This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Ampoorter, E., Barbaro, L., Jactel, H., Baeten, L., Boberg, J., Carnol, M., Castagneyrol, B., Charbonnier, Y., Dawud, S.M., Deconchat, M., Smedt, P. De, Wandeler, H. De, Guyot, V., Hättenschwiler, S., Joly, F., Koricheva, J., Milligan, H., Muys, B., Nguyen, D., Ratcliffe, S., Raulund-rasmussen, K., Scherer-lorenzen, M., Plas, F. Van Der, Keer, J. Van, Verheyen, K., Vesterdal, L., Allan, E., 2020. Tree diversity is key for promoting the diversity and abundance of forest-associated taxa in Europe 133–146, which has been published in final form at 10.1111/oik.06290. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions.
All documents in ORBi are protected by a user license.
Ampoorter, E.; Forest and Nature Lab, Campus Gontrode, Dept of Environment, Ghent Univ., Geraardsbergsesteenweg 267, Melle-Gontrode, BE-9090, Belgium
Barbaro, L.; DYNAFOR, Univ. de Toulouse, INRA, INPT, INPT-EL PURPAN, Castanet-Tolosan, France
Jactel, H.; Biogeco, INRA, Univ. de Bordeaux, Cestas, France
Baeten, L.; Forest and Nature Lab, Campus Gontrode, Dept of Environment, Ghent Univ., Geraardsbergsesteenweg 267, Melle-Gontrode, BE-9090, Belgium, CESCO, Museum national d'Histoire naturelle, CNRS, Sorbonne-Univ., Paris, France
Boberg, J.; Dept of Forest Mycology and Plant Pathology, Swedish Univ. of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden
Carnol, Monique ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département de Biologie, Ecologie et Evolution > Ecologie végétale et microbienne
Castagneyrol, B.; Biogeco, INRA, Univ. de Bordeaux, Cestas, France
Charbonnier, Y.; Biogeco, INRA, Univ. de Bordeaux, Cestas, France
Dawud, S. M.; Dept of Forestry, College of Agriculture, Wollo Univ., Dessie, Ethiopia
Deconchat, M.; DYNAFOR, Univ. de Toulouse, INRA, INPT, INPT-EL PURPAN, Castanet-Tolosan, France
De Smedt, P.; Forest and Nature Lab, Campus Gontrode, Dept of Environment, Ghent Univ., Geraardsbergsesteenweg 267, Melle-Gontrode, BE-9090, Belgium
Wandeler, H. D.; Dept of Earth and Environmental Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
Guyot, V.; DYNAFOR, Univ. de Toulouse, INRA, INPT, INPT-EL PURPAN, Castanet-Tolosan, France, Biogeco, INRA, Univ. de Bordeaux, Cestas, France
Hättenschwiler, S.; Centre of Evolutionary and Functional Ecology, UMR5175, CNRS – Univ. of Montpellier – Univ. Paul-Valéry Montpellier – EPHE, Montpellier, 1919, France
Joly, F.-X.; Biological and Environmental Sciences, Univ. of Stirling, Stirling, United Kingdom
Koricheva, J.; School of Biological Sciences, Royal Holloway Univ. of London, Egham, Surrey, United Kingdom
Milligan, H.; School of Biological Sciences, Royal Holloway Univ. of London, Egham, Surrey, United Kingdom
Muys, B.; Dept of Earth and Environmental Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
Nguyen, Diem
Ratcliffe, Sophia
Raulund-Rasmussen, K.; Dept of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, Univ. of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, Denmark
Scherer-Lorenzen, M.; Geobotany, Faculty of Biology, Univ. of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
van der Plas, F.; Dept of Systematic Botany and Functional Biodiversity, Univ. of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
Keer, J. V.; Kapelle-op-den-Bos, Belgium
Verheyen, K.; Forest and Nature Lab, Campus Gontrode, Dept of Environment, Ghent Univ., Geraardsbergsesteenweg 267, Melle-Gontrode, BE-9090, Belgium
Vesterdal, L.; Dept of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, Univ. of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, Denmark
Allan, E.; Inst. of Plant Sciences, Univ. of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
FP7 - 265171 - FUNDIVEUROPE - Functional significance of forest biodiversity in Europe FP7 - 265171 - FUNDIVEUROPE - Functional significance of forest biodiversity in Europe
Name of the research project :
European Research Council, ERC: 614839
Funders :
ERC - European Research Council [BE] CE - Commission Européenne [BE]
AllanE. et al. 2014. Interannual variation in land-use intensity enhances grassland multidiversity. – Proc. Natl Acad. Sci USA111: 308–313.
AmpoorterE. et al. 2016. Driving mechanisms of overstorey-understorey diversity relationships in European forests. – Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst.19: 21–29.
AmpoorterE. et al. 2019. Data from: tree diversity is key for promoting the diversity and abundance of forest-associated taxa in Europe. – Dryad Digital Repository, .
AugustoL. et al. 2015. Influences of evergreen gymnosperm and deciduous angiosperm tree species on the functioning of temperate and boreal forests. – Biol. Rev.90: 444–466.
BaetenL. et al. 2013. A novel comparative research platform designed to determine the functional significance of tree species diversity in European forests. – Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst.15: 281–291.
BarbaroL. et al. 2014. Bird functional diversity enhances insectivory at forest edges: a transontinental experiment. – Divers. Distrib.20: 149–159.
BarbaroL. et al. 2019. Biotic predictors complement models of bat and bird responses to climate and tree diversity in European forests. – Proc. R. Soc. B. 286. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2018.2193
BarbatiA. et al. 2007. European forest types. Categories and types for sustainable forest management reporting and policy. – European Environment Agency Technical Report 9/2006, Copenhagen.
BarbierS. et al. 2008. Influence of tree species on understory vegetation diversity and mechanisms involved – a critical review for temperate and boreal forests. – For. Ecol. Manage.254: 1–15.
BarbierS. et al. 2009. Influence of several tree traits on rainfall partitioning in temperate and boreal forests: a review. – Ann. For. Sci.66: 602–602.
BarbosaP. et al. 2009. Associational resistance and associational susceptibility: having right or wrong neighbors. – Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst.40: 1–20.
BarkmanJ. J. 1992. Canopies and microclimate of tree species mixtures. – In: CannellM. G. R. et al. (eds), The ecology of mixed-species stands of trees. Blackwell.
BassetY. et al. 2012. Arthropod diversity in a tropical forest. – Science14: 1481–1484.
BatesD. et al. 2013. Lme4: linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. – R package ver. 1.0-4.
BorerE. T. et al. 2012. Plant diversity controls arthropod biomass and temporal stability. – Ecol. Lett.15: 1457–1464.
BoulangeatI. et al. 2012. Accounting for dispersal and biotic interactions to disentangle the drivers of species distributions and their abundances. – Ecol. Lett.15: 584–593.
BrändleM.BrandlR. 2001. Species richness of insects and mites on trees: expanding Southwood. – J. Anim. Ecol.70: 194–504.
BroseU. 2003. Bottom–up control of carabid beetle communities in early successional wetlands. Mediated by vegetation structure or plant diversity? – Oecologia135: 407–413.
ButchartS. H. M. et al. 2010. Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. – Science328: 1164–1168.
CardinaleB. J. et al. 2006. Effects of biodiversity on the functioning of trophic groups and ecosystems. – Nature443: 989–992.
CarnolM.BazgirM. 2013. Nutrient return to the forest floor through litter and throughfall under 7 forest species after conversion from Norway spruce. – For. Ecol. Manage.309: 66–75.
CavardX. et al. 2011. Importance of mixedwoods for biodiversity conservation: evidence for understory plants, songbirds, soil fauna and ectomycorrhizae in northern forests. – Environ. Rev.19: 142–161.
ChamagneJ. et al. 2016. Do the rich get richer? Varying effects of tree species identity and diversity on the richness of understory taxa. – Ecology97: 2364–2373.
CharbonnierY. M. et al. 2016. Bat and bird diversity along independent gradients of latitude and tree composition in European forests. – Oecologia182: 529–537.
DiazS. et al. 2016. The global spectrum of plant form and function. – Nature529: 167–171.
DormannC. F. et al. 2013. Collinearity: a review of methids to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance. – Ecography36: 027–046.
EngelbrechtB. M. J. et al. 2007. Drought sensitivity shapes species distribution patterns in tropical forests. – Nature447: 80-U2.
FornoffF. et al. 2019. Tree diversity increases robustness of multi-trophic interactions. – Proc. Biol. Sci.13: 20182399.
GamfeldtL. et al. 2013. Higher levels of multiple ecosystem services are found in forests with more tree species. – Nat. Commun.4: 1340.
GilbertG. S. et al. 2012. Evolutionary tools for phytosanitary risk analysis: phylogenetic signal as a predictor of host range of plant pests and pathogens. – Evol. Appl.5: 869–878.
GossnerM. M. et al. 2016. Land-use intensification causes multitrophic homogenization of grassland communities. – Nature540: 266–269.
GuyotV. et al. 2016. Tree diversity reduces pest damage in mature forests across Europe. – Biol. Lett.12: 20151037.
HaddadN. M. et al. 2009. Plant species loss decreases arthropod diversity and shifts trophic structure. – Ecol. Lett.12: 1029–1039.
HobbieS. E. et al. 2006. Tree species effects on decomposition and forest floor dynamics in a common garden. – Ecology87: 2288–2297.
IzutaT. et al. 2001. Growth, net photosynthetic rate, nutrient status and secondary xylem anatomical characteristics of Fagus crenata seedlings grown in brown forest soil acidified with H2SO4 solution. – Water Air Soil Pollut.130: 1007–1012.
JenningsS. B. et al. 1999. Assessing forest canopies and understorey illumination: canopy closure, canopy cover and other measures. – Forestry72: 59–73.
JuckerT. et al. 2014. Stabilizing effects of diversity on aboveground wood production in forest ecosystems: linking patterns and processes. – Ecol. Lett.17: 1560–1569.
JulesE. S. et al. 2014. Host heterogeneity influences the impact of a non-native disease invasion on populations of a foundation tree species. – Ecosphere5: 105.
JungK. et al. 2012. Moving in three dimensions: effects of structural complexity on occurrence and activity of insectivorous bats in managed forest stands. – J. Appl. Ecol.49: 523–531.
KellerA. B. et al. 2013. Effects of canopy tree species on belowground biogeochemistry in a lowland wet tropical forest. – Soil Biol. Biochem.58: 61–69.
KennedyC. E. J.SouthwoodT. R. E. 1984. The number of species of insects associated with British trees: a re-analysis. – J. Anim. Ecol.53: 455–478.
KorenkoS. et al. 2011. Are arboreal spiders associated with particular tree canopies? – North-Western J. Zool.7: 261–269.
LalibertéE. 2014. FD: measuring functional diversity (FD) from multiple traits, and other tools for functional ecology. – R package ver. 1.0-12.
LalibertéE.LegendreP. 2010. A distance-based framework for measuring functional diversity from multiple traits. – Ecology91: 299–305.
LevineJ. M.HilleRisLambersJ. 2009. The importance of niches for the maintenance of species diversity. – Nature461: 254–258.
LindenmayerD.FranklinJ. F. 2002. Conserving forest biodiversity: a comprehensive multiscaled approach. – Island Press.
MartensS. N. et al. 2000. Spatial distributions of understory light along the grassland/forest continuum: effects of cover, height and spatial pattern of tree canopies. – Ecol. Model.126: 79–93.
MasonN. W. H. et al. 2005. Functional richness, functional evenness and functional divergence: the primary components of functional diversity. – Oikos111: 112–118.
MessierC. et al. 1998. Effects of overstory and understory vegetation on the understory light environment in mixed boreal forests. – J. Veg. Sci.9: 511–520.
MilliganH. T.KorichevaJ. 2013. Effects of tree species richness and composition on moose winter browsing damage and foraging selectivity: an experimental study. – J. Anim. Ecol.82: 739–748.
NakagawaS.SchielzethH. 2013. A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. – Methods Ecol. Evol.4: 133–142.
NguyenD. et al. 2016. Fungal disease incidence along tree diversity gradients depends on latitude in European forests. – Ecol. Evol.6: 2426–2438.
PaquetteA.MessierC. 2011. The effect of biodiversity on tree productivity: from temperate to boreal forests. – Global Ecol. Biogeogr.20: 170–180.
ParkerI. M. et al. 2015. Phylogenetic structure and host abundance drive disease pressure in communities. – Nature520: 542–544.
PetcheyO. L.GastonK. J. 2006. Functional diversity: back to basics and looking forward. – Ecol. Lett.9: 741–758.
PlathM. et al. 2012. Associational resistance and associational susceptibility: specialist herbivores show contrasting responses to tree stand diversification. – Oecologia169: 477–487.
PollastriniM. et al. 2013. Interactions and competition processes among tree species in young experimental mixed forests, assessed with chlorophyll fluorescence and leaf morphology. – Plant Biol.16: 323–331.
PottsS. G. et al. 2003. Linking bees and flowers: how do floral communities structure pollinator communities? – Ecology84: 2628–2642.
ReichP. B. et al. 2005. Linking litter calcium, earthworms and soil properties: a common garden test with 14 tree species. – Ecol. Lett.8: 811–818.
RicottaC.MorettiM. 2011. CWM and Rao's quadratic diversity: a unified framework for functional ecology. – Oecologia167: 181–188.
RobertsonM.AvilesL. 2019. Rain, predators and vegetation lushness may structure web-building spider communities along precipitation gradients. – Ecol. Entomol.44: 217–226.
RoschC. et al. 2002. Biodiversity of denitrifying and dinitrogen-fixing bacteria in an acid forest soil. – Appl. Environ. Microbiol.68: 3818–3829.
RoweE. C. et al. 2006. Fertilizer application during primary succession changes the structure of plant and herbivore communities. – Biol. Conserv.131: 510–522.
Ruiz-BenitoP. et al. 2014. Diversity increases carbon storage and tree productivity in Spanish forests. – Global Ecol. Biogeogr. – 23: 311–322.
SardansJ. et al. 2011. Factors affecting nutrient concentration and stoichiometry of forest trees in Catalonia (NE Spain). – For. Ecol. Manage.262: 2024–2034.
ScherberC. et al. 2010. Bottom–up effects of plant diversity on multitrophic interactions on a biodiversity experiment. – Nature468: 553–556.
Scherer-LorenzenM. 2014. The functional role of biodiversity in the context of global change. – In: BurslemD. et al. (eds), Forests and global change. Cambridge Univ. Press, pp. 195–238.
SchielzethH. 2010. Simple means to improve the interpretability of regression coefficients. – Methods Ecol. Evol.1: 103–113.
SchuldtA. et al. 2019. Multiple plant diversity components drive consumer communities across ecosystems. – Nat. Commun.10: 1460.
SiemannE. 1998. Experimental tests of effects of plant productivity and diversity on grassland arthropod diversity. – Ecology79: 2057–2070.
SiemannE. et al. 1998. Experimental tests of the dependence of arthropod diversity on plant diversity. – Am. Nat.152: 738–750.
SilvertownJ. 2004. Plant coexistence and the niche. – Trends Ecol. Evol.19: 605–611.
SobekS. et al. 2009. Sapling herbivory, invertebrate herbivores and predators across a natural tree diversity gradient in Germany's largest connected deciduous forest. – Oecologia160: 279–288.
SoliveresS. et al. 2016. Biodiversity at multiple trophic levels is needed for ecosystem multifunctionality. – Nature536: 456–459.
StephensD. W.KrebsJ. R. 1986. Foraging theory. – Princeton Univ. Press.
van der PlasF. et al. 2016a. Jack-of-all-trades effects drive biodiversity–ecosystem multifunctionality relationships in European forests. – Nat. Commun.7: 11109.
van der PlasF. et al. 2016b. Biotic homogenization can decrease landscape-scale forest multifunctionality. – Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA113: 3557–3562.
WangL. et al. 2010. Mechanisms linking plant species richness to foraging of a large herbivore. – J. Appl. Ecol.47: 868–875.
WhelanC. J. 2001. Foliage structure influences foraging of insectivorous forest birds: an experimental study. – Ecology82: 219–231.
WorldClim 2015. Ver. 1. – Global Climate Data, .
ZhangJ. et al. 2013. Local forest structure, climate and human disturbances determine regional distribution of boreal bird species richness in Alberta, Canada. – J. Biogeogr.40: 1131–1142.
ZhangK. et al. 2016. Plant diversity accurately predicts insect diversity in two tropical landscapes. – Mol. Biol.25: 4407–4419.
