–3117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter A. &Aarssen L.W. (1988): Plants helping plants.BioScience 38: 34–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huston M.A. (1994):Biological diversity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huston M.A. (1999): Local processes and regional patterns: appropriate scales for understanding variation in the diversity of plants and animals.Oikos 86: 393–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huston M.A., Aarssen L.W., Austin M.P., Cade B.S., Fridley J.D., Garnier E., Grime J.P., Hodgson J., Lauenroth W.K., Thompson K., Vandermeer J. &Wardle D.A. (2000): No consistent effect of plant diversity on productivity.Science 289: 1255.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Huston M.A. &McBride A.C. (2002): Evaluating the relative strengths of biotic versus abiotic controls on ecosystem processes. In:Loreau M., Naeem S. &Inchausti P. (eds.),Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: synthesis and perspectives, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 47–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inderjit &Callaway R.M. (2003): Experimental design for the study of allelopathy.Pl. & Soil 256: 1–11.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jolliffe P.A. (1997): Are mixed populations of plant species more productive than pure stands?Oikos 80: 595–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judd W.S., Sanders R.W. &Donoghue M.J. (1994): Angiosperm family pairs: preliminary phylogenetic analyses.Harvard Pap. Bot. 5: 1–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laird R., Pither J. &Aarssen L.W. (2003): Species evenness, not richness has a consistent relationship with productivity in old-field vegetation.Community Ecol. 4: 21–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loehle C. (1998): Height growth rate trade-offs determine northern and southern range limits for trees.J. Biogeogr. 25: 735–742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loreau M., Naeem S., Inchausti P., Bengtsson J., Grime J.P., Hector A., Hooper D.U., Huston M.A., Raffaelli D., Schmid B., Tilman D. &Wardle D.A. (2001): Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: Current knowledge and future challenges.Science 294: 804–808.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Loreau M., Naeem S &Inchausti P. (eds.) (2002):Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: synthesis and perspectives. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maina G.G., Brown J.S. &Gersani M. (2002): Tragedy of the commons and other consequences of intra-plant versus inter-plant root competition in beans.Pl. Ecol. 160: 235–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGlone M.S. (1996): When history matters: scale, time, climate and tree diversity.Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. Lett. 5: 309–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mittelbach G.C., Steiner C.F., Scheiner S.M., Gross K.L., Reynolds H.L., Waide R.B., Willig M.R., Dodson S.I. &Gough L. (2001): What is the observed relationship between species richness and productivity?Ecology 82: 2381–2396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niklas K.J., Midgley J.J. &Rand R.H. (2003): Size dependent species richness: trends within plant communities and across latitude.Ecol. Lett. 6: 631–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijs I. &Impens I. (2000): Underlying effects of resource use efficiency in diversity-productivity relationships.Oikos 91: 204–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orians G.H., Brown G.M., Jr.,Kunin W.E. &Swierzbinski J.E. (1990):The preservation and valuation of biological resources. University of Washington Press, Seattle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petchey O.L. (2003): Integrating methods that investigate how complementarity influences ecosystem functioning.Oikos 101: 323–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pianka E.R. (1966): Latitudinal gradients in species diversity: a review of concepts.Amer. Naturalist 100: 33–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pither J. (2003): Climate tolerance and interspecific variation in geographic range size.Proc. Roy Soc. London B, Biol. Sci. 270: 475–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polis G.A. (1999): Why are parts of the world green? Multiple factors control productivity and the distribution of biomass.Oikos 86: 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajaniemi T.K. (2003): Explaining the productivity-diversity relationship in plants.Oikos 101: 449–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phode K. (1992): Latitudinal gradients in species diversity: the search for the primary cause.Oikos 65: 514–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricklefs R.E. (2004a): A comprehensive framework for global patterns in biodiversity.Ecol. Lett. 7: 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricklefs R.E. (2004b): Historical and ecological dimensions of global patterns in plant diversity.Biol. Skr. (in press).

  • Rosenzweig M.L. (1975): On continental steady states of species diversity. In:Cody M.L. &Diamond J.M. (eds.),Ecology and evolution of communities, Blkanp, Cambridge, pp. 121–140.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig M.L. &Abramsky Z. (1993): How are diversity and productivity related? In:Ricklefs R.E. &Schluter D. (eds.),Species diversity in ecological communities, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 52–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schamp B., Laird R, &Aarssen L.W. (2002): Fewer species because of uncommon habitat? Testing the species pool hypothesis for low plant species richness in highly productive habitats.Oikos 97: 145–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schamp B., Aarssen L.W. &Lee H. (2003): Local plant species richness increases with regional habitat commonness across a gradient of forest productivity.Folia Geobot. 38: 273–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid B. (2002): The species richness-productivity controversy.Trends Ecol. Evol. 17: 113–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Špačková I. &Lepš J. (2001): Procedure for separating the selection effect form other effects in diversity-productivity relationship.Ecol. Lett. 4: 585–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens G.C. (1989): The latitudinal gradient in geographic range: how so many species coexist in the tropics.Amer. Naturalist 13: 240–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swift M.J. &Anderson J.M. (1994): Biodiversity and ecosystem function in agricultural systems. In:Schulze E.-D. &Mooney H.A. (eds),Biodiversity and ecosystem function, Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp. 15–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tallis J.H. (1991):Plant community history. Long-term changes in plant distribution and diversity. Chapman and Hall, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor D.R., Aarssen L.W. &Loehle C. (1990): On the relationship between r/K — selection and environmental carrying capacity: A new habitat templet for plant life history strategies.Oikos 58: 239–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terborgh J. (1973): On the notion of favourableness in plant ecology.Amer. Naturalist 107: 481–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D. (1988):Plant strategies and the dynamics and structure of plant communities. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D., Lehman C.L. &Thompson K.T. (1997): Plant diversity and ecosystem productivity: theoretical considerations.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94: 1857–1861.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van der Heijden M.G.A &Cornelissen J.H.C. (2002): The critical role of plant-microbe interactions on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: arbuscular mycorrhizal associations as an example. In:Loreau M., Naeem S. &Inchausti P. (eds.),Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: synthesis and perspectives, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 181–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandermeer J. (1989):The ecology of intercropping. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandermeer D., Lawrence D., Sysstad A. &Hobbie S. (2002): Effect of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning in managed ecosystems. In:Loreau M., Naeem S. &Inchausti P. (eds.),Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: synthesis and perspectives, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 221–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandermeulen M.A., Hudson A.J. &Scheiner S.M. (2001): Three evolutionary hypotheses for the hump-shaped productivity-diversity curve.Evol. Ecol. Res. 3: 379–392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waide R.B., Willig M.R., Steiner C.F., Mittelbach G., Gough L., Dodson S.I., Juday G.P. &Parmenter R. (1999): The relationship between productivity and species richness.Annual Rev. Ecol. Syst. 30: 257–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wardle D.A., Nilsson M.C., Gallet C. &Zachrisson O. (1998): An ecosystem-level perspective of allelopathy.Biol. Rev. 73: 305–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitfield J. (2002): Neutrality versus the niche.Nature 417: 481–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker R.J., Willis K.J. &Field R. (2001): Scale and species richness: toward a general hierarchical theory of species diversity.J. Biogeogr. 28: 453–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willig M.R., Kaufman D.M. &Stevens R.D. (2003): Latitudinal gradients of biodiversity: pattern, process, scale and synthesis.Annual Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 34: 273–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willis J.C. (1922):Age and area. A study in geographical distribution and origin in species. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willson M.F. (1973): Evolutionary ecology of plants, a review. Part IV. Niches and competition.Biologist 55: 74–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthen W.B. (1996): Community composition and nested-subset analyses: Basic descriptors for community ecology.Oikos 76: 417–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright D.H. (1983): Species-energy theory: an extension of species-area theory.Oikos 41: 496–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright D.H., Currie D.J. &Maurer B.A. (1993): Energy supply and patterns of species richness on local and regional scales. In:Ricklefs R.E. &Schluter D. (eds.),Species diversity in ecological communities: historical and geographical perspectives, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 66–74

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, Queen’s University, K7L3N6, Kingston, ON, Canada

    Lonnie W. Aarssen

Authors
  1. Lonnie W. Aarssen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lonnie W. Aarssen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aarssen, L.W. Interpreting co-variation in species richness and productivity in terrestrial vegetation: Making sense of causations and correlations at multiple scales. Folia Geobot 39, 385–403 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02803210

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02803210

Keywords

Search

Navigation