Back

Functional coexistence theory: a mechanistic framework linking biodiversity to ecosystem function

Wan, J.; Ke, P.-J.; Hordijk, I.; Bialic-Murphy, L.; Crowther, T. W.

2024-05-05 ecology
10.1101/2024.05.05.591902 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Theory and experiments show that diverse ecosystems often have higher levels of function (for instance, biomass production), yet it remains challenging to identify the biological mechanisms responsible. We synthesize developments in coexistence theory into a general theoretical framework linking community coexistence to ecosystem function. Our framework, which we term functional coexistence theory, identifies three components determining the total function of a community of coexisting species. The first component directly corresponds to the niche differences that enable pairwise species coexistence, and to the complementarity component from the additive partition of biodiversity effects. The second component measures whether higher functioning species also have higher competitive fitness, providing a missing link between the additive partitions selection effect and modern coexistence theorys concept of equalization. The third component is least well-studied: reducing functional imbalances between species increases niche differences positive effect on function. Using a mechanistic model of resource competition, we show that our framework can identify how traits drive the effect of competition on productivity, and confirm our theoretical expectations by fitting this model to data from a classic plant competition experiment. Furthermore, we apply our framework to simulations of communities with multiple ecosystem functions or more than two species, demonstrating that relationships between niche, fitness, and function also predict total function beyond the case studied by classical theory. Taken together, our results highlight fundamental links between species coexistence and its consequences for ecosystem function, providing an avenue towards a predictive theory of community-ecosystem feedbacks.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Ecology Letters
121 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
33.4%
2
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 20%
9.3%
3
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 4%
7.3%
4
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 11%
6.5%
50% of probability mass above
5
Nature Ecology & Evolution
113 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
4.9%
6
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.9%
7
The American Naturalist
114 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.2%
8
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
9
Theoretical Ecology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
10
Oikos
74 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
11
Ecology
70 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
12
Cell Systems
167 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.5%
13
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 49%
1.2%
14
Journal of Theoretical Biology
144 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
15
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 26%
0.9%
16
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
17
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
18
Current Biology
596 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.8%
19
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
53 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
20
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 76%
0.7%
21
Ecography
50 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
22
Science
429 papers in training set
Top 21%
0.7%
23
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 71%
0.7%
24
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
25
Ecological Modelling
24 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%
26
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 25%
0.5%
27
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.5%