Search

Interactions among species are a fundamental aspect of biodiversity and drive ecosystem functioning and services. Species interactions include direct (pairwise) interactions among two species and indirect interactions that occur when a third species interacts and changes the pairwise direct interaction. In a three‐species interaction network, these interactions can be transitive (where one species outperforms all others) or intransitive (where each species outperforms another). Here, we investigate how direct and indirect interactions influence ecosystem functions in crop systems and how diversification and evolutionary adaptation can influence those interactions and therefore ecosystem functions.A common garden experiment was conducted with crop communities in monocultures, 2‐ and 3‐species mixtures that had either a common or no coexistence history (i.e. co‐adaptation) for the three previous years. Net, direct and indirect interaction intensities were estimated and compared between the diversity levels and coexistence histories. Furthermore, species interaction networks were inspected for transitive/intransitive interactions.We found evidence for less intense competition in mixtures and for reduced negative direct interaction intensity and enhanced facilitative effects upon co‐adaptation. We could further show that indirect interactions were generally less important for co‐adaptation than direct interactions. Additionally, we showed that co‐adaptation has the potential to shift interactions in the species interaction networks from competitive intransitive into pairwise competitive interactions where interactions occurred mainly between two species.Synthesis. Co‐adapted crop species with reduced negative interactions might have the potential to enhance productivity, especially in more diverse cropping systems. This supports the notion that intercropping is a vital part towards a more sustainable agriculture and one with further yield potential when developing cultivars optimised for growth in mixtures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Plant interactions in extreme environments are often inferred from spatial associations and quantified by means of paired sampling. Yet, this method might be confounded by habitat‐sharing effects. Here, we address whether paired and random sampling methods provide similar results at varying levels of environmental heterogeneity. We quantified spatial associations with the two methods at three sites that encompass different micro‐environmental heterogeneity and stress levels: Mediterranean environments in Canary Islands, Spain, and Sardinia, Italy, and a cold alpine environment in Hokkaido, Japan. Then, we simulated plant communities with different levels of species micro‐habitat preferences, environmental heterogeneity, and stress levels. We found that differences in species associations between paired and random sampling were indistinguishable from zero in a homogeneous space. When simulating codispersion over a decreasing abundance gradient, both sampling methods correctly identified facilitation and distinguished it from codispersion. Yet, the pairwise method provided higher facilitation estimates than the random one. At each site, there were strong differences between beneficiary species in their spatial association with nurse species, and associations became more positive with increasing stress in Spain. Most importantly, there were no differences in results yielded by the two methods at any of the different stress levels at the Spanish and Japanese sites. At the Italian site, although micro‐environmental heterogeneity was low, we found weakly significant differences between methods that were unlikely due to habitat‐sharing effects. Thus, the paired sampling method can provide significant insights into net and long‐term effects of plant interactions in spatially conspicuous environments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Ecology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

More diverse plant communities are generally more productive than monocultures. This benefit of species diversity is supposed to stem from resource partitioning of species in mixtures where different species use the resources spatially, temporally, or chemically in distinct ways. With respect to water, the simultaneous cultivation of crops with distinct water uptake patterns might reduce niche overlaps and thus result in higher productivity. However, little is known about whether and how spatial water uptake patterns of crop species differ among different planting arrangements and whether these changes result in increased niche partitioning and explain overyielding in mixtures.Stable isotopes of water and a Bayesian model were used to investigate the spatial water uptake patterns of six different crop species and how these patterns change depending on the planting arrangement (monocultures vs mixtures). Niche overlaps and niche widths in spatial water uptake were compared among the different crop diversity levels and linked to productivity. Furthermore, spatial water uptake was related to competition intensity and overyielding in mixtures.We found evidence for increased niche partitioning in spatial water uptake, and therefore complementary spatial root distributions of crop species, and higher expected productivity in mixtures compared to expected productivity in monocultures both due to inherent species‐level differences in water uptake and plasticity in the water uptake pattern of species. We also found a significant relationship of competition and overyielding with observed patterns in spatial water uptake. These results suggest that competition was most intense in shallow soil layers and enhanced overyielding was related to a gradual increase of water uptake in deeper soil layers. Thus, overyielding might be related to a more complete spatial exploitation of available water sources.Synthesis. Differences in spatial water uptake and niche partitioning of intercropped species, driven most likely by a complementary spatial root distribution, might explain why mixtures outperform monocultures. These findings underpin the potential of intercropping systems for a more sustainable agriculture with a more efficient use of soil resources and hence reduced input demands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Facilitation is an interaction where one species (the benefactor) positively impacts another (the beneficiary). However, the reciprocal effects of beneficiaries on their benefactors are typically only documented using short‐term datasets. We use Azorella selago, a cushion plant species and benefactor, and a co‐occurring grass species, Agrostis magellanica, on sub‐Antarctic Marion Island, comparing cushion plants and the grasses growing on them over a 13‐year period using a correlative approach. We additionally compare the feedback effect of A. magellanica on A. selago identified using our long‐term dataset with data collected from a single time period. We hypothesized that A. selago size and vitality would be negatively affected by A. magellanica cover and that the effect of A. magellanica on A. selago would become more negative with increasing beneficiary cover and abiotic‐severity, due to, e.g. more intense competition for resources. We additionally hypothesized that A. magellanica cover would increase more on cushion plants with greater dead stem cover, since dead stems do not inhibit grass colonization or growth. The relationship between A. magellanica cover and A. selago size and vitality was not significant in the long‐term dataset, and the feedback effect of A. magellanica on A. selago did not vary significantly with altitude or aspect; however, data from a single time period did not consistently identify this same lack of correlation. Moreover, A. selago dead stem cover was not significantly related to an increase in A. magellanica cover over the long term; however, we observed contrasting results from short‐term datasets. Long‐term datasets may, therefore, be more robust (and practical) for assessing beneficiary feedback effects than conventional approaches, particularly when benefactors are slow‐growing. For the first time using a long‐term dataset, we show a lack of physical cost to a benefactor species in a facilitative interaction, in contrast to the majority of short‐term studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increasing biodiversity generally enhances productivity through selection and complementarity effects not only in natural, but also in agricultural, systems. However, the quest to explain why diverse cropping systems are more productive than monocultures remains a central goal in agricultural science. In a mesocosm experiment, we constructed monocultures, two‐ and four‐species mixtures from eight crop species with or without fertilizer and both in temperate Switzerland and dry, Mediterranean Spain. We measured physical factors and plant traits and related these in structural equation models to selection and complementarity effects to explain seed yield differences between monocultures and mixtures. Increased crop diversity increased seed yield in Switzerland. This positive biodiversity effect was driven to almost the same extent by selection and complementarity effects, which increased with plant height and specific leaf area (SLA), respectively. Also, ecological processes driving seed yield increases from monocultures to mixtures differed from those responsible for seed yield increases through the diversification of mixtures from two to four species. Whereas selection effects were mainly driven by one species, complementarity effects were linked to larger leaf area per unit leaf weight. Seed yield increases due to mixture diversification were driven only by complementarity effects and were not mediated through the measured traits, suggesting that ecological processes beyond those measured in this study were responsible for positive diversity effects on yield beyond two‐species mixtures. By understanding the drivers of positive biodiversity–productivity relationships, we can improve our ability to predict species combinations that enhance ecosystem functioning and can promote sustainable agricultural production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]