@article {6163, title = {Do trade-offs govern plant species{\textquoteright} responses to different global change treatments?}, journal = {Ecology}, volume = {103}, year = {2022}, pages = {e3626}, keywords = {LTER-KNZ}, issn = {0012-9658}, doi = {10.1002/ecy.3626}, url = {https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecy.3626}, author = {Langley, J. Adam and Grman, Emily and K.R. Wilcox and M.L. Avolio and Kimberly J. Komatsu and Collins, Scott L. and Koerner, S.E. and M. D. Smith and Baldwin, Andrew H. and Bowman, William and Chiariello, Nona and Eskelinen, Anu and Harmens, Harry and Hovenden, Mark and Klanderud, Kari and McCulley, Rebecca L. and Onipchenko, Vladimir G. and Robinson, Clare H. and K.N. Suding} } @article {6125, title = {Making sense of multivariate community responses in global change experiments}, journal = {Ecosphere}, volume = {13}, year = {2022}, pages = {e4249}, keywords = {LTER-KNZ}, doi = {10.1002/ecs2.4249}, url = {https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecs2.4249}, author = {M.L. Avolio and Kimberly J. Komatsu and Koerner, S.E. and Grman, Emily and Isbell, Forest and Johnson, David S. and K.R. Wilcox and Alatalo, Juha M. and Baldwin, Andrew H. and Beierkuhnlein, Carl and Britton, Andrea J. and Foster, Bryan L. and Harmens, Harry and Kern, Christel C. and Li, Wei and McLaren, Jennie R. and Reich, Peter B. and Souza, Lara and Yu, Qiang and Zhang, Yunhai} } @article {5968, title = {Determinants of community compositional change are equally affected by global change}, journal = {Ecology Letters}, volume = {24}, year = {2021}, pages = {1892-1904}, abstract = {

Global change is impacting plant community composition, but the mechanisms underlying these changes are unclear. Using a dataset of 58 global change experiments, we tested the five fundamental mechanisms of community change: changes in evenness and richness, reordering, species gains and losses. We found 71\% of communities were impacted by global change treatments, and 88\% of communities that were exposed to two or more global change drivers were impacted. Further, all mechanisms of change were equally likely to be affected by global change treatments\—species losses and changes in richness were just as common as species gains and reordering. We also found no evidence of a progression of community changes, for example, reordering and changes in evenness did not precede species gains and losses. We demonstrate that all processes underlying plant community composition changes are equally affected by treatments and often occur simultaneously, necessitating a wholistic approach to quantifying community changes.

}, keywords = {LTER-KNZ}, doi = {10.1111/ele.13824}, url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ele.13824}, author = {M.L. Avolio and Kimberly J. Komatsu and S.L Collins and Grman, Emily and Koerner, S.E. and Tredennick, A.T. and Wilcox, K.R. and Baer, S.G. and E.H. Boughton and Britton, Andrea J. and Foster, Bryan and Gough, Laura and Hovenden, Mark and Isbell, Forest and Jentsch, Anke and Johnson, David S. and Knapp, Alan K. and Kreyling, Juergen and Langley, J. Adam and Lortie, Christopher and McCulley, Rebecca L. and McLaren, Jennie R. and Reich, Peter B. and Seabloom, Eric W. and Smith, Melinda D. and Suding, Katharine N. and Suttle, K. Blake and Tognetti, Pedro M.}, editor = {Anderson, Marti} } @article {KNZ001965, title = {Global change effects on plant communities are magnified by time and the number of global change factors imposed}, journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences}, volume = {116}, year = {2019}, pages = {17867-17873}, abstract = {

Global change drivers (GCDs) are expected to alter community structure and consequently, the services that ecosystems provide. Yet, few experimental investigations have examined effects of GCDs on plant community structure across multiple ecosystem types, and those that do exist present conflicting patterns. In an unprecedented global synthesis of over 100 experiments that manipulated factors linked to GCDs, we show that herbaceous plant community responses depend on experimental manipulation length and number of factors manipulated. We found that plant communities are fairly resistant to experimentally manipulated GCDs in the short term (\<10 y). In contrast, long-term (\≥10 y) experiments show increasing community divergence of treatments from control conditions. Surprisingly, these community responses occurred with similar frequency across the GCD types manipulated in our database. However, community responses were more common when 3 or more GCDs were simultaneously manipulated, suggesting the emergence of additive or synergistic effects of multiple drivers, particularly over long time periods. In half of the cases, GCD manipulations caused a difference in community composition without a corresponding species richness difference, indicating that species reordering or replacement is an important mechanism of community responses to GCDs and should be given greater consideration when examining consequences of GCDs for the biodiversity\–ecosystem function relationship. Human activities are currently driving unparalleled global changes worldwide. Our analyses provide the most comprehensive evidence to date that these human activities may have widespread impacts on plant community composition globally, which will increase in frequency over time and be greater in areas where communities face multiple GCDs simultaneously.

}, keywords = {LTER-KNZ}, doi = {10.1073/pnas.1819027116}, url = {https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2019/08/14/1819027116}, author = {Kimberly J. Komatsu and M.L. Avolio and Lemoine, Nathan P. and Isbell, Forest and Grman, Emily and Houseman, Gregory R. and Koerner, Sally E. and Johnson, D.S. and K.R. Wilcox and Juha M. Alatalo and Anderson, J.P. and Aerts, R. and S.G. Baer and Baldwin, Andrew H. and Bates, J. and Beierkuhnlein, C. and Belote, R.T. and John M. Blair and Bloor, J.M.G. and Bohlen, P.J. and Edward W. Bork and Elizabeth H. Boughton and W.D. Bowman and Britton, Andrea J. and Cahill, James F. and Chaneton, Enrique J. and Chiariello, N.R. and Cheng, Jimin. and Scott. L. Collins and Cornelissen, J.H.C. and G. Du and Eskelinen, Anu and Firn, Jennifer and Foster, B. and Gough, L. and Gross, K. and Hallett, L.M. and Han, X. and Harmens, H. and Hovenden, M.J. and Jagerbrand, A. and Jentsch, A. and Kern, Christel and Klanderud, Kari and Alan K. Knapp and Kreyling, Juergen and Li, W. and Luo, Yiqi and McCulley, R.L. and McLaren, Jennie R. and Megonigal, Patrick and J.W. Morgan and Onipchenko, Vladimir and Pennings, S.C. and Prev{\'e}y, J.S. and Price, Jodi N. and P.B. Reich and Robinson, Clare H. and Russell, L.F. and Sala, O.E. and Seabloom, E.W. and M.D. Smith and Soudzilovskaia, Nadejda A. and Souza, Lara and K.N. Suding and Suttle, B.K. and Svejcar, T. and Tilman, David and Tognetti, P. and Turkington, R. and White, S. and Xu, Zhuwen and Yahdjian, L. and Yu, Q. and Zhang, Pengfei and Zhang, Yunhai} } @article {KNZ001842, title = {Asynchrony among local communities stabilises ecosystem function of metacommunities}, journal = {Ecology Letters}, year = {2017}, abstract = {

Temporal stability of ecosystem functioning increases the predictability and reliability of ecosystem services, and understanding the drivers of stability across spatial scales is important for land management and policy decisions. We used species-level abundance data from 62 plant communities across five continents to assess mechanisms of temporal stability across spatial scales. We assessed how asynchrony (i.e. different units responding dissimilarly through time) of species and local communities stabilised metacommunity ecosystem function. Asynchrony of species increased stability of local communities, and asynchrony among local communities enhanced metacommunity stability by a wide range of magnitudes (1\–315\%); this range was positively correlated with the size of the metacommunity. Additionally, asynchronous responses among local communities were linked with species\’ populations fluctuating asynchronously across space, perhaps stemming from physical and/or competitive differences among local communities. Accordingly, we suggest spatial heterogeneity should be a major focus for maintaining the stability of ecosystem services at larger spatial scales.

}, keywords = {LTER-KNZ, Alpha diversity, alpha variability, beta diversity, Biodiversity, CoRRE data base, patchiness, Plant communities, Primary productivity, species synchrony}, doi = {10.1111/ele.12861}, url = {http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ele.12861/epdf}, author = {K.R. Wilcox and Tredennick, Andrew T. and Koerner, Sally E. and Grman, Emily and Hallett, Lauren M. and M.L. Avolio and Kimberly J. La Pierre and Houseman, Gregory R. and Isbell, Forest and Johnson, David Samuel and Juha M. Alatalo and Baldwin, Andrew H. and Edward W. Bork and Elizabeth H. Boughton and W.D. Bowman and Britton, Andrea J. and Cahill, James F. and Scott. L. Collins and G. Du and Eskelinen, Anu and Gough, Laura and Jentsch, Anke and Kern, Christel and Klanderud, Kari and Alan K. Knapp and Kreyling, Juergen and Luo, Yiqi and McLaren, Jennie R. and Megonigal, Patrick and Onipchenko, Vladimir and Prev{\'e}y, Janet and Price, Jodi N. and Robinson, Clare H. and Sala, Osvaldo E. and M.D. Smith and Soudzilovskaia, Nadejda A. and Souza, Lara and Tilman, David and White, Shannon R. and Xu, Zhuwen and Yahdjian, Laura and Yu, Qiang and Zhang, Pengfei and Zhang, Yunhai}, editor = {Gurevitch, Jessica} }