Description: Concern about the functional consequences of unprecedented loss in biodiversity has prompted biodiversity–ecosystem functioning (BEF) research to become one of the most active fields of ecological research in the past 25 years. Hundreds of experiments have manipulated biodiversity as an independent variable and found compelling support that the functioning of ecosystems increases with the diversity of their ecological communities. This research has also identified some of the mechanisms underlying BEF relationships, some context-dependencies of the strength of relationships, as well as implications for various ecosystem services that humankind depends upon. In this chapter, we argue that a multitrophic perspective of biotic interactions in random and non-random biodiversity change scenarios is key to advance future BEF research and to address some of its most important remaining challenges. We discuss that the study and the quantification of multitrophic interactions in space and time facilitates scaling up from small-scale biodiversity manipulations and ecosystem function assessments to management-relevant spatial scales across ecosystem boundaries. We specifically consider multitrophic conceptual frameworks to understand and predict the context-dependency of BEF relationships. Moreover, we highlight the importance of the eco-evolutionary underpinnings of multitrophic BEF relationships. We outline that FAIR data (meeting the standards of findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability) and reproducible processing will be key to advance this field of research by making it more integrative. Finally, we show how these BEF insights may be implemented for ecosystem management, society, and policy. Given that human well-being critically depends on the multiple services provided by diverse, multitrophic communities, integrating the approaches of evolutionary ecology, community ecology, and ecosystem ecology in future BEF research will be key to refine conservation targets and develop sustainable management strategies.

Description: © The Author(s), 2014. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Journal of Ecology 103 (2015): 202–218, doi:10.1111/1365-2745.12334.

Description: Schedules of survival, growth and reproduction are key life-history traits. Data on how these traits vary among species and populations are fundamental to our understanding of the ecological conditions that have shaped plant evolution. Because these demographic schedules determine population growth or decline, such data help us understand how different biomes shape plant ecology, how plant populations and communities respond to global change and how to develop successful management tools for endangered or invasive species. Matrix population models summarize the life cycle components of survival, growth and reproduction, while explicitly acknowledging heterogeneity among classes of individuals in the population. Matrix models have comparable structures, and their emergent measures of population dynamics, such as population growth rate or mean life expectancy, have direct biological interpretations, facilitating comparisons among populations and species. Thousands of plant matrix population models have been parameterized from empirical data, but they are largely dispersed through peer-reviewed and grey literature, and thus remain inaccessible for synthetic analysis. Here, we introduce the compadre Plant Matrix Database version 3.0, an open-source online repository containing 468 studies from 598 species world-wide (672 species hits, when accounting for species studied in more than one source), with a total of 5621 matrices. compadre also contains relevant ancillary information (e.g. ecoregion, growth form, taxonomy, phylogeny) that facilitates interpretation of the numerous demographic metrics that can be derived from the matrices. Large collections of data allow broad questions to be addressed at the global scale, for example, in genetics (genbank), functional plant ecology (try, bien, d3) and grassland community ecology (nutnet). Here, we present compadre, a similarly data-rich and ecologically relevant resource for plant demography. Open access to this information, its frequent updates and its integration with other online resources will allow researchers to address timely and important ecological and evolutionary questions.

Description: This collection contains measurements of standing below ground biomass, belowground biomass productivity and morphological root parameters measured on the Main Experiment plots of a large grassland biodiversity experiment (the Jena Experiment; see further details below). In the Main Experiment, 82 grassland plots of 20 x 20 m were established from a pool of 60 species belonging to four functional groups (grasses, legumes, tall and small herbs). In May 2002, varying numbers of plant species from this species pool were sown into the plots to create a gradient of plant species richness (1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 60 species) and functional richness (1, 2, 3, 4 functional groups). Since 2010, plots were weeded three times per year. The following series of datasets are contained in this collection: 1. Standing below ground biomass: Coarse and fine root biomass was measured in 2003, 2004, 2006 and 2008 in 0 - 30 cm depth. In 2011 and 2014, total root biomass was sampled down to 40 cm depth. Some years report the data divided into sublayers. Every year, several soil cores were taken per plot and pooled before the whole bulk material or a subsample was washed for roots. Roots were dried at 60 - 70 °C and weighed. Standing root biomass was calculated as g m-2. 2. Below ground biomass productivity in 0 - 30 cm depth: Coarse and fine root biomass production from June to September 2003, September 2003 to July 2004 and July 2007 to June 2008 was measured by the ingrowth core method. In 2008, the data is reported divided into sublayers. Each time, five soil cores were taken per plot and replaced by root free soil from the field site. The initially root-free ingrowth cores were removed after a while and pooled plot-wise. To extract the newly formed roots, a subsample of the bulk material was washed for roots. Roots were dried at 70 °C and weighed. Root biomass productivity was calculated as g m-2. In addition, C- (only in 2003 and 2004) and N-concentration of the fine roots was determined. 3. Morphological root parameters of newly formed roots in 0 - 30 cm depth: Root length density and mean root diameter of newly formed roots from June to September 2003 and September 2003 to July 2004 were measured by the ingrowth core method. Each time, five soil cores were taken per plot and replaced by root free soil from the field site. The initially root-free ingrowth cores were removed after a while and pooled plot-wise. To extract the newly formed roots, a subsample of the bulk material was washed and scanned. Root length and mean diameter were determined by using WinRhizo (Regent Instruments, Quebec, Canada). 4. Morphological root parameters of standing roots in 0 - 30 cm depth: In 2004, mean diameter of standing roots was measured by sampling three soil cores per plot. To extract the standing roots, a subsample of the bulk material was washed and scanned. Mean diameter was determined by using WinRhizo (Regent Instruments, Quebec, Canada).

Description: This data set contains measures of energy-use efficiency, energy flow, and energy storage in units of dry biomass that quantify the multitrophic ecosystem functioning realized in grassland ecosystems of differing plant diversity. Given are both the measures integrated over whole ecosystems (total network measures) as well as the energy dynamics associated with individual ecosystem compartments including the entire biological community and detrital compartments across the above- and belowground parts of the ecosystem. Data presented here is from the Main Experiment plots of a large grassland biodiversity experiment (the Jena Experiment, see further details below). In the main experiment, 82 grassland plots of 20 x 20 m were established from a pool of 60 species belonging to four functional groups (grasses, legumes, tall and small herbs). In May 2002, varying numbers of plant species from this species pool were sown into the plots to create a gradient of plant species richness (1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 60 species) and functional richness (1, 2, 3, 4 functional groups). Study plots are grouped in four blocks in parallel to the river in order to account for any effect of a gradient in abiotic soil properties. Each block contains an equal number of plots of each plant species richness and plant functional group richness level. Plots were maintained in general by bi-annual weeding and mowing. Since 2010, plot size was reduced to 5.5 x 6 m and plots were weeded three times per year. Trophic-network models were constructed for 80 of the experimental plots, and represent the ecosystem energy budget in the currency of dry-mass (g m-2 for standing stocks and g m-2 d-1 for flows). All trophic networks have the same topology, but they differ in the estimated size of the standing stock biomass of individual compartments (g m-2) and flows among the compartments (g m-2 d-1). Each trophic network contains twelve ecosystem compartments representing distinct trophic groups of the above- and belowground parts of the ecosystem (i.e., plants, soil microbial community, and above- and belowground herbivores, carnivores, omnivores, decomposers, all represented by invertebrate macro- and mesofauna) and detrital pools (i.e., surface litter and soil organic matter). Vertebrates were not considered in our study due to limitations of data availability and because the impact of resident vertebrates in our experimental system is expected to be minimal. Larger grazing vertebrates were excluded by a fence around the field site, though there was some occasional grazing by voles. Compartments are connected by 41 flows. Flows (fluxes) constitute 30 internal flows within the system, namely feeding (herbivory, predation, decomposition), excretion, mortality, and mechanical transformation of surface litter due to bioturbation plus eleven 11 external flows, i.e. one input (flows entering the system, namely carbon uptake by plants) and ten output flows (flows leaving the system, namely respiration losses). The ecosystem inflow (a flow entering the system) and outflows (flows leaving the system) represent carbon uptake and respiration losses, respectively. In the case of consumer groups, the food consumed (compartment-wide input flow) is further split into excretion (not assimilated organic material that is returned to detrital pools in the form of fecesfaeces) and assimilated organic material, which is further split into respiration (energy lost out of the system to the environment) and biomass production, which is further consumed by higher trophic levels due to predation or returned to detrital pools in the form of mortality (natural mortality or prey residues). In case of detrital pools (i.e. surface litter and soil organic matter), the input flows are in the form of excretion and mortality from the biota compartments, and output flows are in the form of feeding by decomposers and soil microorganisms (i.e. decomposition). Surface litter and soil organic matter are connected by flows in the form of burrowing (mechanical transportation) of organic material from the surface to the soil by soil fauna. Organism immigration and emigration are not considered in our study due to limited data availability. Flows were quantified using resource processing rates (i.e. the feeding rates at which material is taken from a source) multiplied with the standing biomass of the respective source compartment. To approximate resource processing rates, different approaches were used: (i) experimental measurements (namely the aboveground decomposition, fauna burial activity (bioturbation), microbial respiration, and aboveground herbivory and predation rates); (ii) allometric equations scaled by individual body mass, environmental temperature and phylogenetic group (for the above- and belowground fauna respiration rates and plant respiration); (iii) assimilation rates scaled by diet type (for quantification of belowground fauna excretion and natural mortality); (iv) literature-based rates scaled by biomass of trophic groups (for microbial mortality); and (v) mass-balance assumptions (carbon uptake, plant and aboveground fauna mortality, belowground decomposition, belowground herbivory, and belowground predation). Mass-balance assumption means that the flows are calculated assuming that resource inputs into the compartment (i.e. feeding) balance the rate at which material is lost (i.e. the sum of through excretion, respiration, predation, and natural death). We used constrained nonlinear multivariable optimization to perturb the initial flow rates estimated from the various sources. We assigned confidence ratings for each flow rate, reflecting the quality of empirical data it is based on. We then used the 'fmincon' function from Matlab's optimization toolbox, which utilizes the standard Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse approach to achieve a balanced steady state ecological network model that best reflects the collected field data. Measured data used to parameterize the trophic network models were collected mostly in the year 2010. Network-wide measures that quantify proxies for different aspects of multitrophic ecosystem functioning were calculated for each experimental plot using the 'enaR' package in R. In particular, total energy flow was measured as the sum of all flows through each ecosystem compartment. Flow uniformity was calculated as the ratio of the mean of summed flows through each individual ecosystem compartment divided by the standard deviation of these means. Total-network standing biomass was determined as the sum of standing biomass across all ecosystem compartments. Community maintenance costs were calculated as the ratio of community-wide respiration related to community-wide biomass.

Description: This data set contains measurements of standing belowground plant biomass. Data presented here is from the Main Experiment plots of a large grassland biodiversity experiment (the Jena Experiment; see further details below). In the Main experiment, 82 grassland plots of 20 x 20 m were established from a pool of 60 species belonging to four functional groups (grasses, legumes, tall and small herbs). In May 2002, varying numbers of plant species from this species pool were sown into the plots to create a gradient of plant species richness (1, 2, 4, 8, 16 and 60 species) and functional richness (1, 2, 3, 4 functional groups). Plots were maintained in general by bi-annual weeding and mowing. Since 2010, plots were weeded three times per year. Plot size was reduced to 5 x 6 m since 2010. In 2011, standing root biomass was sampled in June. Three (two in few cases because of stones) soil cores with a 3.5 cm diameter per plot were taken to 40 cm depth and pooled plot-wise. The cores were immediately stored cool until further handling. The bulk material of the pooled cores was weighed and cut with scissors to 〈 1 cm pieces. For root washing, the bulk sample was soaked in water and then repeatedly rinsed with tap water over a 0.5 mm sieve. Remaining soil particles were removed by hand. Roots were dried at 60 - 70 °C and weighed subsequently. In 2011, soil cores were separated in depth increments of 0-5, 5-10, 10-20, 20-30 and 30 - 40 cm depth and the corresponding layers were pooled plot-wise. Roots were not seperated in coarse (diameter 〉 2 mm) and fine roots and only total root biomass is shown in this dataset.