Search

A large body of research shows that biodiversity loss can reduce ecosystem functioning. However, much of the evidence for this relationship is drawn from biodiversity–ecosystem functioning experiments in which biodiversity loss is simulated by randomly assembling communities of varying species diversity, and ecosystem functions are measured. This random assembly has led some ecologists to question the relevance of biodiversity experiments to real-world ecosystems, where community assembly or disassembly may be non-random and influenced by external drivers, such as climate, soil conditions or land use. Here, we compare data from real-world grassland plant communities with data from two of the largest and longest-running grassland biodiversity experiments (the Jena Experiment in Germany and BioDIV in the United States) in terms of their taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversity and functional-trait composition. We found that plant communities of biodiversity experiments cover almost all of the multivariate variation of the real-world communities, while also containing community types that are not currently observed in the real world. Moreover, they have greater variance in their compositional features than their real-world counterparts. We then re-analysed a subset of experimental data that included only ecologically realistic communities (that is, those comparable to real-world communities). For 10 out of 12 biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships, biodiversity effects did not differ significantly between the full dataset of biodiversity experiments and the ecologically realistic subset of experimental communities. Although we do not provide direct evidence for strong or consistent biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships in real-world communities, our results demonstrate that the results of biodiversity experiments are largely insensitive to the exclusion of unrealistic communities and that the conclusions drawn from biodiversity experiments are generally robust.

A large body of research shows that biodiversity loss can reduce ecosystem functioning, thus providing support for the conservation of biological diversity1–4. Much of the evidence for this relationship is drawn from biodiversity-ecosystem functioning experiments (hereafter: biodiversity experiments), in which biodiversity loss is simulated by randomly assembling communities of varying species diversity, and ecosystem functions are measured5–9. This random assembly has led some ecologists to question the relevance of biodiversity experiments to real-world ecosystems, where community assembly may often be non-random and influenced by external drivers, such as climate or land-use intensification10–18. Despite these repeated criticisms, there has been no comprehensive, quantitative assessment of how experimental and real-world plant communities really differ, and whether these differences invalidate the experimental results. Here, we compare data from two of the largest and longest-running grassland biodiversity experiments globally (Jena Experiment, Germany; BioDIV, USA) to related real-world grassland plant communities in terms of their taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity and functional-trait composition. We found that plant communities of biodiversity experiments have greater variance in these compositional features than their real-world counterparts, covering almost all of the variation of the real-world communities (82-96%) while also containing community types that are not currently observed in the real world. We then re-analysed a subset of experimental data that included only ecologically-realistic communities, i.e. those comparable to real-world communities. For ten out of twelve biodiversity-ecosystem functioning relationships, biodiversity effects did not differ significantly between the full dataset of biodiversity experiments and the ecologically-realistic subset of experimental communities. This demonstrates that the results of biodiversity experiments are largely insensitive to the inclusion/exclusion of unrealistic communities. By bridging the gap between experimental and real-world studies, these results demonstrate the validity of inferences from biodiversity experiments, a key step in translating their results into specific recommendations for real-world biodiversity management.

Indigenous crops also known as orphan crops are key contributors to food security, which is becoming increasingly vulnerable with the current trend of population growth and climate change. They have the major advantage that they fit well into the general socio-economic and ecological context of developing world agriculture. However, most indigenous crops did not benefit from the Green Revolution, which dramatically increased the yield of major crops such as wheat and rice. Here, we describe the Tef Improvement Project, which employs both conventional- and molecular-breeding techniques to improve tef—an orphan crop important to the food security in the Horn of Africa, a region of the world with recurring devastating famines. We have established an efficient pipeline to bring improved tef lines from the laboratory to the farmers of Ethiopia. Of critical importance to the long-term success of this project is the cooperation among participants in Ethiopia and Switzerland, including donors, policy makers, research institutions, and farmers. Together, European and African scientists have developed a pipeline using breeding and genomic tools to improve the orphan crop tef and bring new cultivars to the farmers in Ethiopia. We highlight a new variety, Tesfa, developed in this pipeline and possessing a novel and desirable combination of traits. Tesfa’s recent approval for release illustrates the success of the project and marks a milestone as it is the first variety (of many in the pipeline) to be released., Euphytica, 214 (2), ISSN:0014-2336, ISSN:1573-5060