Options
Aebi, Alexandre
Nom
Aebi, Alexandre
Affiliation principale
Site web
Fonction
MER
Email
alexandre.aebi@unine.ch
Identifiants
Résultat de la recherche
Voici les éléments 1 - 2 sur 2
- PublicationAccès libreUnderstanding negative biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationship in semi-natural wildflower strips(2018-12-7)
;Sandau, Nadine ;Naisbit, Russel E ;Fabian, Yvonne ;Bruggisser, Odile T ;Kehrli, Patrick; ;Rohr, RudolfBersier, Louis-FelixStudies on biodiversity–ecosystem functioning (BEF) in highly controlled experiments often yield results incompatible with observations from natural systems: experimental results often reveal positive relationships between diversity and productivity, while for natural systems, zero or even negative relationships have been reported. The discrepancy may arise due to a limited or closed local species pool in experiments, while natural systems in meta-community contexts experience dynamic processes, i.e., colonization and extinctions. In our study, we analysed plant community properties and above-ground biomass within a semi-natural (i.e., not weeded) experiment in an agricultural landscape. Eleven replicates with four different diversity levels were created from a species pool of 20 wildflower species. We found an overall significant negative relationship between total diversity and productivity. This relationship likely resulted from invasion resistance: in plots sown with low species numbers, we observed colonization by low-performing species; colonization increased species richness but did not contribute substantially to productivity. Interestingly, when analysing the biomass of the sown and the colonizer species separately, we observed in both cases positive BEF relationships, while this relationship was negative for the whole system. A structural equation modelling approach revealed that higher biomass of the sown species was linked to higher species richness, while the positive BEF relationship of the colonizers was indirect and constrained by the sown species biomass. Our results suggest that, in semi-natural conditions common in extensive agroecosystems, the negative BEF relationship results from the interplay between local dominant species and colonization from the regional species pool by subordinate species. - PublicationAccès libreThe relative contributions of species richness and species composition to ecosystem functioning(2016-9-27)
;Sandau, Nadine ;Fabian, Yvonne ;Bruggisser, Odile T ;Rohr, Rudolf P ;Naisbit, Russel E ;Kehrli, Patrick; Bersier, Louis-FelixHow species diversity influences ecosystem functioning has been the subject of many experiments and remains a key question for ecology and conservation biology. However, the fact that diversity cannot be manipulated without affecting species composition makes this quest methodologically challenging. Here, we evaluate the relative importance of diversity and of composition on biomass production, by using partial Mantel tests for one variable while controlling for the other. We analyse two datasets, from the Jena (2002–2008) and the Grandcour (2008–2009) Experiments. In both experiments, plots were sown with different numbers of species to unravel mechanisms underlying the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (BEF). Contrary to Jena, plots were neither mowed nor weeded in Grandcour, allowing external species to establish. Based on the diversity–ecosystem functioning and competition theories, we tested two predictions: 1) the contribution of composition should increase with time; 2) the contribution of composition should be more important in non‐weeded than in controlled systems. We found support for the second hypothesis, but not for the first. On the contrary, the contribution of species richness became markedly more important few years after the start of the Jena Experiment. This result can be interpreted as suggesting that species complementarity, rather than intraspecific competition, is the driving force in this system. Finally, we explored to what extent the estimated relative importance of both factors varied when measured on different spatial scales of the experiment (in this case, increasing the number of plots included in the analyses). We found a strong effect of scale, suggesting that comparisons between studies, and more generally the extrapolation of results from experiments to natural situations, should be made with caution.