title: Are ecosystem services stabilized by differences among species? A test using crop pollination.
abstract: Biological diversity could enhance ecosystem service provision by increasing the mean level of services provided, and/or by providing more consistent (stable) services over space and time. Ecological theory predicts that when an ecosystem service is provided by many species, it will be stabilized against disturbance by a variety of 'stabilizing mechanisms.' However, few studies have investigated whether stabilizing mechanisms occur in real landscapes affected by human disturbance. We used two datasets on crop pollination by wild native bees to screen for and differentiate among three stabilizing mechanisms: density compensation (negative co-variance among species' abundances); response diversity (differential response to environmental variables among species); and cross-scale resilience (response to the same environmental variable at different scales by different species). In both datasets, we found response diversity and cross-scale resilience, but not density compensation. We conclude that stabilizing mechanisms may contribute to the stability of pollination services in our study areas, emphasizing the insurance value of seemingly 'redundant' species. Furthermore, the absence of density compensation that we found at the landscape scale contrasts with findings of previous small-scale experimental and modelling work, suggesting that we should not assume that density compensation will stabilize ecosystem services in real landscapes.
authors.affiliation: Department of Entomology, Rutgers, The State University, 119 Blake Hall, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA. rwinfree@rci.rutgers.edu
authors.forename: Rachael
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Winfree
authors.forename: Claire
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Kremen
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D001516:Bees / Q000502:physiology*; D044822:Biodiversity; D017753:Ecosystem; D054817:Pollination; D011156:Population Density; D013045:Species Specificity
references.citation: Oecologia. 2007 Sep;153(3):589-96
references.pmid: 17483965
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Mar 13;104(11):4461-6
references.pmid: 17360546
references.citation: Ecol Lett. 2007 Apr;10(4):299-314
references.pmid: 17355569
references.citation: Am Nat. 2000 Nov;156(5):534-552
references.pmid: 29587515
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Feb 16;96(4):1463-8
references.pmid: 9990046
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Dec 24;99(26):16812-6
references.pmid: 12486221
references.citation: Science. 2007 Jul 6;317(5834):58-62
references.pmid: 17615333
references.citation: Nature. 2006 Jun 1;441(7093):629-32
references.pmid: 16738658
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Sep 12;103(37):13890-5
references.pmid: 16940358
references.citation: Ecol Lett. 2006 Oct;9(10):1146-56
references.pmid: 16972878
references.citation: Ecol Lett. 2005 May;8(5):468-79
references.pmid: 21352450
references.citation: Am Nat. 1998 Mar;151(3):277-82
references.pmid: 18811358
references.citation: Ecol Lett. 2007 Nov;10(11):1105-13
references.pmid: 17877737
references.citation: Science. 2005 Nov 11;310(5750):1029-31
references.pmid: 16239439
references.citation: Ecol Lett. 2005 May;8(5):538-47
references.pmid: 21352458
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2003 May 7;270(1518):955-61
references.pmid: 12803911
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Feb 7;274(1608):303-13
references.pmid: 17164193
references.citation: Ecol Lett. 2008 May;11(5):499-515
references.pmid: 18294214
references.citation: Science. 2004 Nov 12;306(5699):1177-80
references.pmid: 15539601
references.citation: Am Nat. 1998 Mar;151(3):264-76
references.pmid: 18811357
references.citation: Nature. 2004 May 13;429(6988):174-7
references.pmid: 15141210