Diversity-productivity relations at a northern prairie site: An investigation using spectral data
The impact of decreasing plant diversity on terrestrial ecosystem productivity remains controversial. Recent studies generally suggest that diverse plant communities are more productive than depauperate versions. However, there is less agreement as to whether this is caused by the number of species present, the identities of the species present, the number of functional groups that these species make up, or by which functional groups are represented. This study evaluates whether relationships between plant diversity and productivity in northern mixed grass prairie are dependent on (a) the diversity measure used (species richness vs. functional richness), (b) the productivity measure utilized, or (c) the scale of observation. We collected plant diversity and productivity information over circular plots of 0.5 m diameter during the summer of 1998, then used a spatially nested sampling design to scale each property and their relationships to 2.5 m, 10 m and 50 m sampling resolutions. Observed diversity-productivity relationships were dependent on all of the above factors. Richness-productivity relationships were found to be mostly asymptotic at all observational scales. The presence of particular species, and functional groups, alone or in combination all had significant effects on productivity at the plot (0.5m) level, but not at coarser resolutions. These results were consistent with those of other studies, and suggest that the higher productivities of diverse grassland plots in our grassland site might result from the effects of diversity and the presence of productive species. The lack of species effects at coarser resolutions suggest other mechanisms are responsible for such relationships at these scales.
KeywordsDiversity Functional group Grasslands Productivity Radiometry Richness
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Davidson, A. 2002. Integrating field sampling and remotely sensed data for monitoring the function and composition of northern Mixed Grass prairie. PhD thesis, University of Toronto, National Library of Canada, Ottawa, Canada, 225 pp.Google Scholar
- Hector, A., Schmid, B., Beierkuhnlein, C., Caldeira, M. C., Dimer, M., Dimitrakapoulos, P. G., Finn, J. A., Freitas, H., Giller, P. S., Good, J., Harris, R., Högberg, P., Huss-Danell, K., Joshi, J., Jumpponen, A., Körner, C., Leadley, P. W., Loreau, M., Minns, A., Mulder, C. P. H., O’Donovan, G., Otway, S., Pereira, J. S., Prinz, A., Read, D. J., Scherer-Lorenzen, M., Schulze, E.-D., Siamantziouras, A.-S. D., Spehn, E. M., Terry, A. C., Troumbis, A. Y., Woodward, F. I., Yachi, S., and Lawton, J. H. 1999. Plant diversity and productivity experiments in European grasslands. Science 286: 1123–1127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hooper, D.U., Chapin, F.S., Ewel, J.J., Hector, A., Inchausti, P., La-vorel, S., Lawton, J.H., Lodge, D.M., Loreau, M., Naeem, S., Schmid, B., Setala, H., Symstad, A.J., Vandermeer, J., Wardle, D.A. 2005. Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a consensus of current knowledge. Ecological Monographs 7: 3–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kutiel, P. and Danin, A. 1987. Annual-species diversity and above-ground phytomass in relation to some soil properties in the sand dunes of the northern Sharon Plains, Israel. Vegetatio 70: 45–59.Google Scholar
- Lauenroth, W.K., Coffin, D.P., Burke, I.C., and Virginia, R.A. 1997. Interactions between demographic and ecosystem processes in a semi-arid and arid grassland: a challenge for plant functional types. In T.M. Smith, H.H. Shugart & F.I. Woodward (eds.), Plant Functional Types. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 234–254.Google Scholar
- Milner, C. and Hughes, R.E. 1968. Methods for the Measurement of Primary Production of Grassland. IBP Handbook No. 6. Black-well, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
- Ricklefs, R.E. 1990. Ecology. Freeman, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
- Sala, O.E., Lauenroth, W.K. and Golluscio, R.A. 1997. Plant functional types in temperate semi-arid regions. In: T.M. Smith, H.H. Shugart and F.I. Woodward (eds.), Plant Functional Types. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 217–233.Google Scholar
- Stubbendieck, J., Hatch, S.L. and Butterfield, C.H. 1992. North American Range Plants. University of Nebraska Press, Nebraska, USA, 493 pp.Google Scholar
- The Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, U.S.A. pp 1392.Google Scholar
- Tieszen, L.L., Reed, B.C., Bliss, N.B., Wylie, B.K. and DeJong, D.D. 1997. NDVI, C3 and C4 production, and distributions in Great Plains grassland land cover classes. Ecological Applications 7: 59–78.Google Scholar
- Tilman, D. 1999. The ecological consequences of biodiversity: a search for general principles. Ecology 80: 1455–1474.Google Scholar
- Tilman, D. 2001. Effects of diversity and composition on grassland stability and productivity. In: M.C Press, N.J. Huntly and S.A. Levin (eds.), Ecology: Achievement and Challenge. Blackwell Science, London, UK, pp. 183–207.Google Scholar
- Webster, R. 1979. Nested classification and sampling. In: R. Webster (ed.), Quantitative Numerical Methods in Soil Classification Survey. Oxford University Press, Bristol, UK. pp 90–106.Google Scholar
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.