@article {5968, title = {Determinants of community compositional change are equally affected by global change}, journal = {Ecology Letters}, volume = {24}, year = {2021}, pages = {1892-1904}, abstract = {

Global change is impacting plant community composition, but the mechanisms underlying these changes are unclear. Using a dataset of 58 global change experiments, we tested the five fundamental mechanisms of community change: changes in evenness and richness, reordering, species gains and losses. We found 71\% of communities were impacted by global change treatments, and 88\% of communities that were exposed to two or more global change drivers were impacted. Further, all mechanisms of change were equally likely to be affected by global change treatments\—species losses and changes in richness were just as common as species gains and reordering. We also found no evidence of a progression of community changes, for example, reordering and changes in evenness did not precede species gains and losses. We demonstrate that all processes underlying plant community composition changes are equally affected by treatments and often occur simultaneously, necessitating a wholistic approach to quantifying community changes.

}, keywords = {LTER-KNZ}, doi = {10.1111/ele.13824}, url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ele.13824}, author = {M.L. Avolio and Kimberly J. Komatsu and S.L Collins and Grman, Emily and Koerner, S.E. and Tredennick, A.T. and Wilcox, K.R. and Baer, S.G. and E.H. Boughton and Britton, Andrea J. and Foster, Bryan and Gough, Laura and Hovenden, Mark and Isbell, Forest and Jentsch, Anke and Johnson, David S. and Knapp, Alan K. and Kreyling, Juergen and Langley, J. Adam and Lortie, Christopher and McCulley, Rebecca L. and McLaren, Jennie R. and Reich, Peter B. and Seabloom, Eric W. and Smith, Melinda D. and Suding, Katharine N. and Suttle, K. Blake and Tognetti, Pedro M.}, editor = {Anderson, Marti} } @article {KNZ001965, title = {Global change effects on plant communities are magnified by time and the number of global change factors imposed}, journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences}, volume = {116}, year = {2019}, pages = {17867-17873}, abstract = {

Global change drivers (GCDs) are expected to alter community structure and consequently, the services that ecosystems provide. Yet, few experimental investigations have examined effects of GCDs on plant community structure across multiple ecosystem types, and those that do exist present conflicting patterns. In an unprecedented global synthesis of over 100 experiments that manipulated factors linked to GCDs, we show that herbaceous plant community responses depend on experimental manipulation length and number of factors manipulated. We found that plant communities are fairly resistant to experimentally manipulated GCDs in the short term (\<10 y). In contrast, long-term (\≥10 y) experiments show increasing community divergence of treatments from control conditions. Surprisingly, these community responses occurred with similar frequency across the GCD types manipulated in our database. However, community responses were more common when 3 or more GCDs were simultaneously manipulated, suggesting the emergence of additive or synergistic effects of multiple drivers, particularly over long time periods. In half of the cases, GCD manipulations caused a difference in community composition without a corresponding species richness difference, indicating that species reordering or replacement is an important mechanism of community responses to GCDs and should be given greater consideration when examining consequences of GCDs for the biodiversity\–ecosystem function relationship. Human activities are currently driving unparalleled global changes worldwide. Our analyses provide the most comprehensive evidence to date that these human activities may have widespread impacts on plant community composition globally, which will increase in frequency over time and be greater in areas where communities face multiple GCDs simultaneously.

}, keywords = {LTER-KNZ}, doi = {10.1073/pnas.1819027116}, url = {https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2019/08/14/1819027116}, author = {Kimberly J. Komatsu and M.L. Avolio and Lemoine, Nathan P. and Isbell, Forest and Grman, Emily and Houseman, Gregory R. and Koerner, Sally E. and Johnson, D.S. and K.R. Wilcox and Juha M. Alatalo and Anderson, J.P. and Aerts, R. and S.G. Baer and Baldwin, Andrew H. and Bates, J. and Beierkuhnlein, C. and Belote, R.T. and John M. Blair and Bloor, J.M.G. and Bohlen, P.J. and Edward W. Bork and Elizabeth H. Boughton and W.D. Bowman and Britton, Andrea J. and Cahill, James F. and Chaneton, Enrique J. and Chiariello, N.R. and Cheng, Jimin. and Scott. L. Collins and Cornelissen, J.H.C. and G. Du and Eskelinen, Anu and Firn, Jennifer and Foster, B. and Gough, L. and Gross, K. and Hallett, L.M. and Han, X. and Harmens, H. and Hovenden, M.J. and Jagerbrand, A. and Jentsch, A. and Kern, Christel and Klanderud, Kari and Alan K. Knapp and Kreyling, Juergen and Li, W. and Luo, Yiqi and McCulley, R.L. and McLaren, Jennie R. and Megonigal, Patrick and J.W. Morgan and Onipchenko, Vladimir and Pennings, S.C. and Prev{\'e}y, J.S. and Price, Jodi N. and P.B. Reich and Robinson, Clare H. and Russell, L.F. and Sala, O.E. and Seabloom, E.W. and M.D. Smith and Soudzilovskaia, Nadejda A. and Souza, Lara and K.N. Suding and Suttle, B.K. and Svejcar, T. and Tilman, David and Tognetti, P. and Turkington, R. and White, S. and Xu, Zhuwen and Yahdjian, L. and Yu, Q. and Zhang, Pengfei and Zhang, Yunhai} } @article {KNZ001888, title = {Change in dominance determines herbivore effects on plant biodiversity}, journal = {Nature Ecology and Evolution}, volume = {2}, year = {2018}, pages = {1925-1932}, abstract = {

Herbivores alter plant biodiversity (species richness) in many of the world\’s ecosystems, but the magnitude and the direction of herbivore effects on biodiversity vary widely within and among ecosystems. One current theory predicts that herbivores enhance plant biodiversity at high productivity but have the opposite effect at low productivity. Yet, empirical support for the importance of site productivity as a mediator of these herbivore impacts is equivocal. Here, we synthesize data from 252 large-herbivore exclusion studies, spanning a 20-fold range in site productivity, to test an alternative hypothesis\—that herbivore-induced changes in the competitive environment determine the response of plant biodiversity to herbivory irrespective of productivity. Under this hypothesis, when herbivores reduce the abundance (biomass, cover) of dominant species (for example, because the dominant plant is palatable), additional resources become available to support new species, thereby increasing biodiversity. By contrast, if herbivores promote high dominance by increasing the abundance of herbivory-resistant, unpalatable species, then resource availability for other species decreases reducing biodiversity. We show that herbivore-induced change in dominance, independent of site productivity or precipitation (a proxy for productivity), is the best predictor of herbivore effects on biodiversity in grassland and savannah sites. Given that most herbaceous ecosystems are dominated by one or a few species, altering the competitive environment via herbivores or by other means may be an effective strategy for conserving biodiversity in grasslands and savannahs globally.

}, keywords = {LTER-KNZ}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-018-0696-y}, url = {https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-018-0696-y$\#$article-info}, author = {Koerner, S.E. and M.D. Smith and Burkepile, D.E. and N.P. Hanan and M.L. Avolio and Scott. L. Collins and Alan K. Knapp and N.P. Lemoine and E.J. Forrestel and S. Eby and D.I. Thompson and G. Aguado-Santacruz and J.P. Anderson and Anderson, M. and A. Angassa and S. Bagchi and E.S. Bakker and Bastin, Gary and L.E. Baur and K.H. Beard and E.A. Beever and P.J. Bohlen and Elizabeth H. Boughton and Canestro, Don and Cesa, Ariela and Chaneton, Enrique and Cheng, Jimin and C.M. D{\textquoteright}Antonio and C. Deleglise and Fadiala. Demb{\'e}l{\'e} and Josh. Dorrough and David. J. Eldridge and Barbara. Fernandez-Going and Silvia. Fern{\'a}ndez-Lugo and Lauchlan. H. Fraser and Bill. Freedman and Gonzalo. Garc{\'\i}a-Salgado and Jacob. R. Goheen and Liang. Guo and Sean. Husheer and Moussa. Karemb{\'e} and Johannes. M. H. Knops and Tineke. Kraaij and Andrew. Kulmatiski and Minna-Maarit. Kyt{\"o}viita and Felipe. Lezama and Gregory. Loucougaray and Alejandro. Loydi, Dan G. Milchunas, and Dan.G. Milchunas, and Suzanne. J. Milton and J.W. Morgan and Claire. Moxham and Kyle. C. Nehring and Han. Olff and Todd. M. Palmer and Salvador. Rebollo and Corinna. Riginos and Anita. C. Risch and Marta Rueda and Mahesh. Sankaran and Takehiro. Sasaki and Kathryn. A. Schoenecker and Nick. L. Schultz and Martin. Sch{\"u}tz and Angelika. Schwabe and Frances. Siebert and Christian. Smit and Karen. A. Stahlheber and Christian. Storm and Dustin. J. Strong and Jishuai. Su and Yadugiri. V. Tiruvaimozhi and Claudia. Tyler and James. Val and Martijn. L. Vandegehuchte and Kari. E. Veblen and Lance. T. Vermeire and David. Ward and Jianshuang. Wu and Truman. P. Young and Qiang. Yu and Tamara. Jane. Zelikova} } @article {KNZ001842, title = {Asynchrony among local communities stabilises ecosystem function of metacommunities}, journal = {Ecology Letters}, year = {2017}, abstract = {

Temporal stability of ecosystem functioning increases the predictability and reliability of ecosystem services, and understanding the drivers of stability across spatial scales is important for land management and policy decisions. We used species-level abundance data from 62 plant communities across five continents to assess mechanisms of temporal stability across spatial scales. We assessed how asynchrony (i.e. different units responding dissimilarly through time) of species and local communities stabilised metacommunity ecosystem function. Asynchrony of species increased stability of local communities, and asynchrony among local communities enhanced metacommunity stability by a wide range of magnitudes (1\–315\%); this range was positively correlated with the size of the metacommunity. Additionally, asynchronous responses among local communities were linked with species\’ populations fluctuating asynchronously across space, perhaps stemming from physical and/or competitive differences among local communities. Accordingly, we suggest spatial heterogeneity should be a major focus for maintaining the stability of ecosystem services at larger spatial scales.

}, keywords = {LTER-KNZ, Alpha diversity, alpha variability, beta diversity, Biodiversity, CoRRE data base, patchiness, Plant communities, Primary productivity, species synchrony}, doi = {10.1111/ele.12861}, url = {http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ele.12861/epdf}, author = {K.R. Wilcox and Tredennick, Andrew T. and Koerner, Sally E. and Grman, Emily and Hallett, Lauren M. and M.L. Avolio and Kimberly J. La Pierre and Houseman, Gregory R. and Isbell, Forest and Johnson, David Samuel and Juha M. Alatalo and Baldwin, Andrew H. and Edward W. Bork and Elizabeth H. Boughton and W.D. Bowman and Britton, Andrea J. and Cahill, James F. and Scott. L. Collins and G. Du and Eskelinen, Anu and Gough, Laura and Jentsch, Anke and Kern, Christel and Klanderud, Kari and Alan K. Knapp and Kreyling, Juergen and Luo, Yiqi and McLaren, Jennie R. and Megonigal, Patrick and Onipchenko, Vladimir and Prev{\'e}y, Janet and Price, Jodi N. and Robinson, Clare H. and Sala, Osvaldo E. and M.D. Smith and Soudzilovskaia, Nadejda A. and Souza, Lara and Tilman, David and White, Shannon R. and Xu, Zhuwen and Yahdjian, Laura and Yu, Qiang and Zhang, Pengfei and Zhang, Yunhai}, editor = {Gurevitch, Jessica} }