↓ Skip to main content

Biodiversity effects in the wild are common and as strong as key drivers of productivity

Overview of attention for article published in Nature, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
478 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1073 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Biodiversity effects in the wild are common and as strong as key drivers of productivity
Published in
Nature, September 2017
DOI 10.1038/nature23886
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Emmett Duffy, Casey M. Godwin, Bradley J. Cardinale

Abstract

More than 500 controlled experiments have collectively suggested that biodiversity loss reduces ecosystem productivity and stability. Yet the importance of biodiversity in sustaining the world's ecosystems remains controversial, largely because of the lack of validation in nature, where strong abiotic forcing and complex interactions are assumed to swamp biodiversity effects. Here we test this assumption by analysing 133 estimates reported in 67 field studies that statistically separated the effects of biodiversity on biomass production from those of abiotic forcing. Contrary to the prevailing opinion of the previous two decades that biodiversity would have rare or weak effects in nature, we show that biomass production increases with species richness in a wide range of wild taxa and ecosystems. In fact, after controlling for environmental covariates, increases in biomass with biodiversity are stronger in nature than has previously been documented in experiments and comparable to or stronger than the effects of other well-known drivers of productivity, including climate and nutrient availability. These results are consistent with the collective experimental evidence that species richness increases community biomass production, and suggest that the role of biodiversity in maintaining productive ecosystems should figure prominently in global change science and policy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 251 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,073 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 1073 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 237 22%
Researcher 187 17%
Student > Master 139 13%
Student > Bachelor 95 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 62 6%
Other 158 15%
Unknown 195 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 385 36%
Environmental Science 296 28%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 42 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 1%
Engineering 16 1%
Other 62 6%
Unknown 256 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 234. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 January 2024.
All research outputs
#164,451
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#10,222
of 99,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,486
of 326,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#200
of 870 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 99,074 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 102.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,218 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 870 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.