Test of Diversity-Productivity Models in Natural, Degraded, and Restored Wet Prairies

Conceptual restoration models depict strong correlations between structure and function, with both decreasing as an ecosystem is degraded and increasing during restoration. We evaluated the “linear” and “asymptotic” models by measuring diversity and annual net primary productivity (NPP) within four...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Restoration ecology 2011-03, Vol.19 (2), p.186-193
Hauptverfasser: Jelinski, Nicolas A, Kucharik, Christopher J, Zedler, Joy B
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 193
container_issue 2
container_start_page 186
container_title Restoration ecology
container_volume 19
creator Jelinski, Nicolas A
Kucharik, Christopher J
Zedler, Joy B
description Conceptual restoration models depict strong correlations between structure and function, with both decreasing as an ecosystem is degraded and increasing during restoration. We evaluated the “linear” and “asymptotic” models by measuring diversity and annual net primary productivity (NPP) within four states of a southern Wisconsin floodplain: a remnant (unplowed) wet prairie, two degraded sites (soybean field and invaded prairie), and a restored prairie. Neither model fit our data for aboveground (ANPP), belowground (BNPP), or total (TNPP) productivity. ANPP declined as species richness increased (r = 0.998, df = 2), with highest values for soybeans (1,024 g/m²; two species in 30 0.25-m² plots) and invaded prairie (937 g/m²; nine species, 99% cover of Phalaris arundinacea), intermediate for restored prairie (712 g/m²; 28 species), and lowest for diverse remnant prairie (571 g/m²; 36 species). In contrast, BNPP was lowest for soybeans (225 g/m²) and highest for remnant prairie (571 g/m²). TNPP in restored prairie (990 g/m²) matched that of the remnant (1,147 g/m²) within 7 years, but root:shoot NPP ratios were quite different (0.39 and 0.99, respectively). Overall, results suggest that the relationship between species diversity and productivity can differ with the component measured (ANPP, BNPP, or TNPP) and that diversity does not ensure high productivity. Because measuring ANPP does not fully test ecosystem-function theory, we recommend assessing BNPP and additional ecosystem processes in future attempts to determine whether adding species will restore more function to degraded ecosystems.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1526-100X.2009.00551.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_860398573</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>860398573</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4331-e39ac36cba2d4032812a8106998fea431511c97e6a7757b6246750a8cd4d8ba03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkM1u1DAURiMEUkvhGWqxYdME_8a2xAbSUpBKOyozKmJz5YmdykM6LnZSZt6-DkFdsMIbX8vfsT-dokAEVySvd5uKCFqXBOPvFcVYVxgLQards-Lw6eJ5nnFNSqolOSheprTBmAil2GGxWro0oNChU__gYvLDvlzEYMd28A_5gL4G6_qE_BZdmmGMpj9Bp-42GuvsCTJbi64zH6Kz6MYNaBGNj96lV8WLzvTJvf67HxWrT2fL5nN5cXX-pflwUbacMVI6pk3L6nZtqOWYUUWoUbmp1qpzhjMiCGm1dLWRUsh1TXktBTaqtdyqtcHsqHg7v3sfw68xN4E7n1rX92brwphA1ZhpJSTLyTf_JDdhjNtcDpTgnKv8aw6pOdTGkFJ0HdxHf2fiHgiGyTZsYJIKk1SYbMMf27DL6PsZ_e17t_9vDq7PmjxkvJxxnwa3e8JN_Am1ZFLAzeU5fFwuGt7QHzA1PZ7znQlgbqNPsPpGMWGY6CxNM_YI_FmcMg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>854448069</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Test of Diversity-Productivity Models in Natural, Degraded, and Restored Wet Prairies</title><source>Wiley Journals</source><creator>Jelinski, Nicolas A ; Kucharik, Christopher J ; Zedler, Joy B</creator><creatorcontrib>Jelinski, Nicolas A ; Kucharik, Christopher J ; Zedler, Joy B</creatorcontrib><description>Conceptual restoration models depict strong correlations between structure and function, with both decreasing as an ecosystem is degraded and increasing during restoration. We evaluated the “linear” and “asymptotic” models by measuring diversity and annual net primary productivity (NPP) within four states of a southern Wisconsin floodplain: a remnant (unplowed) wet prairie, two degraded sites (soybean field and invaded prairie), and a restored prairie. Neither model fit our data for aboveground (ANPP), belowground (BNPP), or total (TNPP) productivity. ANPP declined as species richness increased (r = 0.998, df = 2), with highest values for soybeans (1,024 g/m²; two species in 30 0.25-m² plots) and invaded prairie (937 g/m²; nine species, 99% cover of Phalaris arundinacea), intermediate for restored prairie (712 g/m²; 28 species), and lowest for diverse remnant prairie (571 g/m²; 36 species). In contrast, BNPP was lowest for soybeans (225 g/m²) and highest for remnant prairie (571 g/m²). TNPP in restored prairie (990 g/m²) matched that of the remnant (1,147 g/m²) within 7 years, but root:shoot NPP ratios were quite different (0.39 and 0.99, respectively). Overall, results suggest that the relationship between species diversity and productivity can differ with the component measured (ANPP, BNPP, or TNPP) and that diversity does not ensure high productivity. Because measuring ANPP does not fully test ecosystem-function theory, we recommend assessing BNPP and additional ecosystem processes in future attempts to determine whether adding species will restore more function to degraded ecosystems.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1061-2971</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1526-100X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-100X.2009.00551.x</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Biodiversity ; biodiversity-ecosystem function theory ; case study ; diversity ; Ecosystem studies ; Environmental restoration ; Phalaris arundinacea ; Plant ecology ; Prairies ; productivity ; wetland ; Wisconsin</subject><ispartof>Restoration ecology, 2011-03, Vol.19 (2), p.186-193</ispartof><rights>2009 Society for Ecological Restoration International</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4331-e39ac36cba2d4032812a8106998fea431511c97e6a7757b6246750a8cd4d8ba03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4331-e39ac36cba2d4032812a8106998fea431511c97e6a7757b6246750a8cd4d8ba03</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1526-100X.2009.00551.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1526-100X.2009.00551.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jelinski, Nicolas A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kucharik, Christopher J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zedler, Joy B</creatorcontrib><title>Test of Diversity-Productivity Models in Natural, Degraded, and Restored Wet Prairies</title><title>Restoration ecology</title><description>Conceptual restoration models depict strong correlations between structure and function, with both decreasing as an ecosystem is degraded and increasing during restoration. We evaluated the “linear” and “asymptotic” models by measuring diversity and annual net primary productivity (NPP) within four states of a southern Wisconsin floodplain: a remnant (unplowed) wet prairie, two degraded sites (soybean field and invaded prairie), and a restored prairie. Neither model fit our data for aboveground (ANPP), belowground (BNPP), or total (TNPP) productivity. ANPP declined as species richness increased (r = 0.998, df = 2), with highest values for soybeans (1,024 g/m²; two species in 30 0.25-m² plots) and invaded prairie (937 g/m²; nine species, 99% cover of Phalaris arundinacea), intermediate for restored prairie (712 g/m²; 28 species), and lowest for diverse remnant prairie (571 g/m²; 36 species). In contrast, BNPP was lowest for soybeans (225 g/m²) and highest for remnant prairie (571 g/m²). TNPP in restored prairie (990 g/m²) matched that of the remnant (1,147 g/m²) within 7 years, but root:shoot NPP ratios were quite different (0.39 and 0.99, respectively). Overall, results suggest that the relationship between species diversity and productivity can differ with the component measured (ANPP, BNPP, or TNPP) and that diversity does not ensure high productivity. Because measuring ANPP does not fully test ecosystem-function theory, we recommend assessing BNPP and additional ecosystem processes in future attempts to determine whether adding species will restore more function to degraded ecosystems.</description><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>biodiversity-ecosystem function theory</subject><subject>case study</subject><subject>diversity</subject><subject>Ecosystem studies</subject><subject>Environmental restoration</subject><subject>Phalaris arundinacea</subject><subject>Plant ecology</subject><subject>Prairies</subject><subject>productivity</subject><subject>wetland</subject><subject>Wisconsin</subject><issn>1061-2971</issn><issn>1526-100X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkM1u1DAURiMEUkvhGWqxYdME_8a2xAbSUpBKOyozKmJz5YmdykM6LnZSZt6-DkFdsMIbX8vfsT-dokAEVySvd5uKCFqXBOPvFcVYVxgLQards-Lw6eJ5nnFNSqolOSheprTBmAil2GGxWro0oNChU__gYvLDvlzEYMd28A_5gL4G6_qE_BZdmmGMpj9Bp-42GuvsCTJbi64zH6Kz6MYNaBGNj96lV8WLzvTJvf67HxWrT2fL5nN5cXX-pflwUbacMVI6pk3L6nZtqOWYUUWoUbmp1qpzhjMiCGm1dLWRUsh1TXktBTaqtdyqtcHsqHg7v3sfw68xN4E7n1rX92brwphA1ZhpJSTLyTf_JDdhjNtcDpTgnKv8aw6pOdTGkFJ0HdxHf2fiHgiGyTZsYJIKk1SYbMMf27DL6PsZ_e17t_9vDq7PmjxkvJxxnwa3e8JN_Am1ZFLAzeU5fFwuGt7QHzA1PZ7znQlgbqNPsPpGMWGY6CxNM_YI_FmcMg</recordid><startdate>201103</startdate><enddate>201103</enddate><creator>Jelinski, Nicolas A</creator><creator>Kucharik, Christopher J</creator><creator>Zedler, Joy B</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>7QH</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201103</creationdate><title>Test of Diversity-Productivity Models in Natural, Degraded, and Restored Wet Prairies</title><author>Jelinski, Nicolas A ; Kucharik, Christopher J ; Zedler, Joy B</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4331-e39ac36cba2d4032812a8106998fea431511c97e6a7757b6246750a8cd4d8ba03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>biodiversity-ecosystem function theory</topic><topic>case study</topic><topic>diversity</topic><topic>Ecosystem studies</topic><topic>Environmental restoration</topic><topic>Phalaris arundinacea</topic><topic>Plant ecology</topic><topic>Prairies</topic><topic>productivity</topic><topic>wetland</topic><topic>Wisconsin</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jelinski, Nicolas A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kucharik, Christopher J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zedler, Joy B</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution &amp; Environmental Quality</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><jtitle>Restoration ecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jelinski, Nicolas A</au><au>Kucharik, Christopher J</au><au>Zedler, Joy B</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Test of Diversity-Productivity Models in Natural, Degraded, and Restored Wet Prairies</atitle><jtitle>Restoration ecology</jtitle><date>2011-03</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>186</spage><epage>193</epage><pages>186-193</pages><issn>1061-2971</issn><eissn>1526-100X</eissn><abstract>Conceptual restoration models depict strong correlations between structure and function, with both decreasing as an ecosystem is degraded and increasing during restoration. We evaluated the “linear” and “asymptotic” models by measuring diversity and annual net primary productivity (NPP) within four states of a southern Wisconsin floodplain: a remnant (unplowed) wet prairie, two degraded sites (soybean field and invaded prairie), and a restored prairie. Neither model fit our data for aboveground (ANPP), belowground (BNPP), or total (TNPP) productivity. ANPP declined as species richness increased (r = 0.998, df = 2), with highest values for soybeans (1,024 g/m²; two species in 30 0.25-m² plots) and invaded prairie (937 g/m²; nine species, 99% cover of Phalaris arundinacea), intermediate for restored prairie (712 g/m²; 28 species), and lowest for diverse remnant prairie (571 g/m²; 36 species). In contrast, BNPP was lowest for soybeans (225 g/m²) and highest for remnant prairie (571 g/m²). TNPP in restored prairie (990 g/m²) matched that of the remnant (1,147 g/m²) within 7 years, but root:shoot NPP ratios were quite different (0.39 and 0.99, respectively). Overall, results suggest that the relationship between species diversity and productivity can differ with the component measured (ANPP, BNPP, or TNPP) and that diversity does not ensure high productivity. Because measuring ANPP does not fully test ecosystem-function theory, we recommend assessing BNPP and additional ecosystem processes in future attempts to determine whether adding species will restore more function to degraded ecosystems.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1526-100X.2009.00551.x</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1061-2971
ispartof Restoration ecology, 2011-03, Vol.19 (2), p.186-193
issn 1061-2971
1526-100X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_860398573
source Wiley Journals
subjects Biodiversity
biodiversity-ecosystem function theory
case study
diversity
Ecosystem studies
Environmental restoration
Phalaris arundinacea
Plant ecology
Prairies
productivity
wetland
Wisconsin
title Test of Diversity-Productivity Models in Natural, Degraded, and Restored Wet Prairies
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T15%3A09%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Test%20of%20Diversity-Productivity%20Models%20in%20Natural,%20Degraded,%20and%20Restored%20Wet%20Prairies&rft.jtitle=Restoration%20ecology&rft.au=Jelinski,%20Nicolas%20A&rft.date=2011-03&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=186&rft.epage=193&rft.pages=186-193&rft.issn=1061-2971&rft.eissn=1526-100X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1526-100X.2009.00551.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E860398573%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=854448069&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true