1Authorship seniority is shared equally by the authors and their names appear in alphabetical order.
Reconsidering diversity–productivity relationships: directness of productivity estimates matters
Article first published online: 7 JUL 2003
Volume 6, Issue 8, pages 695–699, August 2003
How to Cite
Groner, E. and Novoplansky, A. (2003), Reconsidering diversity–productivity relationships: directness of productivity estimates matters. Ecology Letters, 6: 695–699. doi: 10.1046/j.1461-0248.2003.00488.x
- Issue published online: 7 JUL 2003
- Article first published online: 7 JUL 2003
- Editor, A. Troumbis Manuscript received 9 April 2003 First decision made 2 May 2003 Manuscript accepted 20 May 2003
- complex interactions;
- diversity–productivity patterns;
- trophic levels
Despite extensive research efforts, the controversy over diversity–productivity (D–P) patterns in natural communities still looms large. Recent meta-analyses suggest that unimodal D–P relationships tend to pre-dominate in plant studies, while positively linear relationships are more common in animal studies. These patterns, however, are based on studies in which productivity is estimated either directly, based on the biomass or energy of the studied organisms, or indirectly, according to the productivity of lower trophic levels, and various surrogates. Our analysis shows that the distribution of D–P patterns is sensitive to the directness of productivity estimates in animal studies but not in plant studies. Analysis of D–P patterns should be based on direct productivity estimates of the studied organisms, especially in comparative meta-analyses of communities from multiple trophic levels, where productivity is often affected nonlinearly by indirect factors or when complex feedback interactions are expected between productivity and diversity.