USGS · 70038029
Response to comments on "Productivity is a poor predictor of plant species richness"
Abstract
Pan et al. claim that our results actually support a strong linear positive relationship between productivity and richness, whereas Fridley et al. contend that the data support a strong humped relationship. These responses illustrate how preoccupation with bivariate patterns distracts from a deeper understanding of the multivariate mechanisms that control these important ecosystem properties.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Explore connections, maps & timelines
James B. Grace, Peter B. Adler, Eric W. Seabloom, Elizabeth T. Borer, Helmut Hillebrand, Yann Hautier, Andy Hector, W. Stanley Harpole, Lydia R. O’Halloran, T. Michael Anderson, Jonathan D. Bakker, Cynthia S. Brown, Yvonne M. Buckley, Scott L. Collins, Kathryn L. Cottingham, Michael J. Crawley, Ellen Ingman Damschen, Kendi F. Davies, Nicole M. DeCrappeo, Philip A. Fay, Jennifer Firn, Daniel S. Gruner, Nicole Hagenah, Virginia L. Jin, Kevin P. Kirkman, Johannes M.H. Knops, Kimberly J. La Pierre, John G. Lambrinos, Brett A. Melbourne, Charles E. Mitchell, Joslin L. Moore, John W. Morgan, John L. Orrock, Suzanne M. Prover, Carly J. Stevens, Peter D. Wragg, Louie H. Yang. 2012. Response to comments on "Productivity is a poor predictor of plant species richness". https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1214939
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.