TY - JOUR A1 - Soliveres, Santiago A1 - Manning, Peter A1 - Prati, Daniel A1 - Gossner, Martin M. A1 - Alt, Fabian A1 - Arndt, Hartmut A1 - Baumgartner, Vanessa A1 - Binkenstein, Julia A1 - Birkhofer, Klaus A1 - Blaser, Stefan A1 - Bluethgen, Nico A1 - Boch, Steffen A1 - Boehm, Stefan A1 - Boerschig, Carmen A1 - Buscot, Francois A1 - Diekoetter, Tim A1 - Heinze, Johannes A1 - Hoelzel, Norbert A1 - Jung, Kirsten A1 - Klaus, Valentin H. A1 - Klein, Alexandra-Maria A1 - Kleinebecker, Till A1 - Klemmer, Sandra A1 - Krauss, Jochen A1 - Lange, Markus A1 - Morris, E. Kathryn A1 - Mueller, Joerg A1 - Oelmann, Yvonne A1 - Overmann, Jörg A1 - Pasalic, Esther A1 - Renner, Swen C. A1 - Rillig, Matthias C. A1 - Schaefer, H. Martin A1 - Schloter, Michael A1 - Schmitt, Barbara A1 - Schoening, Ingo A1 - Schrumpf, Marion A1 - Sikorski, Johannes A1 - Socher, Stephanie A. A1 - Solly, Emily F. A1 - Sonnemann, Ilja A1 - Sorkau, Elisabeth A1 - Steckel, Juliane A1 - Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf A1 - Stempfhuber, Barbara A1 - Tschapka, Marco A1 - Tuerke, Manfred A1 - Venter, Paul A1 - Weiner, Christiane N. A1 - Weisser, Wolfgang W. A1 - Werner, Michael A1 - Westphal, Catrin A1 - Wilcke, Wolfgang A1 - Wolters, Volkmar A1 - Wubet, Tesfaye A1 - Wurst, Susanne A1 - Fischer, Markus A1 - Allan, Eric T1 - Locally rare species influence grassland ecosystem multifunctionality JF - Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London : B, Biological sciences N2 - 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. KW - biodiversity KW - common species KW - ecosystem function KW - identity hypothesis KW - land use KW - multitrophic Y1 - 2016 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0269 SN - 0962-8436 SN - 1471-2970 VL - 371 SP - 3175 EP - 3185 PB - Royal Society CY - London ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Allan, Eric A1 - Weisser, Wolfgang W. A1 - Fischer, Markus A1 - Schulze, Ernst-Detlef A1 - Weigelt, Alexandra A1 - Roscher, Christiane A1 - Baade, Jussi A1 - Barnard, Romain L. A1 - Bessler, Holger A1 - Buchmann, Nina A1 - Ebeling, Anne A1 - Eisenhauer, Nico A1 - Engels, Christof A1 - Fergus, Alexander J. F. A1 - Gleixner, Gerd A1 - Gubsch, Marlen A1 - Halle, Stefan A1 - Klein, Alexandra-Maria A1 - Kertscher, Ilona A1 - Kuu, Annely A1 - Lange, Markus A1 - Le Roux, Xavier A1 - Meyer, Sebastian T. A1 - Migunova, Varvara D. A1 - Milcu, Alexandru A1 - Niklaus, Pascal A. A1 - Oelmann, Yvonne A1 - Pasalic, Esther A1 - Petermann, Jana S. A1 - Poly, Franck A1 - Rottstock, Tanja A1 - Sabais, Alexander C. W. A1 - Scherber, Christoph A1 - Scherer-Lorenzen, Michael A1 - Scheu, Stefan A1 - Steinbeiss, Sibylle A1 - Schwichtenberg, Guido A1 - Temperton, Vicky A1 - Tscharntke, Teja A1 - Voigt, Winfried A1 - Wilcke, Wolfgang A1 - Wirth, Christian A1 - Schmid, Bernhard T1 - A comparison of the strength of biodiversity effects across multiple functions JF - Oecologia N2 - 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. KW - Bottom-up effects KW - Carbon cycling KW - Ecological synthesis KW - Ecosystem processes KW - Grasslands KW - Jena experiment KW - Nitrogen cycling Y1 - 2013 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-012-2589-0 SN - 0029-8549 VL - 173 IS - 1 SP - 223 EP - 237 PB - Springer CY - New York ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Manning, Pete A1 - Gossner, Martin M. A1 - Bossdorf, Oliver A1 - Allan, Eric A1 - Zhang, Yuan-Ye A1 - Prati, Daniel A1 - Blüthgen, Nico A1 - Boch, Steffen A1 - Böhm, Stefan A1 - Börschig, Carmen A1 - Hölzel, Norbert A1 - Jung, Kirsten A1 - Klaus, Valentin H. A1 - Klein, Alexandra-Maria A1 - Kleinebecker, Till A1 - Krauss, Jochen A1 - Lange, Markus A1 - Müller, Jörg A1 - Pasalic, Esther A1 - Socher, Stephanie A. A1 - Tschapka, Marco A1 - Türke, Manfred A1 - Weiner, Christiane A1 - Werner, Michael A1 - Gockel, Sonja A1 - Hemp, Andreas A1 - Renner, Swen C. A1 - Wells, Konstans A1 - Buscot, Francois A1 - Kalko, Elisabeth K. V. A1 - Linsenmair, Karl Eduard A1 - Weisser, Wolfgang W. A1 - Fischer, Markus T1 - Grassland management intensification weakens the associations among the diversities of multiple plant and animal taxa JF - Ecology : a publication of the Ecological Society of America N2 - Land-use intensification is a key driver of biodiversity change. However, little is known about how it alters relationships between the diversities of different taxonomic groups, which are often correlated due to shared environmental drivers and trophic interactions. Using data from 150 grassland sites, we examined how land-use intensification (increased fertilization, higher livestock densities, and increased mowing frequency) altered correlations between the species richness of 15 plant, invertebrate, and vertebrate taxa. We found that 54% of pairwise correlations between taxonomic groups were significant and positive among all grasslands, while only one was negative. Higher land-use intensity substantially weakened these correlations(35% decrease in rand 43% fewer significant pairwise correlations at high intensity), a pattern which may emerge as a result of biodiversity declines and the breakdown of specialized relationships in these conditions. Nevertheless, some groups (Coleoptera, Heteroptera, Hymenoptera and Orthoptera) were consistently correlated with multidiversity, an aggregate measure of total biodiversity comprised of the standardized diversities of multiple taxa, at both high and lowland-use intensity. The form of intensification was also important; increased fertilization and mowing frequency typically weakened plant-plant and plant-primary consumer correlations, whereas grazing intensification did not. This may reflect decreased habitat heterogeneity under mowing and fertilization and increased habitat heterogeneity under grazing. While these results urge caution in using certain taxonomic groups to monitor impacts of agricultural management on biodiversity, they also suggest that the diversities of some groups are reasonably robust indicators of total biodiversity across a range of conditions. KW - Biodiversity indicators KW - correlation KW - fertilization KW - grassland management KW - grazing KW - land-use change KW - land-use intensity KW - mowing KW - multidiversity KW - multitrophic interactions Y1 - 2015 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1890/14-1307.1 SN - 0012-9658 SN - 1939-9170 VL - 96 IS - 6 SP - 1492 EP - 1501 PB - Wiley CY - Washington ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Kühne, Katharina A1 - Fischer, Martin H. A1 - Jeglinski-Mende, Melinda A. T1 - During the COVID-19 pandemic participants prefer settings with a face mask, no interaction and at a closer distance JF - Scientific Reports N2 - Peripersonal space is the space surrounding our body, where multisensory integration of stimuli and action execution take place. The size of peripersonal space is flexible and subject to change by various personal and situational factors. The dynamic representation of our peripersonal space modulates our spatial behaviors towards other individuals. During the COVID-19 pandemic, this spatial behavior was modified by two further factors: social distancing and wearing a face mask. Evidence from offline and online studies on the impact of a face mask on pro-social behavior is mixed. In an attempt to clarify the role of face masks as pro-social or anti-social signals, 235 observers participated in the present online study. They watched pictures of two models standing at three different distances from each other (50, 90 and 150 cm), who were either wearing a face mask or not and were either interacting by initiating a hand shake or just standing still. The observers’ task was to classify the model by gender. Our results show that observers react fastest, and therefore show least avoidance, for the shortest distances (50 and 90 cm) but only when models wear a face mask and do not interact. Thus, our results document both pro- and anti-social consequences of face masks as a result of the complex interplay between social distancing and interactive behavior. Practical implications of these findings are discussed. Y1 - 2022 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-16730-1 SN - 2045-2322 VL - 12 SP - 1 EP - 12 PB - Springer Nature CY - Berlin ER - TY - GEN A1 - Fischer, Martin H. A1 - Winter, Bodo A1 - Felisatti, Arianna A1 - Myachykov, Andriy A1 - Jeglinski-Mende, Melinda A. A1 - Shaki, Samuel T1 - More Instructions Make Fewer Subtractions T2 - Zweitveröffentlichungen der Universität Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe N2 - Research on problem solving offers insights into how humans process task-related information and which strategies they use (Newell and Simon, 1972; Öllinger et al., 2014). Problem solving can be defined as the search for possible changes in one's mind (Kahneman, 2003). In a recent study, Adams et al. (2021) assessed whether the predominant problem solving strategy when making changes involves adding or subtracting elements. In order to do this, they used several examples of simple problems, such as editing text or making visual patterns symmetrical, either in naturalistic settings or on-line. The essence of the authors' findings is a strong preference to add rather than subtract elements across a diverse range of problems, including the stabilizing of artifacts, creating symmetrical patterns, or editing texts. More specifically, they succeeded in demonstrating that “participants were less likely to identify advantageous subtractive changes when the task did not (vs. did) cue them to consider subtraction, when they had only one opportunity (vs. several) to recognize the shortcomings of an additive search strategy or when they were under a higher (vs. lower) cognitive load” (Adams et al., 2021, p. 258). Addition and subtraction are generally defined as de-contextualized mathematical operations using abstract symbols (Russell, 1903/1938). Nevertheless, understanding of both symbols and operations is informed by everyday activities, such as making or breaking objects (Lakoff and Núñez, 2000; Fischer and Shaki, 2018). The universal attribution of “addition bias” or “subtraction neglect” to problem solving activities is perhaps a convenient shorthand but it overlooks influential framing effects beyond those already acknowledged in the report and the accompanying commentary (Meyvis and Yoon, 2021). Most importantly, while Adams et al.'s study addresses an important issue, their very method of verbally instructing participants, together with lack of control over several known biases, might render their findings less than conclusive. Below, we discuss our concerns that emerged from the identified biases, namely those regarding the instructions and the experimental materials. Moreover, we refer to research from mathematical cognition that provides new insights into Adams et al.'s findings. T3 - Zweitveröffentlichungen der Universität Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe - 763 KW - problem solving KW - addition KW - subtraction KW - cognitive bias KW - SNARC Y1 - 2022 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-550086 SN - 1866-8364 VL - 12 SP - 1 EP - 3 PB - Universitätsverlag Potsdam CY - Potsdam ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Fischer, Martin H. A1 - Winter, Bodo A1 - Felisatti, Arianna A1 - Myachykov, Andriy A1 - Jeglinski-Mende, Melinda A. A1 - Shaki, Samuel T1 - More instructions make fewer subtractions JF - Frontiers in psychology / Frontiers Research Foundation N2 - Research on problem solving offers insights into how humans process task-related information and which strategies they use (Newell and Simon, 1972; Öllinger et al., 2014). Problem solving can be defined as the search for possible changes in one's mind (Kahneman, 2003). In a recent study, Adams et al. (2021) assessed whether the predominant problem solving strategy when making changes involves adding or subtracting elements. In order to do this, they used several examples of simple problems, such as editing text or making visual patterns symmetrical, either in naturalistic settings or on-line. The essence of the authors' findings is a strong preference to add rather than subtract elements across a diverse range of problems, including the stabilizing of artifacts, creating symmetrical patterns, or editing texts. More specifically, they succeeded in demonstrating that “participants were less likely to identify advantageous subtractive changes when the task did not (vs. did) cue them to consider subtraction, when they had only one opportunity (vs. several) to recognize the shortcomings of an additive search strategy or when they were under a higher (vs. lower) cognitive load” (Adams et al., 2021, p. 258). Addition and subtraction are generally defined as de-contextualized mathematical operations using abstract symbols (Russell, 1903/1938). Nevertheless, understanding of both symbols and operations is informed by everyday activities, such as making or breaking objects (Lakoff and Núñez, 2000; Fischer and Shaki, 2018). The universal attribution of “addition bias” or “subtraction neglect” to problem solving activities is perhaps a convenient shorthand but it overlooks influential framing effects beyond those already acknowledged in the report and the accompanying commentary (Meyvis and Yoon, 2021). Most importantly, while Adams et al.'s study addresses an important issue, their very method of verbally instructing participants, together with lack of control over several known biases, might render their findings less than conclusive. Below, we discuss our concerns that emerged from the identified biases, namely those regarding the instructions and the experimental materials. Moreover, we refer to research from mathematical cognition that provides new insights into Adams et al.'s findings. KW - problem solving KW - addition KW - subtraction KW - cognitive bias KW - SNARC Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.720616 SN - 1664-1078 VL - 12 SP - 1 EP - 3 PB - Frontiers Research Foundation CY - Lausanne, Schweiz ER -