General Information

This is a master course on the causes and consequences of plant biodiversity. The course covers all aspects of biodiversity, including genetic, species, phylogenetic and functional diversity. Short lectures will give introductions to the different topics. For the major part, students will have to read, present and discuss the literature, which includes book chapters, classical papers as well as examples from the recent literature. These papers cover conceptual or theoretical approaches to the study of biodiversity, reviews of existing knowledge, famous experiments, or novel and innovative methodologies. Referring to Sustainability we read and discuss at least two papers related to ecosystem services / global change per semester.

Time Table

Date Paper Presenter Key1 Key2 Approach Additional.reading
21/09/2022 (Semchenko et al., 2022) Gemma specialist.generalist PSF Review
28/09/2022 (Buisson et al., 2022) Ralph grassland restotation Review
05/10/2022 (Xi et al., 2022) 3 BEF drought legacy Experiment
12/10/2022 (Klink et al., 2022) 4 Insect monitor technology Review
19/10/2022 (Rixen et al., 2022) 5 climate change tropic interactions Observational
26/10/2022 (Pastore et al., 2021) 6 coexistence evolution Model
02/11/2022 (Willems et al., 2022) 7 climate change plants Observational; herbaria
09/11/2022 (Yang et al., 2022) 8 climate change plant interactions Meta-analysis
16/11/2022 (Liu et al., 2022) 9 light pollution pollinators Experiment
23/11/2022 (LaManna et al., 2022) 10 climate change CNDD Observational
30/11/2022 (Huang et al., 2022) 11 BEF insect exclusion Experiment
07/12/2022 (Palmer, 1994) 12 species richness conditions Classic (Adler et al., 2007)
14/12/2022 (Feng et al., 2022) 13 BEF context Meta-analysis
21/12/2022 (Buchkowski et al., 2022) 14 cannibalism soil food web Model

Student information

Aims

In the journal club in plant diversity we read and discuss papers on a range of topics in ecology. The course is attended by PhDs and postdocs in the groups of Eric Allan and Markus Fischer, together with students following the course. The aim of the course is to introduce students to the scientific literature, so that they learn how to read and critique a paper. The course aims to teach critical thinking and engagement with the papers. Remember all papers have their flaws and (usually) their strengths. As a scientist it is essential that you are able to review papers and to decide whether they make an important contribution to the field and to see what problems they might have.

Structure

Each week one participant in the journal club presents the paper: to do this they need to explain a bit of background about the papers and describe the methods and results, so that everyone can understand what has been done. Following this everyone discusses the pros and cons of the paper, i.e. whether we think the methods are appropriate, whether the conclusions are supported by the data, whether the writing and figures are clear, how the paper relates to others in the field, what the next major steps might be, what we think of the broader issues raised by the paper.

Participation

As students taking the course you have to attend all of the journal clubs (exceptions are made for illness or military service) and participate in the discussion. To help you participate you should think of one thing you liked and one thing you did not like about the paper under discussion. We will hear these immediately after the presentation. You are also strongly encouraged to participate in the discussion throughout, which can involve asking questions about things you did not understand in the paper and, of course, giving your own opinion on the topics under discussion.

Presentation

In addition, you will have to present one of the papers. Take a look at the list of papers and select one that interests you. Send your choice to Eric Allan within one week (i.e. before the second journal club). For the presentation you should spend 10-15 minutes introducing the paper and explaining the methods that it used. If there is something that you didn’t understand in the paper you can also ask for help in explaining this part. The presentations are without powerpoint but there is a white board that can be used to draw diagrams if you like.

Review

Finally, you should write a short review of the paper. This should be in the style of a review for a journal. It should be 800-1000 words long and should have a brief introduction where you shortly explain what was done in the paper and what were the main results. You should then mention what the good points of the paper were: i.e. were the results novel, did it use an interesting new approach? Were the results surprising? Was it very clearly written? Does it use a large dataset? Then mention what was (were) the main problem(s): are there major flaws in the methods? Do the conclusions go beyond the data? Is the writing poor? You can then mention more minor concerns that you have with the paper. Remember to be constructive in your review: don’t just point out flaws but try to explain how the authors could deal with the problems. To write your review you should listen to the discussion in the journal club and of course think about the issues yourself.

Mark

The final mark is an average of the mark for the presentation, your participation during the course and the review. Each part counts the same.

References & Abstracts

Adler, P. B., HilleRislambers, J., & Levine, J. M. (2007). A niche for neutrality. Ecology Letters, 10(2), 95–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00996.x
Ecologists now recognize that controversy over the relative importance of niches and neutrality cannot be resolved by analyzing species abundance patterns. Here, we use classical coexistence theory to reframe the debate in terms of stabilizing mechanisms (niches) and fitness equivalence (neutrality). The neutral model is a special case where stabilizing mechanisms are absent and species have equivalent fitness. Instead of asking whether niches or neutral processes structure communities, we advocate determining the degree to which observed diversity reflects strong stabilizing mechanisms overcoming large fitness differences or weak stabilization operating on species of similar fitness. To answer this question, we propose combining data on per capita growth rates with models to: (i) quantify the strength of stabilizing processes; (ii) quantify fitness inequality and compare it with stabilization; and (iii) manipulate frequency dependence in growth to test the consequences of stabilization and fitness equivalence for coexistence. 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS.
Buchkowski, R. W., Barel, J. M., & Jassey, V. E. J. (2022). Cannibalism has its limits in soil food webs. 172(January). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2022.108773
Cannibalism imperfectly recycles resources back to the same species and so decreases trophic transfer efficiency in food webs. As such, viable populations have some limit on how much of their diet can come from cannibalism. We applied a Lotka-Volterra model to derive a theoretical maximum for the proportion of the diet coming from cannibalism. This proportion is set by the food conversion efficiency for both cannibalism and alternative prey. We apply the result to sixteen published soil food web models and find that cannibalism cannot exceed 20% of the diet of most organisms, which includes eating conspecifics that were already dead. However, predators can show a strong (>80%) preference for cannibalism because encountering conspecifics is rare. Cannibalism increased carbon and nitrogen mineralization in fifteen soil food webs and had non-monotonic effects in the remaining one. Our estimates map a physiological parameter (conversion efficiency) to an ecological one (cannibalism) to help to improve model fit and to help soil ecologists identify taxa where cannibalism may be most important. 1.
Buisson, E., Archibald, S., Fidelis, A., & Suding, K. N. (2022). Ancient grasslands guide ambitious goals in grassland restoration. Science, 377(6606), 594–598.
Grasslands, which constitute almost 40% of the terrestrial biosphere, provide habitat for a great diversity of animals and plants and contribute to the livelihoods of more than 1 billion people worldwide. Whereas the destruction and degradation of grasslands can occur rapidly, recent work indicates that complete recovery of biodiversity and essential functions occurs slowly or not at all. Grassland restoration—interventions to speed or guide this recovery—has received less attention than restoration of forested ecosystems, often due to the prevailing assumption that grasslands are recently formed habitats that can reassemble quickly. Viewing grassland restoration as long-term assembly toward oldgrowth endpoints, with appreciation of feedbacks and threshold shifts, will be crucial for recognizing when and how restoration can guide recovery of this globally important ecosystem.
Feng, Y., Schmid, B., Loreau, M., Forrester, D. I., Fei, S., Zhu, J., Tang, Z., Zhu, J., Hong, P., Ji, C., Shi, Y., Su, H., Xiong, X., Xiao, J., Wang, S., & Fang, J. (2022). Multispecies forest plantations outyield monocultures across a broad range of conditions. Science, 376(6595), 865–868. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abm6363
Multispecies tree planting has long been applied in forestry and landscape restoration in the hope of providing better timber production and ecosystem services; however, a systematic assessment of its effectiveness is lacking. We compiled a global dataset of matched single-species and multispecies plantations to evaluate the impact of multispecies planting on stand growth. Average tree height, diameter at breast height, and aboveground biomass were 5.4, 6.8, and 25.5% higher, respectively, in multispecies stands compared with single-species stands. These positive effects were mainly the result of interspecific complementarity and were modulated by differences in leaf morphology and leaf life span, stand age, planting density, and temperature. Our results have implications for designing afforestation and reforestation strategies and bridging experimental studies of biodiversity-ecosystem functioning relationships with real-world practices.
Huang, Y., Schuldt, A., Hönig, L., Yang, B., Liu, X., Bruelheide, H., Ma, K., Schmid, B., & Niklaus, P. A. (2022). Effects of enemy exclusion on biodiversity–productivity relationships in a subtropical forest experiment (pp. 0–3). https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.13940
Interspecific niche complementarity is a key mechanism posited to explain positive species richness–productivity relationships in plant communities. However, the exact nature of the niche dimensions that plant species partition remains poorly known. Species may partition abiotic resources that limit their growth, but species may also be specialized with respect to their set of biotic interactions with other trophic levels, in particular with enemies including pathogens and consumers. The lower host densities present in more species-diverse plant communities may therefore result in smaller populations of specialized enemies, and in a smaller associated negative feedback these enemies exert on plant productivity. To test whether such host density-dependent effects of enemies drive diversity–productivity relationships in young forest stands, we experimentally manipulated leaf fungal pathogens and insect herbivores in a large subtropical forest biodiversity–ecosystem functioning experiment in China (BEF-China). We found that fungicide spraying of tree canopies removed the positive tree-species richness–productivity relationship present in untreated control plots. The tree species that contributed the most to this effect were the ones with the highest fungicide-induced growth increase in monoculture. Insecticide application did not cause comparable effects. Synthesis. Our findings suggest that tree species diversity may not only promote productivity by interspecific resource-niche partitioning but also by trophic niche partitioning. Most likely, partitioning occurred with respect to enemies such as pathogenic fungi. Alternatively, similar effects on tree growth would have occurred if fungicide had eliminated positive effects of a higher diversity of beneficial fungi (e.g. mycorrhizal symbionts) that may have occurred in mixed tree species communities.
Klink, R. V., August, T., Bas, Y., Bodesheim, P., Bonn, A., & Fossøy, F. (2022). Trends in Ecology & Evolution Emerging technologies revolutionise insect ecology and monitoring. July. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2022.06.001
LaManna, J. A., Jones, F. A., Bell, D. M., Pabst, R. J., & Shaw, D. C. (2022). Tree species diversity increases with conspecific negative density dependence across an elevation gradient. Ecology Letters, 25(5), 1237–1249. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.13996
Elevational and latitudinal gradients in species diversity may be mediated by biotic interactions that cause density-dependent effects of conspecifics on survival or growth to differ from effects of heterospecifics (i.e. conspecific density dependence), but limited evidence exists to support this. We tested the hypothesis that conspecific density dependence varies with elevation using over 40 years of data on tree survival and growth from 23 old-growth temperate forest stands across a 1,000-m elevation gradient. We found that conspecific-density-dependent effects on survival of small-to-intermediate-sized focal trees were negative in lower elevation, higher diversity forest stands typically characterised by warmer temperatures and greater relative humidity. Conspecific-density-dependent effects on survival were less negative in higher elevation stands and ridges than in lower elevation stands and valley bottoms for small-to-intermediate-sized trees, but were neutral for larger trees across elevations. Conspecific-density-dependent effects on growth were negative across all tree size classes and elevations. These findings reveal fundamental differences in biotic interactions that may contribute to relationships between species diversity, elevation and climate.
Liu, Y., Speißer, B., Knop, E., & Kleunen, M. van. (2022). The Matthew effect: Common species become more common and rare ones become more rare in response to artificial light at night. Global Change Biology, 28(11), 3674–3682. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16126
Artificial light at night (ALAN) has been and still is rapidly spreading and has become an important component of global change. Although numerous studies have tested its potential biological and ecological impacts on animals, very few studies have tested whether it affects alien and native plants differently. Furthermore, common plant species, and particularly common alien species, are often found to benefit more from additional resources than rare native and rare alien species. Whether this is also the case with regard to increasing light due to ALAN is still unknown. Here, we tested how ALAN affected the performance of common and rare alien and native plant species in Germany directly, and indirectly via flying insects. We grew five common alien, six rare alien, five common native, and four rare native plant species under four combinations of two ALAN (no ALAN vs. ALAN) and two insect-exclusion (no exclusion vs. exclusion) treatments, and compared their biomass production. We found that common plant species, irrespective of their origin, produced significantly more biomass than rare species and that this was particularly true under ALAN. Furthermore, alien species tended to show a slightly stronger positive response to ALAN than native species did (p =.079). Our study shows that common plant species benefited more from ALAN than rare ones. This might lead to competitive exclusion of rare species, which could have cascading impacts on other trophic levels and thus have important community-wide consequences when ALAN becomes more widespread. In addition, the slightly more positive response of alien species indicates that ALAN might increase the risk of alien plant invasions.
Palmer, M. W. (1994). Variation in species richness: towards a unification of hypotheses. Folia Geobotanica Et Phytotaxonomica, 29(4), 511–530.
The question, "why do areas vary in species richness’ has been important throughout the history of ecology. It is difficult to answer definitively because we have so many (at least 120) plausible hypotheses. This abundance of hypotheses has led to a number of attempts to classify them. Unfortunately, richness hypotheses often defy such categorization. Instead of placing species richness hypotheses into categories, I suggest an alternative approach: to treat species richness hypotheses as violations of the assuml~ions of Gause’s Competitive Exclusion Principle. This is a very similar approach to the pedagogy of population genetics: evolution occurs if and only if at least one assumption of the Hardy-Weinberg principle is violated. The classification of hypotheses advocated here treats interspecific competition as a central organizing concept in community theory. However, it does not treat competition as an organizing concept in communities: indeed, the relaxation or disruption of competition is considered to be the status quo in the majority of conmmnities
Pastore, A. I., Barabás, G., Bimler, M. D., Mayfield, M. M., & Miller, T. E. (2021). The evolution of niche overlap and competitive differences. Nature Ecology and Evolution, 5(3), 330–337. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-01383-y
Competition can result in evolutionary changes to coexistence between competitors but there are no theoretical models that predict how the components of coexistence change during this eco-evolutionary process. Here we study the evolution of the coexistence components, niche overlap and competitive differences, in a two-species eco-evolutionary model based on consumer–resource interactions and quantitative genetic inheritance. Species evolve along a one-dimensional trait axis that allows for changes in both niche position and species intrinsic growth rates. There are three main results. First, the breadth of the environment has a strong effect on the dynamics, with broader environments leading to reduced niche overlap and enhanced coexistence. Second, coexistence often involves a reduction in niche overlap while competitive differences stay relatively constant or vice versa; in general changes in competitive differences maintain coexistence only when niche overlap remains constant. Large simultaneous changes in niche overlap and competitive difference often result in one of the species being excluded. Third, provided that the species evolve to a state where they coexist, the final niche overlap and competitive difference values are independent of the system’s initial state, although they do depend on the model’s parameters. The model suggests that evolution is often a destructive force for coexistence due to evolutionary changes in competitive differences, a finding that expands the paradox of diversity maintenance.
Rixen, C., Wipf, S., Rumpf, S. B., Giejsztowt, J., Millen, J., Morgan, J. W., Nicotra, A. B., Venn, S., Zong, S., Dickinson, K. J. M., Freschet, G. T., Kurzböck, C., Li, J., Pan, H., Pfund, B., Quaglia, E., Su, X., Wang, W., Wang, X., … Deslippe, J. R. (2022). Intraspecific trait variation in alpine plants relates to their elevational distribution. Journal of Ecology, 110(4), 860–875. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.13848
Climate warming is shifting the distributions of mountain plant species to higher elevations. Cold-adapted plant species are under increasing pressure from novel competitors that are encroaching from lower elevations. Plant capacity to adjust to these pressures may be measurable as variation in trait values within a species. In particular, the strength and patterns of intraspecific trait variation along abiotic and biotic gradients can inform us whether and how species can adjust their anatomy and morphology to persist in a changing environment. Here, we tested whether species specialized to high elevations or with narrow elevational ranges show more conservative (i.e. less variable) trait responses across their elevational distribution, or in response to neighbours, than species from lower elevations or with wider elevational ranges. We did so by studying intraspecific trait variation of 66 species along 40 elevational gradients in four countries in both hemispheres. As an indication of potential neighbour interactions that could drive trait variation, we also analysed plant species’ height ratio, its height relative to its nearest neighbour. Variation in alpine plant trait values over elevation differed depending on a species’ median elevation and the breadth of its elevational range, with species with lower median elevations and larger elevational range sizes showing greater trait variation, i.e. a steeper slope in trait values, over their elevational distributions. These effects were evidenced by significant interactions between species’ elevation and their elevational preference or range for several traits: vegetative height, generative height, specific leaf area and patch area. The height ratio of focal alpine species and their neighbours decreased in the lower part of their distribution because neighbours became relatively taller at lower elevations. In contrast, species with lower elevational optima maintained a similar height ratio with neighbours throughout their range. Synthesis. We provide evidence that species from lower elevations and those with larger range sizes show greater intraspecific trait variation, which may indicate a greater ability to respond to environmental changes. Also, larger trait variation of species from lower elevations may indicate stronger competitive ability of upslope shifting species, posing one further threat to species from higher ranges.
Semchenko, M., Barry, K. E., Vries, F. T. de, Mommer, L., Moora, M., & Maciá-Vicente, J. G. (2022). Deciphering the role of specialist and generalist plant–microbial interactions as drivers of plant–soil feedback (Vol. 234, pp. 1929–1944). https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.18118
Feedback between plants and soil microbial communities can be a powerful driver of vegetation dynamics. Plants elicit changes in the soil microbiome that either promote or suppress conspecifics at the same location, thereby regulating population density-dependence and species co-existence. Such effects are often attributed to the accumulation of host-specific antagonistic or beneficial microbiota in the rhizosphere. However, the identity and host-specificity of the microbial taxa involved are rarely empirically assessed. Here we review the evidence for host-specificity in plant-associated microbes and propose that specific plant–soil feedbacks can also be driven by generalists. We outline the potential mechanisms by which generalist microbial pathogens, mutualists and decomposers can generate differential effects on plant hosts and synthesize existing evidence to predict these effects as a function of plant investments into defence, microbial mutualists and dispersal. Importantly, the capacity of generalist microbiota to drive plant–soil feedbacks depends not only on the traits of individual plants but also on the phylogenetic and functional diversity of plant communities. Identifying factors that promote specialization or generalism in plant–microbial interactions and thereby modulate the impact of microbiota on plant performance will advance our understanding of the mechanisms underlying plant–soil feedback and the ways it contributes to plant co-existence.
Willems, F. M., Scheepens, J. F., & Bossdorf, O. (2022). Forest wildflowers bloom earlier as Europe warms: lessons from herbaria and spatial modelling. New Phytologist, 235(1), 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.18124
Today plants often flower earlier due to climate warming. Herbarium specimens are excellent witnesses of such long-term changes. However, the magnitude of phenological shifts may vary geographically, and the data are often clustered. Therefore, large-scale analyses of herbarium data are prone to pseudoreplication and geographical biases. We studied over 6000 herbarium specimens of 20 spring-flowering forest understory herbs from Europe to understand how their phenology had changed during the last century. We estimated phenology trends with or without taking spatial autocorrelation into account. On average plants now flowered over 6 d earlier than at the beginning of the last century. These changes were strongly associated with warmer spring temperatures. Flowering time advanced 3.6 d per 1°C warming. Spatial modelling showed that, in some parts of Europe, plants flowered earlier or later than expected. Without accounting for this, the estimates of phenological shifts were biased and model fits were poor. Our study indicates that forest wildflowers in Europe strongly advanced their phenology in response to climate change. However, these phenological shifts differ geographically. This shows that it is crucial to combine the analysis of herbarium data with spatial modelling when testing for long-term phenology trends across large spatial scales.
Xi, N., Chen, D., Bahn, M., Wu, H., Chu, C., Cadotte, M. W., & Bloor, J. M. G. (2022). Drought soil legacy alters drivers of plant diversity-productivity relationships in oldfield systems. Science Advances, 8(18), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abn3368
Ecosystem functions are threatened by both recurrent droughts and declines in biodiversity at a global scale, but the drought dependency of diversity-productivity relationships remains poorly understood. Here, we use a two-phase mesocosm experiment with simulated drought and model oldfield communities (360 experimental mesocosms/plant communities) to examine drought-induced changes in soil microbial communities along a plant species richness gradient and to assess interactions between past drought (soil legacies) and subsequent drought on plant diversity-productivity relationships. We show that (i) drought decreases bacterial and fungal richness and modifies relationships between plant species richness and microbial groups; (ii) drought soil legacy increases net biodiversity effects, but responses of net biodiversity effects to plant species richness are unaffected; and (iii) linkages between plant species richness and complementarity/selection effects vary depending on past and subsequent drought. These results provide mechanistic insight into biodiversity-productivity relationships in a changing environment, with implications for the stability of ecosystem function under climate change.
Yang, X., Gómez-Aparicio, L., Lortie, C. J., Verdú, M., Cavieres, L. A., Huang, Z., Gao, R., Liu, R., Zhao, Y., & Cornelissen, J. H. C. (2022). Net plant interactions are highly variable and weakly dependent on climate at the global scale. Ecology Letters, 25(6), 1580–1593. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.14010
Although plant–plant interactions (i.e. competition and facilitation) have long been recognised as key drivers of plant community composition and dynamics, their global patterns and relationships with climate have remained unclear. Here, we assembled a global database of 10,502 pairs of empirical data from the literature to address the patterns of and climatic effects on the net outcome of plant interactions in natural communities. We found that plant interactions varied among plant performance indicators, interaction types and biomes, yet competition occurred more frequently than facilitation in plant communities worldwide. Unexpectedly, plant interactions showed weak latitudinal pattern and were weakly related to climate. Our study provides a global comprehensive overview of plant interactions, highlighting competition as a fundamental mechanism structuring plant communities worldwide. We suggest that further investigations should focus more on local factors (e.g. microclimate, soil and disturbance) than on macroclimate to identify key environmental determinants of interactions in plant communities.