Embracing scale-dependence to achieve a deeper understanding of biodiversity and its change across communities

Jonathan M. Chase; Brian J. McGill; Daniel J. McGlinn; Felix May; Shane A. Blowes; Xiao Xiao; Tiffany M. Knight; Oliver Purschke; Nicholas J. Gotelli

doi:10.1111/ele.13151

Embracing scale-dependence to achieve a deeper understanding of biodiversity and its change across communities

Research output: Journal contributions › Scientific review articles › Research

Standard

Embracing scale-dependence to achieve a deeper understanding of biodiversity and its change across communities. / Chase, Jonathan M.; McGill, Brian J.; McGlinn, Daniel J. et al.
In: Ecology Letters, Vol. 21, No. 11, 01.11.2018, p. 1737-1751.

Research output: Journal contributions › Scientific review articles › Research

Bibtex

@article{6a9ed03597c148d6a8e72809a53d970b,

title = "Embracing scale-dependence to achieve a deeper understanding of biodiversity and its change across communities",

abstract = "Because biodiversity is multidimensional and scale-dependent, it is challenging to estimate its change. However, it is unclear (1) how much scale-dependence matters for empirical studies, and (2) if it does matter, how exactly we should quantify biodiversity change. To address the first question, we analysed studies with comparisons among multiple assemblages, and found that rarefaction curves frequently crossed, implying reversals in the ranking of species richness across spatial scales. Moreover, the most frequently measured aspect of diversity – species richness – was poorly correlated with other measures of diversity. Second, we collated studies that included spatial scale in their estimates of biodiversity change in response to ecological drivers and found frequent and strong scale-dependence, including nearly 10% of studies which showed that biodiversity changes switched directions across scales. Having established the complexity of empirical biodiversity comparisons, we describe a synthesis of methods based on rarefaction curves that allow more explicit analyses of spatial and sampling effects on biodiversity comparisons. We use a case study of nutrient additions in experimental ponds to illustrate how this multi-dimensional and multi-scale perspective informs the responses of biodiversity to ecological drivers.",

keywords = "Evenness, Hill number, rarefaction, scale-dependence, Simpson's index, species richness, species–area relationship, Ecosystems Research",

author = "Chase, {Jonathan M.} and McGill, {Brian J.} and McGlinn, {Daniel J.} and Felix May and Blowes, {Shane A.} and Xiao Xiao and Knight, {Tiffany M.} and Oliver Purschke and Gotelli, {Nicholas J.}",

note = "{\textcopyright} 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd/CNRS.",

year = "2018",

month = nov,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1111/ele.13151",

language = "English",

volume = "21",

pages = "1737--1751",

journal = "Ecology Letters",

issn = "1461-023X",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd.",

number = "11",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Embracing scale-dependence to achieve a deeper understanding of biodiversity and its change across communities

AU - Chase, Jonathan M.

AU - McGill, Brian J.

AU - McGlinn, Daniel J.

AU - May, Felix

AU - Blowes, Shane A.

AU - Xiao, Xiao

AU - Knight, Tiffany M.

AU - Purschke, Oliver

AU - Gotelli, Nicholas J.

PY - 2018/11/1

Y1 - 2018/11/1

N2 - Because biodiversity is multidimensional and scale-dependent, it is challenging to estimate its change. However, it is unclear (1) how much scale-dependence matters for empirical studies, and (2) if it does matter, how exactly we should quantify biodiversity change. To address the first question, we analysed studies with comparisons among multiple assemblages, and found that rarefaction curves frequently crossed, implying reversals in the ranking of species richness across spatial scales. Moreover, the most frequently measured aspect of diversity – species richness – was poorly correlated with other measures of diversity. Second, we collated studies that included spatial scale in their estimates of biodiversity change in response to ecological drivers and found frequent and strong scale-dependence, including nearly 10% of studies which showed that biodiversity changes switched directions across scales. Having established the complexity of empirical biodiversity comparisons, we describe a synthesis of methods based on rarefaction curves that allow more explicit analyses of spatial and sampling effects on biodiversity comparisons. We use a case study of nutrient additions in experimental ponds to illustrate how this multi-dimensional and multi-scale perspective informs the responses of biodiversity to ecological drivers.

AB - Because biodiversity is multidimensional and scale-dependent, it is challenging to estimate its change. However, it is unclear (1) how much scale-dependence matters for empirical studies, and (2) if it does matter, how exactly we should quantify biodiversity change. To address the first question, we analysed studies with comparisons among multiple assemblages, and found that rarefaction curves frequently crossed, implying reversals in the ranking of species richness across spatial scales. Moreover, the most frequently measured aspect of diversity – species richness – was poorly correlated with other measures of diversity. Second, we collated studies that included spatial scale in their estimates of biodiversity change in response to ecological drivers and found frequent and strong scale-dependence, including nearly 10% of studies which showed that biodiversity changes switched directions across scales. Having established the complexity of empirical biodiversity comparisons, we describe a synthesis of methods based on rarefaction curves that allow more explicit analyses of spatial and sampling effects on biodiversity comparisons. We use a case study of nutrient additions in experimental ponds to illustrate how this multi-dimensional and multi-scale perspective informs the responses of biodiversity to ecological drivers.

KW - Evenness

KW - Hill number

KW - rarefaction

KW - scale-dependence

KW - Simpson's index

KW - species richness

KW - species–area relationship

KW - Ecosystems Research

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052920468&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/154a5b26-86fe-31c4-8d75-806015b28a0a/

U2 - 10.1111/ele.13151

DO - 10.1111/ele.13151

M3 - Scientific review articles

C2 - 30182500

AN - SCOPUS:85052920468

VL - 21

SP - 1737

EP - 1751

JO - Ecology Letters

JF - Ecology Letters

SN - 1461-023X

IS - 11

ER -

Related by journal

Hill–Chao numbers allow decomposing gamma multifunctionality into alpha and beta components

Chao, A., Chiu, C-H., Hu, K-H., van der Plas, F., Cadotte, M. W., Mitesser, O., Thorn, S., Mori, A. S., Scherer-Lorenzen, M., Eisenhauer, N., Bässler, C., Delory, B., Feldhaar, H., Fichtner, A., Hothorn, T., Peters, M. K., Pierick, K., von Oheimb, G. & Müller, J., 01.2024, In: Ecology Letters. 27, 1, 14 p., e14336.