MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895275277 · doi:10.1111/1365-2745.13084

The type of nutrient limitation affects the plant species richness–productivity relationship: Evidence from dry grasslands across Eurasia

2018· article· en· W2895275277 on OpenAlexaff
Salza Palpurina, Milan Chytrý, Norbert Hölzel, Lubomír Tichý, Viktoria Wagner, Michal Horsák, Irena Axmanová, Michal Hájek, Petra Hájková, Martin Freitag, Zdeňka Lososová, Wanja Mathar, Rossen Tzonev, Jiří Danihelka, Pavel Dřevojan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ecology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersBundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und TechnologieAkademie Věd České RepublikyGrantová Agentura České RepublikyVolkswagen Foundation
KeywordsSpecies richnessNutrientProductivityEcologyBiologyTemperate climateBiomass (ecology)GrasslandCompetition (biology)Species diversityEcosystemAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The species richness–productivity relationship is one of the most debated patterns in ecology. Species coexistence theory suggests that it could be tightly linked to the type of nutrient limitation (no limitation, single‐nutrient limitation, colimitation by several nutrients). Yet, the effects of nutrient limitation on the species richness–productivity relationship have been rarely studied at the regional and continental scales. Combining the predictions of the humped‐back model and the niche dimension hypothesis, we hypothesized that an increase in plant species richness with the number of different limiting nutrients is detectable only at higher productivity levels, at which competition for nutrients is more intense. Therefore, we expected the shape of the diversity–productivity relationship to differ between sites colimited by nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P), sites limited by a single nutrient (either N or P), and sites not limited by any of these nutrients. To test this hypothesis, we used species richness data collected in 10 m × 10 m plots at 694 temperate dry grassland sites across eight regions in northern Eurasia. Productivity ranged from 10 to ~500 g/m 2 of above‐ground standing biomass. The type of nutrient limitation was identified by critical nutrient ratios alone and their combination with critical nutrient concentrations measured in the plant tissue. Relationships were analysed using generalized linear and mixed‐effect models. In line with our expectations, species richness of Eurasian temperate dry grasslands increased more steeply and peaked higher under higher productivity levels at N&P‐colimited sites. When nutrient limitation was assessed by both ratios and concentrations, species richness at N&P‐colimited sites continued to increase monotonically until the maximum productivity sampled in this study. In contrast, at sites with a single‐nutrient limitation or no limitation, the peak in species richness was lower and occurred at a lower productivity of about 300–400 g/m 2 . Synthesis . We provide the first evidence that the species richness–productivity relationship may depend on the type of nutrient limitation as predicted by the species coexistence theory. To generalize these findings, the role of nutrient limitation needs to be tested in other ecosystems, including more productive plant communities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations50
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EcologySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207