@article{AllanBossdorfDormannetal.2014, author = {Allan, Eric and Bossdorf, Oliver and Dormann, Carsten F. and Prati, Daniel and Gossner, Martin M. and Tscharntke, Teja and Bl{\"u}thgen, Nico and Bellach, Michaela and Birkhofer, Klaus and Boch, Steffen and B{\"o}hm, Stefan and B{\"o}rschig, Carmen and Chatzinotas, Antonis and Christ, Sabina and Daniel, Rolf and Diek{\"o}tter, Tim and Fischer, Christiane and Friedl, Thomas and Glaser, Karin and Hallmann, Christine and Hodac, Ladislav and H{\"o}lzel, Norbert and Jung, Kirsten and Klein, Alexandra-Maria and Klaus, Valentin H. and Kleinebecker, Till and Krauss, Jochen and Lange, Markus and Morris, E. Kathryn and M{\"u}ller, J{\"o}rg and Nacke, Heiko and Pasalic, Esther and Rillig, Matthias C. and Rothenwoehrer, Christoph and Schally, Peter and Scherber, Christoph and Schulze, Waltraud X. and Socher, Stephanie A. and Steckel, Juliane and Steffan-Dewenter, Ingolf and T{\"u}rke, Manfred and Weiner, Christiane N. and Werner, Michael and Westphal, Catrin and Wolters, Volkmar and Wubet, Tesfaye and Gockel, Sonja and Gorke, Martin and Hemp, Andreas and Renner, Swen C. and Sch{\"o}ning, Ingo and Pfeiffer, Simone and K{\"o}nig-Ries, Birgitta and Buscot, Francois and Linsenmair, Karl Eduard and Schulze, Ernst-Detlef and Weisser, Wolfgang W. and Fischer, Markus}, title = {Interannual variation in land-use intensity enhances grassland multidiversity}, series = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America}, volume = {111}, journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America}, number = {1}, publisher = {National Acad. of Sciences}, address = {Washington}, issn = {0027-8424}, doi = {10.1073/pnas.1312213111}, pages = {308 -- 313}, year = {2014}, abstract = {Although temporal heterogeneity is a well-accepted driver of biodiversity, effects of interannual variation in land-use intensity (LUI) have not been addressed yet. Additionally, responses to land use can differ greatly among different organisms; therefore, overall effects of land-use on total local biodiversity are hardly known. To test for effects of LUI (quantified as the combined intensity of fertilization, grazing, and mowing) and interannual variation in LUI (SD in LUI across time), we introduce a unique measure of whole-ecosystem biodiversity, multidiversity. This synthesizes individual diversity measures across up to 49 taxonomic groups of plants, animals, fungi, and bacteria from 150 grasslands. Multidiversity declined with increasing LUI among grasslands, particularly for rarer species and aboveground organisms, whereas common species and belowground groups were less sensitive. However, a high level of interannual variation in LUI increased overall multidiversity at low LUI and was even more beneficial for rarer species because it slowed the rate at which the multidiversity of rare species declined with increasing LUI. In more intensively managed grasslands, the diversity of rarer species was, on average, 18\% of the maximum diversity across all grasslands when LUI was static over time but increased to 31\% of the maximum when LUI changed maximally over time. In addition to decreasing overall LUI, we suggest varying LUI across years as a complementary strategy to promote biodiversity conservation.}, 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} } @article{HeinzeBochFischeretal.2011, author = {Heinze, Eric and Boch, Steffen and Fischer, Markus and Hessenm{\"o}ller, Dominik and Klenk, Bernd and M{\"u}ller, J{\"o}rg and Prati, Daniel and Schulze, Ernst-Detlef and Seele, Carolin and Socher, Stephanie and Halle, Stefan}, title = {Habitat use of large ungulates in northeastern Germany in relation to forest management}, series = {Forest ecology and management}, volume = {261}, journal = {Forest ecology and management}, number = {2}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {0378-1127}, doi = {10.1016/j.foreco.2010.10.022}, pages = {288 -- 296}, year = {2011}, abstract = {Estimating large herbivore density has been a major area of research in recent decades. Previous studies monitoring ungulate density, however, focused mostly on determining animal abundance, and did not interpret animal distribution in relation to habitat parameters. We surveyed large ungulates in the Biodiversity Exploratory Schorfheide-Chorin using faecal pellet group counts. This allowed us to explore the link between relative ungulate abundance, habitat use, and browsing damage on trees in a region with several types of forest, including unharvested and age-class beech forests, as well as age-class pine forests. Our results demonstrate that roe deer and fallow deer relative abundance is negatively correlated with large tree cover, and positively correlated with the cover of small shrubs (Rubus spec., Vaccinium spec.), and winter food supply. Habitat use of roe deer and fallow deer, as estimated by counting faecal pellet groups, revealed a preference for mature pine forests, and avoidance of deciduous forests. This differential habitat use is explained by different distributions of high quality food resources during winter. The response of deer to understory cover differed between roe deer and fallow deer at high cover percentages. The amount of browsing damage we observed on coniferous trees was not consistent with the relative deer abundance. Browsing damage was consistently higher on most deciduous trees, except for beech saplings which sustained less damage when roe deer density was low. Because roe deer is a highly selective feeder, it was reported to affect tree diversity by feeding only on trees with high nutritional value. Consequently, we propose that managing the number of all deer species by hunting is necessary to allow successful forest regeneration. Such an adjustment to deer numbers would need to account for both current tree diversity and alternative food resources. Our findings may be applicable to other forest landscapes in northeastern Germany including mature pine stands and differently harvested deciduous forests.}, 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} } @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{SchallGossnerHeinrichsetal.2017, author = {Schall, Peter and Gossner, Martin M. and Heinrichs, Steffi and Fischer, Markus and Boch, Steffen and Prati, Daniel and Jung, Kirsten and Baumgartner, Vanessa and Blaser, Stefan and B{\"o}hm, Stefan and Buscot, Francois and Daniel, Rolf and Goldmann, Kezia and Kaiser, Kristin and Kahl, Tiemo and Lange, Markus and M{\"u}ller, J{\"o}rg Hans and Overmann, J{\"o}rg and Renner, Swen C. and Schulze, Ernst-Detlef and Sikorski, Johannes and Tschapka, Marco and T{\"u}rke, Manfred and Weisser, Wolfgang W. and Wemheuer, Bernd and Wubet, Tesfaye and Ammer, Christian}, title = {The impact of even-aged and uneven-aged forest management on regional biodiversity of multiple taxa in European beech forests}, series = {Journal of applied ecology : an official journal of the British Ecological Society}, volume = {55}, journal = {Journal of applied ecology : an official journal of the British Ecological Society}, number = {1}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Hoboken}, issn = {0021-8901}, doi = {10.1111/1365-2664.12950}, pages = {267 -- 278}, year = {2017}, abstract = {1. For managed temperate forests, conservationists and policymakers favour fine-grained uneven-aged (UEA) management over more traditional coarse-grained even-aged (EA) management, based on the assumption that within-stand habitat heterogeneity enhances biodiversity. There is, however, little empirical evidence to support this assumption. We investigated for the first time how differently grained forest management systems affect the biodiversity of multiple above- and below-ground taxa across spatial scales. 2. We sampled 15 taxa of animals, plants, fungi and bacteria within the largest contiguous beech forest landscape of Germany and classified them into functional groups. Selected forest stands have been managed for more than a century at different spatial grains. The EA (coarse-grained management) and UEA (fine-grained) forests are comparable in spatial arrangement, climate and soil conditions. These were compared to forests of a nearby national park that have been unmanaged for at least 20years. We used diversity accumulation curves to compare -diversity for Hill numbers D-0 (species richness), D-1 (Shannon diversity) and D-2 (Simpson diversity) between the management systems. Beta diversity was quantified as multiple-site dissimilarity. 3. Gamma diversity was higher in EA than in UEA forests for at least one of the three Hill numbers for six taxa (up to 77\%), while eight showed no difference. Only bacteria showed the opposite pattern. Higher -diversity in EA forests was also found for forest specialists and saproxylic beetles. 4. Between-stand -diversity was higher in EA than in UEA forests for one-third (all species) and half (forest specialists) of all taxa, driven by environmental heterogeneity between age-classes, while -diversity showed no directional response across taxa or for forest specialists. 5. Synthesis and applications. Comparing EA and uneven-aged forest management in Central European beech forests, our results show that a mosaic of different age-classes is more important for regional biodiversity than high within-stand heterogeneity. We suggest reconsidering the current trend of replacing even-aged management in temperate forests. Instead, the variability of stages and stand structures should be increased to promote landscape-scale biodiversity.}, language = {en} }