scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessBook ChapterDOI

Transferring biodiversity-ecosystem function research to the management of ‘real-world’ ecosystems

Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
In this article, the authors classify biodiversity-ecosystem functioning (BEF) research into three clusters based on the degree of human control over species composition and the spatial scale, in terms of grain, of the study, and discuss how the research of each cluster is best suited to inform particular fields of ecosystem management.
Abstract
Biodiversity-ecosystem functioning (BEF) research grew rapidly following concerns that biodiversity loss would negatively affect ecosystem functions and the ecosystem services they underpin. However, despite evidence that biodiversity strongly affects ecosystem functioning, the influence of BEF research upon policy and the management of ‘real-world’ ecosystems, i.e., semi-natural habitats and agroecosystems, has been limited. Here, we address this issue by classifying BEF research into three clusters based on the degree of human control over species composition and the spatial scale, in terms of grain, of the study, and discussing how the research of each cluster is best suited to inform particular fields of ecosystem management. Research in the first cluster, small-grain highly controlled studies, is best able to provide general insights into mechanisms and to inform the management of species-poor and highly managed systems such as croplands, plantations, and the restoration of heavily degraded ecosystems. Research from the second cluster, small-grain observational studies, and species removal and addition studies, may allow for direct predictions of the impacts of species loss in specific semi-natural ecosystems. Research in the third cluster, large-grain uncontrolled studies, may best inform landscape-scale management and national-scale policy. We discuss barriers to transfer within each cluster and suggest how new research and knowledge exchange mechanisms may overcome these challenges. To meet the potential for BEF research to address global challenges, we recommend transdisciplinary research that goes beyond these current clusters and considers the social-ecological context of the ecosystems in which BEF knowledge is generated. This requires recognizing the social and economic value of biodiversity for ecosystem services at scales, and in units, that matter to land managers and policy makers.

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters

Biodiversity increases the resistance of ecosystem productivity to climate extremes

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors used data from 46 experiments that manipulated grassland plant diversity to test whether biodiversity provides resistance during and resilience after climate events, and found that biodiversity increased ecosystem resilience for a broad range of climate events.
Book ChapterDOI

A multitrophic perspective on biodiversity-ecosystem functioning research

TL;DR: It is argued that a multitrophic perspective of biotic interactions in random and non-random biodiversity change scenarios is key to advance future BEF research and to address some of its most important remaining challenges.
Journal ArticleDOI

The results of biodiversity–ecosystem functioning experiments are realistic

TL;DR: Comparing data from real-world grassland plant communities with data from two of the largest and longest-running grassland biodiversity experiments in terms of their taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversity and functional-trait composition shows that plant communities of biodiversity experiments cover almost all of the multivariate variation of the real- world communities, while also containing community types that are not currently observed in the real world.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity – ecosystem service management

TL;DR: In this article, the negative and positive effects of agricultural land use for the conservation of biodiversity, and its relation to ecosystem services, need a landscape perspective, which is difficult to be found in the literature.

REVIEWS AND SYNTHESES Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity - ecosystem service management

TL;DR: In this article, the negative and positive effects of agricultural land use for the conservation of biodiversity, and its relation to ecosystem services, need a landscape perspective, which may compensate for local highintensity management.
Related Papers (5)
Frequently Asked Questions (12)
Q1. What are the contributions in "Transferring biodiversity-ecosystem function research to the management of `real-world ecosystems" ?

Here, the authors address this issue by classifying BEF research into three clusters based on the degree of human control over species composition and the spatial scale, in terms of grain, of the study, and discussing how the research of each cluster is best suited to inform particular fields of ecosystem management. Research in the first cluster, small-grain highly controlled studies, is best able to provide general insights into mechanisms and to inform the management of species-poor and highly managed systems such as croplands, plantations, and the restoration of heavily degraded ecosystems. The authors discuss barriers to transfer within each cluster and suggest how new research and knowledge exchange mechanisms may overcome these challenges. To meet the potential for BEF research to address global challenges, the authors recommend transdisciplinary research that goes beyond these current clusters and considers the social-ecological context of the ecosystems in which BEF knowledge is generated. 

Similarly, understanding of how spatial biodiversity dynamics affect functions and the services they underpin needs to be extended to taxa involved in services other than pest control and pollination ( Table 1 ). In some cases, there may be trade-offs between services, e. g., if the conditions that maximize the diversity of one taxa do not favour another ( van der Plas et al., 2019 ). Accordingly, key considerations in applied BEF research are to acknowledge when research is fundamental or applied, and to clarify when services, rather than functions, are being considered, thus making it transparent which ser- vices and functions are focal and why, and acknowledging which stake- holder groups may benefit. How- ever, if the potential for BEF research to address global challenges is to be fully realized, future BEF must also be transdisciplinary, and include the main stakeholders of the ecosystem collaboratively from their inception. 

Because they are conducted in unmanipulated real-world ecosystems, clus-ter B results are directly transferable to semi-natural ecosystems, which expe-rience species loss and compositional change due to global environmentalchange. 

In semi-natural ecosystems the promotion ofthe biodiversity components underpinning ecosystem services are mostlikely to be achieved via management options that are simple and effectiveover large areas, and so the practices that would promote the desired facets ofbiodiversity, e.g., mowing or the introduction of selective grazers, may needto be identified. 

To consider landscape multifunctionality and its dependence on biodi-versity, multiple ecosystem services need to be scaled up in space and time,which is challenging. 

These include the spatial processes that maintain diversity, the matchingbetween species and environmental conditions in which they perform well(Leibold et al., 2017;Mori et al., 2018), and the potential for different speciesto provide different functions and services in different patches of the land-scape, thus boosting landscape multifunctionality (van der Plas et al., 2016;van der Plas et al., 2019). 

To do this, manipula-tions such as the manipulation of dominance and functional composition,trait dissimilarity, or other aspects of biodiversity could be employed(Cross and Harte, 2007; Manning et al., 2006; Smith and Knapp, 2003). 

For instance,the species composition in BEF experiments is randomly assembled and theyare usually performed in unfertilized, pesticide-free, unirrigated systems. 

Within this cluster, the authors also place remote sensing studies (e.g. Oehri et al.,2017) and national and regional correlational studies (e.g. Anderson et al.,2009). 

The authors postulate that this adoption is likely to be attributable to a range of factors including: a strong cultural valuation of grassland, a clearmandate of agriculture to manage sustainably (in Swiss Constitution, article 104), generous agrienvironment compensation schemes for many grassland types, and a strong focus on applied grassland research that has investigated which mixtures work over different time horizons (e.g. annual to permanent) and environmental conditions (moisture and elevational gradients) (e.g. Suter et al., 2015). 

To understand biodiversity-landscape multifunctionality relationships, agreater knowledge of which aspects of diversity underpin different ecosys-tem services is also required. 

These could include a wider range of non-random extinction scenarios,assessments of the relative importance of abiotic drivers of function and bio-diversity (e.g. Isbell et al., 2013; Manning et al., 2006), and the reduction ofdiversity from high to intermediate levels (Zobel et al., 1994), in order toverify, or refute the results of observational studies.