Plant Ecology

, Volume 218, Issue 7, pp 899–908 | Cite as

Exploring the relationship between canopy height and terrestrial plant diversity

  • Roberto Cazzolla GattiEmail author
  • Arianna Di Paola
  • Antonio Bombelli
  • Sergio Noce
  • Riccardo Valentini


A relatively small number of broad-scale patterns describe the distribution of biodiversity across the earth. All of them explore biodiversity focusing on a mono or bi-dimensional space. Conversely, the volume of the forests is rarely considered. In the present work, we tested a global correlation between vascular plant species richness (S) and average forest canopy height (H), the latter regarded as a proxy of volume, using the NASA product of Global Forest Canopy Height map and the global map of plant species diversity. We found a significant correlation between H and S both at global and macro-climate scales, with strongest confidence in the tropics. Hence, two different regression models were compared and discussed to provide a possible pattern of the H–S relation. We suggested that the volume of forest ecosystems should be considered in ecological studies as well as in planning and managing natural sites, although in this first attempt, we cannot definitively prove our hypothesis. Again, high-resolution spatial data could be highly important to confirm the H–S relation, even at different scales.


Biodiversity Biospace Canopy height Ecosystem volume Species richness 



The authors gratefully acknowledge Prof. W. Barthlott (University of Bonn) who kindly shared his global map on vascular plant diversity. We also acknowledge Dr. M. Santini (CMCC) and Dr. F. Di Paola (IMAA-CNR) for many constructive suggestions. The research leading to these results has been supported by the ERC Africa GHG and GEOCARBON Projects Nos. 247349 and 283080, respectively. This study was also supported by the research grant "Study of climatically-driven changes of the biodiversity of vulnerable ecosystems in Siberia", given by Mendeleev Foundation in the framework of the Tomsk State University's Competitiveness Improvement Programme.

Author contributions

RCG conceived the idea and the study, and together with ADP wrote the manuscript; ADP and SN conducted the statistics and the correlation analysis. AB contributed to the discussion and conclusion. RV supervised the study. All the authors had final approval of the submitted version.

Supplementary material

11258_2017_738_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 1028 kb).


  1. Banerjee K, Cazzolla Gatti R, Mitra A (2016) Climate change-induced salinity variation impacts on a stenoecious mangrove species in the Indian Sundarbans. Ambio 46(4):492–499CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Barthlott W, Lauer W, Placke A (1996) Global distribution of species diversity in vascular plants: towards a world map of phytodiversity. Erdkunde 50:317–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barthlott W, Hostert A, Kier G, Küper W, Kreft H, Mutke J, Sommer JH (2007) Geographic patterns of vascular plant diversity at continental to global scales. Erdkunde 61:305–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Battipaglia G, Zalloni E, Castaldi S, Marzaioli F, Cazzolla Gatti R et al (2015) Long tree-ring chronologies provide evidence of recent tree growth decrease in a central african tropical forest. PLoS ONE 10(3):e0120962CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Begon M, Harper JL, Townsend CR (1986) Ecology: individuals, populations and communities. Blackwell Scientific Publications, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. Brose U, Ostling A, Harrison K, Martinez ND (2004) Unified spatial scaling of species and their trophic interactions. Nature 428:167–171CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Cazzolla Gatti R (2011) Evolution is a cooperative process: the biodiversity-related niches differentiation theory (BNDT) can explain why. Theor Biol Forum 104(1):35–43Google Scholar
  8. Cazzolla Gatti R (2016a) A conceptual model of new hypothesis on the evolution of biodiversity. Biologia 71(3):343–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cazzolla Gatti R (2016b) The fractal nature of the latitudinal biodiversity gradient. Biologia 71(6):669–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cazzolla Gatti R, Castaldi S, Lindsell JA, Coomes DA, Marchetti M, Maesano M, Di Paola A, Paparella F, Valentini R (2015) The impact of selective logging and clear cutting on forest structure, tree diversity and above-ground biomass of African tropical forests. Ecol Res 30(1):119–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cazzolla Gatti R, Vaglio Laurin G, Valentini R (2017a) Tree species diversity of three Ghaianan reserves. iForest Biogeosci For 10(2):362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cazzolla Gatti RC, Hordijk W, Kauffman S (2017b) Biodiversity is autocatalytic. Ecol Model 346:70–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Connor EF, McCoy ED (1979) The statistics and biology of the species-area relationship. Am Nat 113(6):791–833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cornell HV, Lawton JH (1992) Species interactions, local and regional processes, and limits to the richness of ecological communities: a theoretical perspective. J Anim Ecol 61:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dupuy JM, Chazdon RL (1998) Long-term effects of forest regrowth and selective logging on the seed bank of tropical forests in NE Costa Rica1. Biotropica 30(2):223–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gaston KJ (1996) Biodiversity-latitudinal gradients. Prog Phys Geogr 20:466–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Goodchild MF (1986) Spatial autocorrelation. concepts and techniques in modern geography 47. Geo Books, NorwichGoogle Scholar
  18. Gouveia SF, Villalobos F, Dobrovolski R, Beltrão-Mendes R, Ferrari SF (2014) Forest structure drives global diversity of primates. J Anim Ecol 83(6):1523–1530CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Hansen MC, Potapov PV, Moore R et al (2013) High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science 342(6160):850–853CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Kohyama T (1993) Size-structured tree populations in gap-dynamic forest—the forest architecture hypothesis for the stable coexistence of species. J Ecol 81:131–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Körner C (2000) Why are there global gradients in species richness? Mountains might hold the answer. Trends Ecol Evol 15:513–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kottek M, Grieser J, Beck C, Rudolf B, Rubel F (2006) World map of the Köppen–Geiger climate classification updated. Meteorologische Zeitschrift 15:259–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kreft H, Jetz W (2007) Global patterns and determinants of vascular plant diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104(14):5925–5930CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Lopatin J, Dolos K, Hernández HJ, Galleguillos M, Fassnacht FE (2016) Comparing generalized linear models and random forest to model vascular plant species richness using LiDAR data in a natural forest in central Chile. Remote Sens Environ 173:200–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. MacArthur RH, Wilson EO (1967) The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  26. Moran PA (1950) Notes on continuous stochastic phenomena. Biometrika 37(1/2):17–23CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Neumann M, Starlinger F (2001) The significance of different indices for stand structure and diversity in forests. For Ecol Manage 145:91–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. O’Brien EM, Field R, Whittaker RJ (2000) Climatic gradients in woody plant (tree and shrub) diversity: water-energy dynamics, residual variation, and topography. Oikos 89:588–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Roll U, Geffen E, Yom-Tov Y (2015) Linking vertebrate species richness to tree canopy height on a global scale. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 24(7):814–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rosenzweig ML (1995) Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rull V (2011) Neotropical biodiversity: timing and potential drivers. Trends Ecol Evol 26:508–513CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Sagarin RD, Gaines SD, Gaylord B (2006) Moving beyond assumptions to understand abundance distributions across the ranges of species. Trends Ecol Evol 21:524–530CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Santini M, Di Paola A (2015) Changes in the world rivers’ discharge projected from an updated high resolution dataset of current and future climate zones. J Hydrol 531:768–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Santini M, Taramelli A, Sorichetta A (2010) ASPHAA: a GIS-Based algorithm to calculate cell area on a latitude-longitude (geographic) regular grid. Trans GIS 14:351–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Scheffers BR, Phillips BL, Laurance WF, Sodhi NS, Diesmos A, Williams SE (2013) Increasing arboreality with altitude: a novel biogeographic dimension. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 280:1581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sexton JO, Noojipady P, Song XP, Feng M, Song DX, Kim DH, Townshend JR (2016) Conservation policy and the measurement of forests. Nat Clim Change 6(2):192–196Google Scholar
  37. Shaffer ML (1981) Minimum population sizes for species conservation. Bioscience 31:131–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Silvertown J (2004) Plant coexistence and the niche. Trends Ecol Evol 19:605–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Simard M, Pinto N, Fisher JB, Baccini A (2011) Mapping forest canopy height globally with spacebornelidar. J Geophys Res Biogeosci 116:4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Spearman C (1904) The proof and measurement of association between two things. Am J Psychol 15:72–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stevens GC (1989) The latitudinal gradient in geographical range: how so many species coexist in the tropics. Am Nat 133:240–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Susmel L (1986) Prodromi di una nuova selvicoltura. Annali Accademia Italiana di Scienze Forestali Firenze 35:33–41Google Scholar
  43. Vaglio Vaglio G, Hawthorne WD, Chiti T et al (2016) Does degradation from selective logging and illegal activities differently impact forest resources? A case study in Ghana. iForest Biogeosci For 9:354–362Google Scholar
  44. Valentini R, Arneth A, Bombelli A et al (2014) A full greenhouse gases budget of Africa: synthesis, uncertainties, and vulnerabilities. Biogeosciences 11:381–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Van Gemerden BS, Olff H, Parren MP, Bongers F (2003) The pristine rain forest? Remnants of historical human impacts on current tree species composition and diversity. J Biogeogr 30(9):1381–1390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Watson RT, Heywood VH, Baste I, Dias B, Gamez R, Janetos T, Ruark R (1995) Global biodiversity assessment. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  47. Willig MR, Kaufman DM, Stevens RD (2003) Latitudinal gradients of biodiversity: pattern, process, scale, and synthesis. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:273–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wirth C (2005) Fire regime and tree diversity in boreal forests: implications for the carbon cycle. In: Scherer-Lorenzen M, Körner C, Schulze ED (eds) Forest diversity and function. Springer, Berlin, pp 309–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wolf JA, Fricker GA, Meyer V, Hubbell SP, Gillespie TW, Saatchi SS (2012) Plant species richness is associated with canopy height and topography in a neotropical forest. Remote Sens 4(12):4010–4021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Woodroffe R, Ginsberg JR (1998) Edge effects and the extinction of populations inside protected areas. Science 280(5372):2126–2128CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Zenner EK (2000) Do residual trees increase structural complexity in Pacific Northwest coniferous forests? Ecol Appl 10(3):800–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roberto Cazzolla Gatti
    • 1
    Email author
  • Arianna Di Paola
    • 2
  • Antonio Bombelli
    • 2
  • Sergio Noce
    • 2
  • Riccardo Valentini
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Biological Diversity and Ecology Laboratory, Bio-Clim-Land Centre of Excellence, Biological InstituteTomsk State UniversityTomskRussia
  2. 2.CMCC Foundation-Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change, Division on Impacts on Agriculture, Forests and Ecosystem Services Division (IAFES)ViterboItaly
  3. 3.RUDN UniversityMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations