Linking the influence and dependence of people on biodiversity across scales

By F. Isbell, Andrew Gonzalez, Michel Loreau, Jane Cowles, S. Díaz, Andy Hector, Georgina M. Mace, David A. Wardle, M. O’Connor, J. Emmett Duffy and 3 more. Nature, 2017

674 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Biodiversity enhances many of nature's benefits to people, including the regulation of climate and the production of wood in forests, livestock forage in grasslands and fish in aquatic ecosystems. Yet people are now driving the sixth mass extinction event in Earth's history. Human dependence and influence on biodiversity have mainly been studied separately and at contrasting scales of space and time, but new multiscale knowledge is beginning to link these relationships. Biodiversity loss substantially diminishes several ecosystem services by altering ecosystem functioning and stability, especially at the large temporal and spatial scales that are most relevant for policy and conservation.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/007fc2eb86b79fd708c760640ec5474a679aaf73

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

A global synthesis reveals biodiversity-mediated benefits for crop production (2019, background): “A major limitation to resolving these relationships is a lack of evidence from 157 real-world human-driven biodiversity changes (7, 8).”
Assessing different components of diversity across a river network using eDNA (2019, background): “…hand, the ecological state and functioning of ecosystems is often inherently linked to biodiversity (Pennekamp et al., 2018) and the current loss of biodiversity has potentially large negative conse‐ quences on the functions and services of ecosystems (Chapin et al., 1998; Isbell et al., 2017).”
Phytoplankton functional diversity increases ecosystem productivity and stability (2017, background): “When only one thermal preference is present in the community, large segments of the temperature gradient will be devoid of any phytoplankton species (Isbell et al., 2017).”
Identifying the tree species compositions that maximize ecosystem functioning in European forests (2018, background): “…changes in species diversity usually result in changes in multiple ecosystem processes, including those related to productivity, nutrient cycling, and stability, as well as to trophic interactions and associated biodiversity (e.g., Schulze & Mooney 1993; Tilman et al. 2014; Isbell et al. 2017).”
Getting the message right on nature‐based solutions to climate change (2021, unknown): “For example, natural forests and mixed species forest plantations have more stable carbon stores during climate extremes compared to species-poor plantations (Hutchison et al., 2018; Osuri et al., 2020), as do high diversity grassland plots com - pared to low diversity plots (Isbell et al., 2017).”
Species richness change across spatial scales (2019, methodology): “…has profound influence 4 on the functioning and stability of natural ecosystems and the people who depend on them (e.g., 5 Cardinale et al. 2012, Isbell et al. 2017), precipitating a number of international collaborations 6 and policies to understand and manage these changes (e.g., Aichi…”
Towards a framework for understanding the context dependence of impacts of non‐native tree species (2020, background): “In contrast, the influence of environmental factors on per capita effects is less well understood, but recent studies demonstrate that species’ effects vary among ecosystems (e.g. Isbell et al., 2017).”
Landscapes that work for biodiversity and people (2018, background): “Within each service, a greater diversity of service providers often enhances the level and/or quality of services and reduces uncertainty in service delivery (22), because different species respond differentially to environmental change (27, 28).”
Understanding the value and limits of nature-based solutions to climate change and other global challenges (2020, background): “Ecosystem sensitivity can be minimized by reducing the pressures affecting ecosystem function (pollution, invasive species, habitat loss and fragmentation, over-exploitation) and enhancing genetic, species and functional richness, which buffer the impacts of extreme weather [58,89] and pests [90].”
The green care code: How nature connectedness and simple activities help explain pro‐nature conservation behaviours (2020, background): “…is a key to the flourishing of all life on Earth—plant and animal, human and other-than-human alike (Diaz, Fargione, Chapin III, & Tilman, 2006; Isbell et al., 2017; Mergeay & Santamaria, 2012; Spicer, 2006), and scientists have long been sounding the alarm over increasing rates of…”
Mapping human pressures on biodiversity across the planet uncovers anthropogenic threat complexes (2020, background): “Meeting the global challenge of the conservation and sustainable use of nature requires not only quantifying biodiversity change, but also identifying the underlying causes of change (Isbell et al., 2017; Tittensor et al., 2014).”
The meaning of the term ‘function’ in ecology: A coral reef perspective (2018, background): “…of ecosystems has brought this functional approach into the arena of 70 conservation biology, as the preservation of functionality (and the species that maintain this 71 functionality) has become an increasingly urgent priority given the ongoing impacts of 72 human development (Isbell et al. 2017).”