@article{PenoneAllanSoliveresetal.2019,
  author    = {Penone, Caterina and Allan, Eric and Soliveres, Santiago and Felipe-Lucia, Maria R. and Gossner, Martin M. and Seibold, Sebastian and Simons, Nadja K. and Schall, Peter and van der Plas, Fons and Manning, Peter and Manzanedo, Ruben D. and Boch, Steffen and Prati, Daniel and Ammer, Christian and Bauhus, Juergen and Buscot, Francois and Ehbrecht, Martin and Goldmann, Kezia and Jung, Kirsten and Mueller, Joerg and Mueller, Joerg C. and Pena, Rodica and Polle, Andrea and Renner, Swen C. and Ruess, Liliane and Schoenig, Ingo and Schrumpf, Marion and Solly, Emily F. and Tschapka, Marco and Weisser, Wolfgang W. and Wubet, Tesfaye and Fischer, Markus},
  title     = {Specialisation and diversity of multiple trophic groups are promoted by different forest features},
  series = {Ecology letters},
  volume    = {22},
  journal   = {Ecology letters},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Wiley},
  address   = {Hoboken},
  issn      = {1461-023X},
  doi       = {10.1111/ele.13182},
  pages     = {170 -- 180},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {While forest management strongly influences biodiversity, it remains unclear how the structural and compositional changes caused by management affect different community dimensions (e.g. richness, specialisation, abundance or completeness) and how this differs between taxa. We assessed the effects of nine forest features (representing stand structure, heterogeneity and tree composition) on thirteen above- and belowground trophic groups of plants, animals, fungi and bacteria in 150 temperate forest plots differing in their management type. Canopy cover decreased light resources, which increased community specialisation but reduced overall diversity and abundance. Features increasing resource types and diversifying microhabitats (admixing of oaks and conifers) were important and mostly affected richness. Belowground groups responded differently to those aboveground and had weaker responses to most forest features. Our results show that we need to consider forest features rather than broad management types and highlight the importance of considering several groups and community dimensions to better inform conservation.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SollySchoeningBochetal.2014,
  author    = {Solly, Emily F. and Sch{\"o}ning, Ingo and Boch, Steffen and Kandeler, Ellen and Marhan, Sven and Michalzik, Beate and M{\"u}ller, J{\"o}rg and Zscheischler, Jakob and Trumbore, Susan E. and Schrumpf, Marion},
  title     = {Factors controlling decomposition rates of fine root litter in temperate forests and grasslands},
  series = {Plant and soil},
  volume    = {382},
  journal   = {Plant and soil},
  number    = {1-2},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Dordrecht},
  issn      = {0032-079X},
  doi       = {10.1007/s11104-014-2151-4},
  pages     = {203 -- 218},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {Fine root decomposition contributes significantly to element cycling in terrestrial ecosystems. However, studies on root decomposition rates and on the factors that potentially influence them are fewer than those on leaf litter decomposition. To study the effects of region and land use intensity on fine root decomposition, we established a large scale study in three German regions with different climate regimes and soil properties. Methods In 150 forest and 150 grassland sites we deployed litterbags (100 mu m mesh size) with standardized litter consisting of fine roots from European beech in forests and from a lowland mesophilous hay meadow in grasslands. In the central study region, we compared decomposition rates of this standardized litter with root litter collected on-site to separate the effect of litter quality from environmental factors. Standardized herbaceous roots in grassland soils decomposed on average significantly faster (24 +/- 6 \% mass loss after 12 months, mean +/- SD) than beech roots in forest soils (12 +/- 4 \%; p < 0.001). Fine root decomposition varied among the three study regions. Land use intensity, in particular N addition, decreased fine root decomposition in grasslands. The initial lignin:N ratio explained 15 \% of the variance in grasslands and 11 \% in forests. Soil moisture, soil temperature, and C:N ratios of soils together explained 34 \% of the variance of the fine root mass loss in grasslands, and 24 \% in forests. Grasslands, which have higher fine root biomass and root turnover compared to forests, also have higher rates of root decomposition. Our results further show that at the regional scale fine root decomposition is influenced by environmental variables such as soil moisture, soil temperature and soil nutrient content. Additional variation is explained by root litter quality.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SoliveresvanderPlasManningetal.2016,
  author    = {Soliveres, Santiago and van der Plas, Fons and Manning, Peter and Prati, Daniel and Gossner, Martin M. and Renner, Swen C. and Alt, Fabian and Arndt, Hartmut and Baumgartner, Vanessa and Binkenstein, Julia and Birkhofer, Klaus and Blaser, Stefan and Bl{\"u}thgen, Nico and Boch, Steffen and B{\"o}hm, Stefan and B{\"o}rschig, Carmen and Buscot, Francois and Diek{\"o}tter, Tim and Heinze, Johannes and H{\"o}lzel, Norbert and Jung, Kirsten and Klaus, Valentin H. and Kleinebecker, Till and Klemmer, Sandra and Krauss, Jochen and Lange, Markus and Morris, E. Kathryn and M{\"u}ller, J{\"o}rg and Oelmann, Yvonne and Overmann, J{\"o}rg and Pasalic, Esther and Rillig, Matthias C. and Schaefer, H. Martin and Schloter, Michael and Schmitt, Barbara and Sch{\"o}ning, Ingo and Schrumpf, Marion and Sikorski, Johannes and Socher, Stephanie A. and Solly, Emily F. and Sonnemann, Ilja and Sorkau, Elisabeth and Steckel, Juliane and Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf and Stempfhuber, Barbara and Tschapka, Marco and T{\"u}rke, Manfred and Venter, Paul C. and Weiner, Christiane N. and Weisser, Wolfgang W. and Werner, Michael and Westphal, Catrin and Wilcke, Wolfgang and Wolters, Volkmar and Wubet, Tesfaye and Wurst, Susanne and Fischer, Markus and Allan, Eric},
  title     = {Biodiversity at multiple trophic levels is needed for ecosystem multifunctionality},
  series = {Nature : the international weekly journal of science},
  volume    = {536},
  journal   = {Nature : the international weekly journal of science},
  publisher = {Nature Publ. Group},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0028-0836},
  doi       = {10.1038/nature19092},
  pages     = {456 -- +},
  year      = {2016},
  language  = {en}
}