植物多样性效应的全球综合指南:跨营养水平的共识和不一致

IF 3.7 2区 生物学 Q1 BIOLOGY Quarterly Review of Biology Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1086/726687
K. D. Holmes, C. Blubaugh
{"title":"植物多样性效应的全球综合指南:跨营养水平的共识和不一致","authors":"K. D. Holmes, C. Blubaugh","doi":"10.1086/726687","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Plant diversity drives the trophic ecology of arthropod communities, and is the focus of thousands of studies and a growing field of meta-analysis. Although syntheses of plant diversity studies have yielded valuable insights, their sheer number and complexity limits broader interpretation. Here we scrutinize 23 syntheses published over three decades to identify common themes and contrasting results. We find that plant diversity consistently attracts more abundant and diverse communities of predators. Herbivore diversity tends to increase in response to plant diversity treatments, while herbivore abundance and plant damage generally decrease. Yet, these net effects often mask nuanced responses to plant diversity that depend on ecosystem, scale, and specialization. For instance, specialist herbivores often respond negatively to plant diversity, while generalists more often mount positive or neutral responses. Studies conducted at greater spatial scales show a dilution of effects on herbivores, but reveal conflicting effects on predators. Despite complexity in outcomes, syntheses show that diversifying plant communities holds great promise for enhancing the resilience of managed ecosystems. A closer examination of how insect diet breadth, spatial scale, and plant arrangement interactively determine the strength of trophic cascades will improve reliability and precision in how we leverage biodiversity for conservation and biocontrol.","PeriodicalId":54517,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Review of Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Guide to 23 Global Syntheses of Plant Diversity Effects: Unpacking Consensus and Incongruence across Trophic Levels\",\"authors\":\"K. D. Holmes, C. Blubaugh\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/726687\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Plant diversity drives the trophic ecology of arthropod communities, and is the focus of thousands of studies and a growing field of meta-analysis. Although syntheses of plant diversity studies have yielded valuable insights, their sheer number and complexity limits broader interpretation. Here we scrutinize 23 syntheses published over three decades to identify common themes and contrasting results. We find that plant diversity consistently attracts more abundant and diverse communities of predators. Herbivore diversity tends to increase in response to plant diversity treatments, while herbivore abundance and plant damage generally decrease. Yet, these net effects often mask nuanced responses to plant diversity that depend on ecosystem, scale, and specialization. For instance, specialist herbivores often respond negatively to plant diversity, while generalists more often mount positive or neutral responses. Studies conducted at greater spatial scales show a dilution of effects on herbivores, but reveal conflicting effects on predators. Despite complexity in outcomes, syntheses show that diversifying plant communities holds great promise for enhancing the resilience of managed ecosystems. A closer examination of how insect diet breadth, spatial scale, and plant arrangement interactively determine the strength of trophic cascades will improve reliability and precision in how we leverage biodiversity for conservation and biocontrol.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quarterly Review of Biology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quarterly Review of Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/726687\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Review of Biology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/726687","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

植物多样性驱动着节肢动物群落的营养生态,是成千上万项研究的焦点,也是一个不断发展的荟萃分析领域。虽然植物多样性的综合研究已经产生了有价值的见解,但它们的数量和复杂性限制了更广泛的解释。在这里,我们仔细研究了30多年来发表的23篇综合论文,以找出共同的主题和对比的结果。我们发现,植物多样性一直吸引着更丰富和多样化的捕食者群落。草食动物多样性随植物多样性处理的增加而增加,而草食动物丰度和植物损害程度普遍降低。然而,这些净效应往往掩盖了对植物多样性的细微反应,这些反应取决于生态系统、规模和专业化。例如,专业食草动物对植物多样性的反应通常是消极的,而通才往往会产生积极或中性的反应。在更大的空间尺度上进行的研究表明,对食草动物的影响有所减弱,但对捕食者的影响却相互矛盾。尽管结果复杂,但综合研究表明,植物群落多样化对增强受管理生态系统的复原力具有很大的希望。对昆虫食性宽度、空间尺度和植物排列如何相互作用决定营养级联强度的更深入研究,将提高我们如何利用生物多样性进行保护和生物防治的可靠性和准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Guide to 23 Global Syntheses of Plant Diversity Effects: Unpacking Consensus and Incongruence across Trophic Levels
Plant diversity drives the trophic ecology of arthropod communities, and is the focus of thousands of studies and a growing field of meta-analysis. Although syntheses of plant diversity studies have yielded valuable insights, their sheer number and complexity limits broader interpretation. Here we scrutinize 23 syntheses published over three decades to identify common themes and contrasting results. We find that plant diversity consistently attracts more abundant and diverse communities of predators. Herbivore diversity tends to increase in response to plant diversity treatments, while herbivore abundance and plant damage generally decrease. Yet, these net effects often mask nuanced responses to plant diversity that depend on ecosystem, scale, and specialization. For instance, specialist herbivores often respond negatively to plant diversity, while generalists more often mount positive or neutral responses. Studies conducted at greater spatial scales show a dilution of effects on herbivores, but reveal conflicting effects on predators. Despite complexity in outcomes, syntheses show that diversifying plant communities holds great promise for enhancing the resilience of managed ecosystems. A closer examination of how insect diet breadth, spatial scale, and plant arrangement interactively determine the strength of trophic cascades will improve reliability and precision in how we leverage biodiversity for conservation and biocontrol.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Quarterly Review of Biology
Quarterly Review of Biology 生物-生物学
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
130
期刊介绍: The premier review journal in biology, The Quarterly Review of Biology has presented insightful historical, philosophical, and technical treatments of important biological topics since 1926. The QRB publishes outstanding review articles of generous length that are guided by an expansive, inclusive, and often humanistic understanding of biology. Beyond the core biological sciences, the QRB is also an important review journal for scholars in related areas, which include policy studies and the history and philosophy of science. A comprehensive section of reviews on new biological books provides educators and researchers alike with information on the latest publications in the life sciences.
期刊最新文献
:Microbiology of Infectious Disease: Integrating Genomics with Natural History :Advances in Insect Physiology. Volume 63 :Population Biology of Vector-Borne Diseases. Ecology and Evolution of Infectious Diseases Series A Guide to 23 Global Syntheses of Plant Diversity Effects: Unpacking Consensus and Incongruence across Trophic Levels :Much Like Us: What Science Reveals about the Thoughts, Feelings, and Behaviour of Animals
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1