@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.2013, author = {Solly, Emily and Sch{\"o}ning, Ingo and Boch, Steffen and Mueller, J. and Socher, S. A. and Trumbore, S. E. and Schrumpf, M.}, title = {Mean age of carbon in fine roots from temperate forests and grasslands with different management}, series = {Biogeosciences}, volume = {10}, journal = {Biogeosciences}, number = {7}, publisher = {Copernicus}, address = {G{\"o}ttingen}, issn = {1726-4170}, doi = {10.5194/bg-10-4833-2013}, pages = {4833 -- 4843}, year = {2013}, abstract = {Fine roots are the most dynamic portion of a plant's root system and a major source of soil organic matter. By altering plant species diversity and composition, soil conditions and nutrient availability, and consequently belowground allocation and dynamics of root carbon (C) inputs, land-use and management changes may influence organic C storage in terrestrial ecosystems. In three German regions, we measured fine root radiocarbon (C-14) content to estimate the mean time since C in root tissues was fixed from the atmosphere in 54 grassland and forest plots with different management and soil conditions. Although root biomass was on average greater in grasslands 5.1 +/- 0.8 g (mean +/- SE, n = 27) than in forests 3.1 +/- 0.5 g (n = 27) (p < 0.05), the mean age of C in fine roots in forests averaged 11.3 +/- 1.8 yr and was older and more variable compared to grasslands 1.7 +/- 0.4 yr (p < 0.001). We further found that management affects the mean age of fine root C in temperate grasslands mediated by changes in plant species diversity and composition. Fine root mean C age is positively correlated with plant diversity (r = 0.65) and with the number of perennial species (r = 0.77). Fine root mean C age in grasslands was also affected by study region with averages of 0.7 +/- 0.1 yr (n= 9) on mostly organic soils in northern Germany and of 1.8 +/- 0.3 yr (n = 9) and 2.6 +/- 0.3 (n = 9) in central and southern Germany (p < 0.05). This was probably due to differences in soil nutrient contents and soil moisture conditions between study regions, which affected plant species diversity and the presence of perennial species. Our results indicate more long-lived roots or internal redistribution of C in perennial species and suggest linkages between fine root C age and management in grasslands. These findings improve our ability to predict and model belowground C fluxes across broader spatial scales.}, language = {en} } @article{BirkhoferSchoeningAltetal.2012, author = {Birkhofer, Klaus and Sch{\"o}ning, Ingo and Alt, Fabian and Herold, Nadine and Klarner, Bernhard and Maraun, Mark and Marhan, Sven and Oelmann, Yvonne and Wubet, Tesfaye and Yurkov, Andrey and Begerow, Dominik and Berner, Doreen and Buscot, Francois and Daniel, Rolf and Diek{\"o}tter, Tim and Ehnes, Roswitha B. and Erdmann, Georgia and Fischer, Christiane and F{\"o}sel, Baerbel and Groh, Janine and Gutknecht, Jessica and Kandeler, Ellen and Lang, Christa and Lohaus, Gertrud and Meyer, Annabel and Nacke, Heiko and N{\"a}ther, Astrid and Overmann, J{\"o}rg and Polle, Andrea and Pollierer, Melanie M. and Scheu, Stefan and Schloter, Michael and Schulze, Ernst-Detlef and Schulze, Waltraud X. and Weinert, Jan and Weisser, Wolfgang W. and Wolters, Volkmar and Schrumpf, Marion}, title = {General relationships between abiotic soil properties and soil biota across spatial scales and different land-use types}, series = {PLoS one}, volume = {7}, journal = {PLoS one}, number = {8}, publisher = {PLoS}, address = {San Fransisco}, issn = {1932-6203}, doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0043292}, pages = {8}, year = {2012}, abstract = {Very few principles have been unraveled that explain the relationship between soil properties and soil biota across large spatial scales and different land-use types. Here, we seek these general relationships using data from 52 differently managed grassland and forest soils in three study regions spanning a latitudinal gradient in Germany. We hypothesize that, after extraction of variation that is explained by location and land-use type, soil properties still explain significant proportions of variation in the abundance and diversity of soil biota. If the relationships between predictors and soil organisms were analyzed individually for each predictor group, soil properties explained the highest amount of variation in soil biota abundance and diversity, followed by land-use type and sampling location. After extraction of variation that originated from location or land-use, abiotic soil properties explained significant amounts of variation in fungal, meso-and macrofauna, but not in yeast or bacterial biomass or diversity. Nitrate or nitrogen concentration and fungal biomass were positively related, but nitrate concentration was negatively related to the abundances of Collembola and mites and to the myriapod species richness across a range of forest and grassland soils. The species richness of earthworms was positively correlated with clay content of soils independent of sample location and land-use type. Our study indicates that after accounting for heterogeneity resulting from large scale differences among sampling locations and land-use types, soil properties still explain significant proportions of variation in fungal and soil fauna abundance or diversity. However, soil biota was also related to processes that act at larger spatial scales and bacteria or soil yeasts only showed weak relationships to soil properties. We therefore argue that more general relationships between soil properties and soil biota can only be derived from future studies that consider larger spatial scales and different land-use types.}, 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} } @article{SoliveresManningPratietal.2016, author = {Soliveres, Santiago and Manning, Peter and Prati, Daniel and Gossner, Martin M. and Alt, Fabian and Arndt, Hartmut and Baumgartner, Vanessa and Binkenstein, Julia and Birkhofer, Klaus and Blaser, Stefan and Bluethgen, Nico and Boch, Steffen and Boehm, Stefan and Boerschig, Carmen and Buscot, Francois and Diekoetter, Tim and Heinze, Johannes and Hoelzel, Norbert and Jung, Kirsten and Klaus, Valentin H. and Klein, Alexandra-Maria and Kleinebecker, Till and Klemmer, Sandra and Krauss, Jochen and Lange, Markus and Morris, E. Kathryn and Mueller, Joerg and Oelmann, Yvonne and Overmann, J{\"o}rg and Pasalic, Esther and Renner, Swen C. and Rillig, Matthias C. and Schaefer, H. Martin and Schloter, Michael and Schmitt, Barbara and Schoening, 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 Tuerke, Manfred and Venter, Paul 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 = {Locally rare species influence grassland ecosystem multifunctionality}, series = {Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London : B, Biological sciences}, volume = {371}, journal = {Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London : B, Biological sciences}, publisher = {Royal Society}, address = {London}, issn = {0962-8436}, doi = {10.1098/rstb.2015.0269}, pages = {3175 -- 3185}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Species diversity promotes the delivery of multiple ecosystem functions (multifunctionality). However, the relative functional importance of rare and common species in driving the biodiversity multifunctionality relationship remains unknown. We studied the relationship between the diversity of rare and common species (according to their local abundances and across nine different trophic groups), and multifunctionality indices derived from 14 ecosystem functions on 150 grasslands across a land use intensity (LUI) gradient. The diversity of above- and below-ground rare species had opposite effects, with rare above-ground species being associated with high levels of multifunctionality, probably because their effects on different functions did not trade off against each other. Conversely, common species were only related to average, not high, levels of multifunctionality, and their functional effects declined with LUI. Apart from the community level effects of diversity, we found significant positive associations between the abundance of individual species and multifunctionality in 6\% of the species tested. Species specific functional effects were best predicted by their response to LUI: species that declined in abundance with land use intensification were those associated with higher levels of multifunctionality. Our results highlight the importance of rare species for ecosystem multifunctionality and help guiding future conservation priorities.}, language = {en} }