@article{ScherberEisenhauerWeisseretal.2010, author = {Scherber, Christoph and Eisenhauer, Nico and Weisser, Wolfgang W. and Schmid, Bernhard and Voigt, Winfried and Fischer, Markus and Schukze, Ernst-Detlef and Roscher, Christiane and Weigelt, Alexandra and Allan, Eric and Beßler, Holger and Bonkowski, Michael and Buchmann, Nina and Buscot, Fran{\c{c}}ois and Clement, Lars W. and Ebeling, Anne and Engels, Christof and Halle, Stefan and Kertscher, Ilona and Klein, Alexandra Maria and Koller, Robert and K{\"o}nig, Stephan and Kowalski, Esther and Kummer, Volker and Kuu, Annely and Lange, Markus and Lauterbach, Dirk}, title = {Bottom-up effects of plant diversity on multitrophic interactions in a biodiversity experiment}, issn = {0028-0836}, year = {2010}, language = {en} } @article{ReichsteinBahnCiaisetal.2013, author = {Reichstein, Markus and Bahn, Michael and Ciais, Philippe and Frank, Dorothea and Mahecha, Miguel D. and Seneviratne, Sonia I. and Zscheischler, Jakob and Beer, Christian and Buchmann, Nina and Frank, David C. and Papale, Dario and Rammig, Anja and Smith, Pete and Thonicke, Kirsten and van der Velde, Marijn and Vicca, Sara and Walz, Ariane and Wattenbach, Martin}, title = {Climate extremes and the carbon cycle}, series = {Nature : the international weekly journal of science}, volume = {500}, journal = {Nature : the international weekly journal of science}, number = {7462}, publisher = {Nature Publ. Group}, address = {London}, issn = {0028-0836}, doi = {10.1038/nature12350}, pages = {287 -- 295}, year = {2013}, abstract = {The terrestrial biosphere is a key component of the global carbon cycle and its carbon balance is strongly influenced by climate. Continuing environmental changes are thought to increase global terrestrial carbon uptake. But evidence is mounting that climate extremes such as droughts or storms can lead to a decrease in regional ecosystem carbon stocks and therefore have the potential to negate an expected increase in terrestrial carbon uptake. Here we explore the mechanisms and impacts of climate extremes on the terrestrial carbon cycle, and propose a pathway to improve our understanding of present and future impacts of climate extremes on the terrestrial carbon budget.}, language = {en} } @article{MeyerPtacnikHillebrandetal.2017, author = {Meyer, Sebastian Tobias and Ptacnik, Robert and Hillebrand, Helmut and Bessler, Holger and Buchmann, Nina and Ebeling, Anne and Eisenhauer, Nico and Engels, Christof and Fischer, Markus and Halle, Stefan and Klein, Alexandra-Maria and Oelmann, Yvonne and Roscher, Christiane and Rottstock, Tanja and Scherber, Christoph and Scheu, Stefan and Schmid, Bernhard and Schulze, Ernst-Detlef and Temperton, Vicky M. and Tscharntke, Teja and Voigt, Winfried and Weigelt, Alexandra and Wilcke, Wolfgang and Weisser, Wolfgang W.}, title = {Biodiversity-multifunctionality relationships depend on identity and number of measured functions}, series = {Nature Ecology \& Evolution}, volume = {2}, journal = {Nature Ecology \& Evolution}, number = {1}, publisher = {Nature Publ. Group}, address = {London}, issn = {2397-334X}, doi = {10.1038/s41559-017-0391-4}, pages = {44 -- 49}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Biodiversity ensures ecosystem functioning and provisioning of ecosystem services, but it remains unclear how biodiversity-ecosystem multifunctionality relationships depend on the identity and number of functions considered. Here, we demonstrate that ecosystem multifunctionality, based on 82 indicator variables of ecosystem functions in a grassland biodiversity experiment, increases strongly with increasing biodiversity. Analysing subsets of functions showed that the effects of biodiversity on multifunctionality were stronger when more functions were included and that the strength of the biodiversity effects depended on the identity of the functions included. Limits to multifunctionality arose from negative correlations among functions and functions that were not correlated with biodiversity. Our findings underline that the management of ecosystems for the protection of biodiversity cannot be replaced by managing for particular ecosystem functions or services and emphasize the need for specific management to protect biodiversity. More plant species from the experimental pool of 60 species contributed to functioning when more functions were considered. An individual contribution to multifunctionality could be demonstrated for only a fraction of the species.}, language = {en} } @article{MeyerEbelingEisenhaueretal.2016, author = {Meyer, Sebastian T. and Ebeling, Anne and Eisenhauer, Nico and Hertzog, Lionel and Hillebrand, Helmut and Milcu, Alexandru and Pompe, Sven and Abbas, Maike and Bessler, Holger and Buchmann, Nina and De Luca, Enrica and Engels, Christof and Fischer, Markus and Gleixner, Gerd and Hudewenz, Anika and Klein, Alexandra-Maria and de Kroon, Hans and Leimer, Sophia and Loranger, Hannah and Mommer, Liesje and Oelmann, Yvonne and Ravenek, Janneke M. and Roscher, Christiane and Rottstock, Tanja and Scherber, Christoph and Scherer-Lorenzen, Michael and Scheu, Stefan and Schmid, Bernhard and Schulze, Ernst-Detlef and Staudler, Andrea and Strecker, Tanja and Temperton, Vicky and Tscharntke, Teja and Vogel, Anja and Voigt, Winfried and Weigelt, Alexandra and Wilcke, Wolfgang and Weisser, Wolfgang W.}, title = {Effects of biodiversity strengthen over time as ecosystem functioning declines at low and increases at high biodiversity}, series = {Ecosphere : the magazine of the International Ecology University}, volume = {7}, journal = {Ecosphere : the magazine of the International Ecology University}, publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell}, address = {Hoboken}, issn = {2150-8925}, doi = {10.1002/ecs2.1619}, pages = {14}, year = {2016}, language = {en} } @misc{FrankReichsteinBahnetal.2015, author = {Frank, Dorothe A. and Reichstein, Markus and Bahn, Michael and Thonicke, Kirsten and Frank, David and Mahecha, Miguel D. and Smith, Pete and Van der Velde, Marijn and Vicca, Sara and Babst, Flurin and Beer, Christian and Buchmann, Nina and Canadell, Josep G. and Ciais, Philippe and Cramer, Wolfgang and Ibrom, Andreas and Miglietta, Franco and Poulter, Ben and Rammig, Anja and Seneviratne, Sonia I. and Walz, Ariane and Wattenbach, Martin and Zavala, Miguel A. and Zscheischler, Jakob}, title = {Effects of climate extremes on the terrestrial carbon cycle: concepts, processes and potential future impacts}, series = {Global change biology}, volume = {21}, journal = {Global change biology}, number = {8}, publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell}, address = {Hoboken}, issn = {1354-1013}, doi = {10.1111/gcb.12916}, pages = {2861 -- 2880}, year = {2015}, abstract = {Extreme droughts, heat waves, frosts, precipitation, wind storms and other climate extremes may impact the structure, composition and functioning of terrestrial ecosystems, and thus carbon cycling and its feedbacks to the climate system. Yet, the interconnected avenues through which climate extremes drive ecological and physiological processes and alter the carbon balance are poorly understood. Here, we review the literature on carbon cycle relevant responses of ecosystems to extreme climatic events. Given that impacts of climate extremes are considered disturbances, we assume the respective general disturbance-induced mechanisms and processes to also operate in an extreme context. The paucity of well-defined studies currently renders a quantitative meta-analysis impossible, but permits us to develop a deductive framework for identifying the main mechanisms (and coupling thereof) through which climate extremes may act on the carbon cycle. We find that ecosystem responses can exceed the duration of the climate impacts via lagged effects on the carbon cycle. The expected regional impacts of future climate extremes will depend on changes in the probability and severity of their occurrence, on the compound effects and timing of different climate extremes, and on the vulnerability of each land-cover type modulated by management. Although processes and sensitivities differ among biomes, based on expert opinion, we expect forests to exhibit the largest net effect of extremes due to their large carbon pools and fluxes, potentially large indirect and lagged impacts, and long recovery time to regain previous stocks. At the global scale, we presume that droughts have the strongest and most widespread effects on terrestrial carbon cycling. Comparing impacts of climate extremes identified via remote sensing vs. ground-based observational case studies reveals that many regions in the (sub-)tropics are understudied. Hence, regional investigations are needed to allow a global upscaling of the impacts of climate extremes on global carbon-climate feedbacks.}, language = {en} } @article{AllanWeisserFischeretal.2013, author = {Allan, Eric and Weisser, Wolfgang W. and Fischer, Markus and Schulze, Ernst-Detlef and Weigelt, Alexandra and Roscher, Christiane and Baade, Jussi and Barnard, Romain L. and Bessler, Holger and Buchmann, Nina and Ebeling, Anne and Eisenhauer, Nico and Engels, Christof and Fergus, Alexander J. F. and Gleixner, Gerd and Gubsch, Marlen and Halle, Stefan and Klein, Alexandra Maria and Kertscher, Ilona and Kuu, Annely and Lange, Markus and Le Roux, Xavier and Meyer, Sebastian T. and Migunova, Varvara D. and Milcu, Alexandru and Niklaus, Pascal A. and Oelmann, Yvonne and Pasalic, Esther and Petermann, Jana S. and Poly, Franck and Rottstock, Tanja and Sabais, Alexander C. W. and Scherber, Christoph and Scherer-Lorenzen, Michael and Scheu, Stefan and Steinbeiss, Sibylle and Schwichtenberg, Guido and Temperton, Vicky and Tscharntke, Teja and Voigt, Winfried and Wilcke, Wolfgang and Wirth, Christian and Schmid, Bernhard}, title = {A comparison of the strength of biodiversity effects across multiple functions}, series = {Oecologia}, volume = {173}, journal = {Oecologia}, number = {1}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {New York}, issn = {0029-8549}, doi = {10.1007/s00442-012-2589-0}, pages = {223 -- 237}, year = {2013}, abstract = {In order to predict which ecosystem functions are most at risk from biodiversity loss, meta-analyses have generalised results from biodiversity experiments over different sites and ecosystem types. In contrast, comparing the strength of biodiversity effects across a large number of ecosystem processes measured in a single experiment permits more direct comparisons. Here, we present an analysis of 418 separate measures of 38 ecosystem processes. Overall, 45 \% of processes were significantly affected by plant species richness, suggesting that, while diversity affects a large number of processes not all respond to biodiversity. We therefore compared the strength of plant diversity effects between different categories of ecosystem processes, grouping processes according to the year of measurement, their biogeochemical cycle, trophic level and compartment (above- or belowground) and according to whether they were measures of biodiversity or other ecosystem processes, biotic or abiotic and static or dynamic. Overall, and for several individual processes, we found that biodiversity effects became stronger over time. Measures of the carbon cycle were also affected more strongly by plant species richness than were the measures associated with the nitrogen cycle. Further, we found greater plant species richness effects on measures of biodiversity than on other processes. The differential effects of plant diversity on the various types of ecosystem processes indicate that future research and political effort should shift from a general debate about whether biodiversity loss impairs ecosystem functions to focussing on the specific functions of interest and ways to preserve them individually or in combination.}, language = {en} }