Linking changes in species composition and biomass in a globally distributed grassland experiment

Global change drivers, such as anthropogenic nutrient inputs, are increasing globally. Nutrient deposition simultaneously alters plant biodiversity, species composition and ecosystem processes like aboveground biomass production. These changes are underpinned by species extinction, colonisation and shifting relative abundance. Here, we use the Price equation to quantify and link the contributions of species that are lost, gained or that persist to change in aboveground biomass in 59 experimental grassland sites. Under ambient (control) conditions, compositional and biomass turnover was high, and losses (i.e. local extinctions) were balanced by gains (i.e. colonisation). Under fertilisation, the decline in species richness resulted from increased species loss and decreases in species gained. Biomass increase under fertilisation resulted mostly from species that persist and to a lesser extent from species gained. Drivers of ecological change can interact relatively independently with diversity, composition and ecosystem processes and functions such as aboveground biomass due to the individual contributions of species lost, gained or persisting.EEA Santa CruzFil: Ladouceur, Emma. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv); AlemaniaFil: Ladouceur, Emma. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ. Department of Physiological Diversity; AlemaniaFil: Ladouceur, Emma. University of Leipzig. Department of Biology; AlemaniaFil: Ladouceur, Emma. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg. Institute of Computer Science; AlemaniaFil: Blowes, Shane A. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv); AlemaniaFil: Blowes, Shane A. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg. Institute of Computer Science; AlemaniaFil: Chase, Jonathan M. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv); AlemaniaFil: Chase, Jonathan M. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg. Institute of Computer Science; AlemaniaFil: Clark, Adam T. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv); AlemaniaFil: Clark, Adam T. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ. Department of Physiological Diversity; AlemaniaFil: Clark, Adam T. Karl-Franzens University of Graz. Institute of Biology; Austria.Fil: Garbowski, Magda. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv); AlemaniaFil: Garbowski, Magda. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ. Department of Physiological Diversity; AlemaniaFil: Alberti, Juan. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras. Laboratorio de Ecología. Mar del Plata; Argentina.Fil: Alberti, Juan. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina.Fil: Arnillas, Carlos Alberto. University of Toronto. Department of Physical and Environmental Sciences; Canadá.Fil: Bakker, Jonathan D. University of Washington. School of Environmental and Forest Sciences; Estados UnidosFil: Barrio, Isabel C. Agricultural University of Iceland. Faculty of Environmental and Forest Sciences; IslandiaFil: Bharath, Siddharth. Atria University; India.Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina.Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina.Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina.Fil: Harpole, Stanley. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv); AlemaniaFil: Harpole, Stanley. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ. Department of Physiological Diversity; AlemaniaMartin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg. Institute of Computer Science; Alemani

Nutrient enrichment increases invertebrate herbivory and pathogen damage in grasslands

1- Plant damage by invertebrate herbivores and pathogens influences the dynamics of grassland ecosystems, but anthropogenic changes in nitrogen and phosphorus availability can modify these relationships. 2- Using a globally distributed experiment, we describe leaf damage on 153 plant taxa from 27 grasslands worldwide, under ambient conditions and with experimentally elevated nitrogen and phosphorus. 3- Invertebrate damage significantly increased with nitrogen addition, especially in grasses and non-leguminous forbs. Pathogen damage increased with nitrogen in grasses and legumes but not forbs. Effects of phosphorus were generally weaker. Damage was higher in grasslands with more precipitation, but climatic conditions did not change effects of nutrients on leaf damage. On average, invertebrate damage was relatively higher on legumes and pathogen damage was relatively higher on grasses. Community-weighted mean damage reflected these functional group patterns, with no effects of N on community-weighted pathogen damage (due to opposing responses of grasses and forbs) but stronger effects of N on community-weighted invertebrate damage (due to consistent responses of grasses and forbs). 4- Synthesis. As human-induced inputs of nitrogen and phosphorus continue to increase, understanding their impacts on invertebrate and pathogen damage becomes increasingly important. Our results demonstrate that eutrophication frequently increases plant damage and that damage increases with precipitation across a wide array of grasslands. Invertebrate and pathogen damage in grasslands is likely to increase in the future, with potential consequences for plant, invertebrate and pathogen communities, as well as the transfer of energy and nutrients across trophic levels.EEA Santa CruzFil: Ebeling, Anne. University of Jena. Institute of Ecology and Evolution; AlemaniaFil: Strauss, Alex T. University of Minnesota. Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior; Estados UnidosFil: Strauss, Alex T. University of Georgia. Odum School of Ecology; Estados UnidosFil: Adler, Peter B. Utah State University. Department of Wildland Resources and the Ecology Center; Estados UnidosFil: Arnillas, Carlos Alberto. University of Toronto —Scarborough. Department of Physical and Environmental Sciences; CanadáFil: Barrio, Isabel C. Agricultural University of Iceland. Faculty of Environmental and Forest Sciences; IslandiaFil: Biederman, Lori A. Iowa State University. Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Organismal Biology; Estados UnidosFil. Borer, Elizabeth T. University of Minnesota. Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior; Estados UnidosFil: Bugalho, Miguel N. University of Lisbon. Centre for Applied Ecology (CEABN-InBIO). School of Agriculture; Portugal.Fil: Caldeira, Maria C. University of Lisbon. Forest Research Centre. School of Agriculture; Portugal.Fil: Cadotte, Marc W. University of Toronto Scarborough. Department of Biological Sciences; CanadáFil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina.Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina.Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina.Fil: Blumenthal, Dana M. USDA-ARS, Rangeland Resources & Systems Research Unit; Estados Unido

Linking changes in species composition and biomass in a globally distributed grassland experiment

Global change drivers, such as anthropogenic nutrient inputs, are increasing globally. Nutrient deposition simultaneously alters plant biodiversity, species composition and ecosystem processes like aboveground biomass production. These changes are underpinned by species extinction, colonisation and shifting relative abundance. Here, we use the Price equation to quantify and link the contributions of species that are lost, gained or that persist to change in aboveground biomass in 59 experimental grassland sites. Under ambient (control) conditions, compositional and biomass turnover was high, and losses (i.e. local extinctions) were balanced by gains (i.e. colonisation). Under fertilisation, the decline in species richness resulted from increased species loss and decreases in species gained. Biomass increase under fertilisation resulted mostly from species that persist and to a lesser extent from species gained. Drivers of ecological change can interact relatively independently with diversity, composition and ecosystem processes and functions such as aboveground biomass due to the individual contributions of species lost, gained or persisting.Fil: Ladouceur, Emma. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; Alemania. Universitat Leipzig; Alemania. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; AlemaniaFil: Blowes, Shane A.. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; Alemania. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; AlemaniaFil: Chase, Jonathan M.. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; Alemania. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; AlemaniaFil: Clark, Adam T.. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; Alemania. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; Alemania. University of Graz; AustriaFil: Garbowski, Magda. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; Alemania. Universitat Leipzig; AlemaniaFil: Alberti, Juan. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras; ArgentinaFil: Arnillas, Carlos Alberto. University of Toronto; CanadáFil: Bakker, Jonathan. University of Washington; Estados UnidosFil: Barrio, Isabel C.. Agricultural University of Iceland; IslandiaFil: Bharath, Siddharth. Atria University; IndiaFil: Borer, Elizabeth. University of Minnesota; Estados UnidosFil: Brudvig, Lars A.. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Cadotte, Marc W.. University of Toronto; CanadáFil: Chen, Qingqing. Peking University; ChinaFil: Collins, Scott L.. University of New Mexico; Estados UnidosFil: Dickman, Christopher R.. The University Of Sydney; AustraliaFil: Donohue, Ian. Trinity College Dublin; IrlandaFil: Du, Guozhen. Lanzhou University; ChinaFil: Ebeling, Anne. Universitat Jena; AlemaniaFil: Eisenhauer, Nico. Martin Luther University Halle—Wittenberg; Alemania. German Centre For Integrative Biodiversity Research (idiv) Halle-jena-leipzig; AlemaniaFil: Fay, Philip A.. USDA-ARS Grassland Soil and Water Research Lab; Estados UnidosFil: Hagenah, Nicole. University Of Pretoria; SudáfricaFil: Hautier, Yann. University of Utrecht; Países BajosFil: Jentsch, Anke. University of Bayreuth; AlemaniaFil: Jónsdóttir, Ingibjörg S.. University of Iceland; IslandiaFil: Komatsu, Kimberly J.. Smithsonian Environmental Research Center; Estados UnidosFil: MacDougall, Andrew. University of Guelph; CanadáFil: Martina, Jason P.. Texas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Moore, Joslin L.. Arthur Rylah Institute For Environmental Research; Australia. Monash University; AustraliaFil: Morgan, John W.. La Trobe University; AustraliaFil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentin

Negative effects of nitrogen override positive effects of phosphorus on grassland legumes worldwide

Anthropogenic nutrient enrichment is driving global biodiversity decline and modifying ecosystem functions. Theory suggests that plant functional types that fix atmospheric nitrogen have a competitive advantage in nitrogen-poor soils, but lose this advantage with increasing nitrogen supply. By contrast, the addition of phosphorus, potassium, and other nutrients may benefit such species in low-nutrient environments by enhancing their nitrogen-fixing capacity. We present a global-scale experiment confirming these predictions for nitrogen-fixing legumes (Fabaceae) across 45 grasslands on six continents. Nitrogen addition reduced legume cover, richness, and biomass, particularly in nitrogen-poor soils, while cover of non–nitrogen-fixing plants increased. The addition of phosphorous, potassium, and other nutrients enhanced legume abundance, but did not mitigate the negative effects of nitrogen addition. Increasing nitrogen supply thus has the potential to decrease the diversity and abundance of grassland legumes worldwide regardless of the availability of other nutrients, with consequences for biodiversity, food webs, ecosystem resilience, and genetic improvement of protein-rich agricultural plant species.DATA AVAILABILITY : Plant, PAR, climate, and soil nitrogen data have been deposited in the Environmental Data Initiative (EDI) repository (https://portal.edirepository.org/nis/mapbrowse?packageid=edi.838.1) (83). Source data are provided with this paper.This work was generated using data from the Nutrient Network (https://nutnet.org/) experiment, funded at the site scale by individual researchers. Coordination and data management were supported by funding to E.T.B. and E.W.S. from the NSF Research Coordination Network (NSF-DEB-1042132) and Long-Term Ecological Research (NSF-DEB-1234162 to Cedar Creek Long-Term Ecological Research) programs, and the Institute on the Environment (DG-0001-13). We also thank the Minnesota Supercomputer Institute for hosting project data and the Institute of the Environment for hosting Network meetings. P.M.T. was supported by an Argentine Research Council fellowship (Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas) and the Australian Endeavour Programme.https://www.pnas.orghj2022Mammal Research InstituteZoology and Entomolog

Linking changes in species composition and biomass in a globally distributed grassland experiment

Global change drivers, such as anthropogenic nutrient inputs, are increasing globally. Nutrient deposition simultaneously alters plant biodiversity, species composition and ecosystem processes like aboveground biomass production. These changes are underpinned by species extinction, colonisation and shifting relative abundance. Here, we use the Price equation to quantify and link the contributions of species that are lost, gained or that persist to change in aboveground biomass in 59 experimental grassland sites. Under ambient (control) conditions, compositional and biomass turnover was high, and losses (i.e. local extinctions) were balanced by gains (i.e. colonisation). Under fertilisation, the decline in species richness resulted from increased species loss and decreases in species gained. Biomass increase under fertilisation resulted mostly from species that persist and to a lesser extent from species gained. Drivers of ecological change can interact relatively independently with diversity, composition and ecosystem processes and functions such as aboveground biomass due to the individual contributions of species lost, gained or persisting

Compositional variation in grassland plant communities

Human activities are altering ecological communities around the globe. Understanding the implications of these changes requires that we consider the composition of those communities. However, composition can be summarized by many metrics which in turn are influenced by different ecological processes. For example, incidence-based metrics strongly reflect species gains or losses, while abundance-based metrics are minimally affected by changes in the abundance of small or uncommon species. Furthermore, metrics might be correlated with different predictors. We used a globally distributed experiment to examine variation in species composition within 60 grasslands on six continents. Each site had an identical experimental and sampling design: 24 plots × 4 years. We expressed compositional variation within each site—not across sites—using abundance- and incidence-based metrics of the magnitude of dissimilarity (Bray–Curtis and Sorensen, respectively), abundance- and incidence-based measures of the relative importance of replacement (balanced variation and species turnover, respectively), and species richness at two scales (per plot-year [alpha] and per site [gamma]). Average compositional variation among all plot-years at a site was high and similar to spatial variation among plots in the pretreatment year, but lower among years in untreated plots. For both types of metrics, most variation was due to replacement rather than nestedness. Differences among sites in overall within-site compositional variation were related to several predictors. Environmental heterogeneity (expressed as the CV of total aboveground plant biomass in unfertilized plots of the site) was an important predictor for most metrics. Biomass production was a predictor of species turnover and of alpha diversity but not of other metrics. Continentality (measured as annual temperature range) was a strong predictor of Sorensen dissimilarity. Metrics of compositional variation are moderately correlated: knowing the magnitude of dissimilarity at a site provides little insight into whether the variation is driven by replacement processes. Overall, our understanding of compositional variation at a site is enhanced by considering multiple metrics simultaneously. Monitoring programs that explicitly incorporate these implications, both when designing sampling strategies and analyzing data, will have a stronger ability to understand the compositional variation of systems and to quantify the impacts of human activities

Compositional variation in grassland plant communities

Human activities are altering ecological communities around the globe. Understanding the implications of these changes requires that we consider the composition of those communities. However, composition can be summarized by many metrics which in turn are influenced by different ecological processes. For example, incidence-based metrics strongly reflect species gains or losses, while abundance-based metrics are minimally affected by changes in the abundance of small or uncommon species. Furthermore, metrics might be correlated with different predictors. We used a globally distributed experiment to examine variation in species composition within 60 grasslands on six continents. Each site had an identical experimental and sampling design: 24 plots × 4 years. We expressed compositional variation within each site—not across sites—using abundance- and incidence-based metrics of the magnitude of dissimilarity (Bray–Curtis and Sorensen, respectively), abundance- and incidence-based measures of the relative importance of replacement (balanced variation and species turnover, respectively), and species richness at two scales (per plot-year [alpha] and per site [gamma]). Average compositional variation among all plot-years at a site was high and similar to spatial variation among plots in the pretreatment year, but lower among years in untreated plots. For both types of metrics, most variation was due to replacement rather than nestedness. Differences among sites in overall within-site compositional variation were related to several predictors. Environmental heterogeneity (expressed as the CV of total aboveground plant biomass in unfertilized plots of the site) was an important predictor for most metrics. Biomass production was a predictor of species turnover and of alpha diversity but not of other metrics. Continentality (measured as annual temperature range) was a strong predictor of Sorensen dissimilarity. Metrics of compositional variation are moderately correlated: knowing the magnitude of dissimilarity at a site provides little insight into whether the variation is driven by replacement processes. Overall, our understanding of compositional variation at a site is enhanced by considering multiple metrics simultaneously. Monitoring programs that explicitly incorporate these implications, both when designing sampling strategies and analyzing data, will have a stronger ability to understand the compositional variation of systems and to quantify the impacts of human activities.Fil: Bakker, Jonathan. University of Washington; Estados UnidosFil: Price, Jodi N.. Charles Sturt University; AustraliaFil: Henning, Jeremiah A.. University of Minnesota; Estados Unidos. University of South Alabama; Estados UnidosFil: Batzer, Evan E.. University of California at Davis; Estados UnidosFil: Ohlert, Timothy. University of New Mexico; Estados UnidosFil: Wainwright, Claire E.. University of Washington; Estados UnidosFil: Adler, Peter. State University of Utah; Estados UnidosFil: Alberti, Juan. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras; ArgentinaFil: Arnillas, Carlos Alberto. University of Toronto; CanadáFil: Biederman, Lori A.. Iowa State University; Estados UnidosFil: Borer, Elizabeth. University of Minnesota; Estados UnidosFil: Brudvig, Lars A.. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Buckley, Yvonne M.. Trinity College Dublin; IrlandaFil: Bugalho, Miguel N.. Universidade de Lisboa; PortugalFil: Cadotte, Marc W.. University of Toronto; CanadáFil: Caldeira, Maria C.. Universidade de Lisboa; PortugalFil: Catford, Jane A.. Kings College London (kcl);Fil: Qingqing, Chen. Peking University; ChinaFil: Crawley, Michael J.. Imperial College. London Institute Of Medical Sciences.;Fil: Daleo, Pedro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras; ArgentinaFil: Dickman, Chris R.. University of Sydney; AustraliaFil: Donohue, Ian. Trinity College Dublin; IrlandaFil: DuPre, Mary Ellyn. Mpg Ranch; Estados UnidosFil: Eisenhauer, Nico. German Centre For Integrative Biodiversity Research; Alemania. Universitat Leipzig; AlemaniaFil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria; ArgentinaFil: Roscher, Christiane. German Centre For Integrative Biodiversity Research; AlemaniaFil: Tedder, Michelle. University Of Kwazulu-natal; SudáfricaFil: Veen, G. F.. Netherlands Institute Of Ecology; Países BajosFil: Virtanen, Risto. University Of Oulu; FinlandiaFil: Wardle, Glenda M.. The University Of Sydney; Australi

Negative effects of nitrogen override positive effects of phosphorus on grassland legumes worldwide

Anthropogenic nutrient enrichment is driving global biodiversity decline and modifying ecosystem functions. Theory suggests that plant functional types that fix atmospheric nitrogen have a competitive advantage in nitrogen-poor soils, but lose this advantage with increasing nitrogen supply. By contrast, the addition of phosphorus, potassium, and other nutrients may benefit such species in lownutrient environments by enhancing their nitrogen-fixing capacity. We present a global-scale experiment confirming these predictions for nitrogen-fixing legumes (Fabaceae) across 45 grasslands on six continents. Nitrogen addition reduced legume cover, richness, and biomass, particularly in nitrogen-poor soils, while cover of non-nitrogenfixing plants increased. The addition of phosphorous, potassium, and other nutrients enhanced legume abundance, but did not mitigate the negative effects of nitrogen addition. Increasing nitrogen supply thus has the potential to decrease the diversity and abundance of grassland legumes worldwide regardless of the availability of other nutrients, with consequences for biodiversity, food webs, ecosystem resilience, and genetic improvement of protein-rich agricultural plant species.</p

Negative effects of nitrogen override positive effects of phosphorus on grassland legumes worldwide

Anthropogenic nutrient enrichment is driving global biodiversity decline and modifying ecosystem functions. Theory suggests that plant functional types that fix atmospheric nitrogen have a competitive advantage in nitrogen-poor soils, but lose this advantage with increasing nitrogen supply. By contrast, the addition of phosphorus, potassium, and other nutrients may benefit such species in lownutrient environments by enhancing their nitrogen-fixing capacity. We present a global-scale experiment confirming these predictions for nitrogen-fixing legumes (Fabaceae) across 45 grasslands on six continents. Nitrogen addition reduced legume cover, richness, and biomass, particularly in nitrogen-poor soils, while cover of non-nitrogenfixing plants increased. The addition of phosphorous, potassium, and other nutrients enhanced legume abundance, but did not mitigate the negative effects of nitrogen addition. Increasing nitrogen supply thus has the potential to decrease the diversity and abundance of grassland legumes worldwide regardless of the availability of other nutrients, with consequences for biodiversity, food webs, ecosystem resilience, and genetic improvement of protein-rich agricultural plant species

Evolutionary history of grazing and resources determine herbivore exclusion effects on plant diversity

Ecological models predict that the effects of mammalian herbivore exclusion on plant diversity depend on resource availability and plant exposure to ungulate grazing over evolutionary time. Using an experiment replicated in 57 grasslands on six continents, with contrasting evolutionary history of grazing, we tested how resources (mean annual precipitation and soil nutrients) determine herbivore exclusion effects on plant diversity, richness and evenness. Here we show that at sites with a long history of ungulate grazing, herbivore exclusion reduced plant diversity by reducing both richness and evenness and the responses of richness and diversity to herbivore exclusion decreased with mean annual precipitation. At sites with a short history of grazing, the effects of herbivore exclusion were not related to precipitation but differed for native and exotic plant richness. Thus, plant species’ evolutionary history of grazing continues to shape the response of the world’s grasslands to changing mammalian herbivory.Fil: Price, Jodi N.. Charles Sturt University; AustraliaFil: Sitters, Judith. University of Agriculture Wageningen; Países Bajos. Vrije Unviversiteit Brussel; BélgicaFil: Ohlert, Timothy. University of New Mexico. Department of Biology; Estados UnidosFil: Tognetti, Pedro Maximiliano. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Métodos Cuantitativos y Sistemas de Información; ArgentinaFil: Brown, Cynthia S.. State University of Colorado - Fort Collins; Estados UnidosFil: Seabloom, Eric. University of Minnesota; Estados UnidosFil: Borer, Elizabeth. University of Minnesota; Estados UnidosFil: Prober, Suzanne M.. CSIRO Exploration and Mining; AustraliaFil: Bakker, Elisabeth S.. Netherlands Institute of Ecology; Países BajosFil: MacDougall, Andrew S.. University of Guelph; CanadáFil: Yahdjian, María Laura. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura; ArgentinaFil: Gruner, Daniel S.. University of Maryland; Estados UnidosFil: Olde Venterink, Harry. Vrije Unviversiteit Brussel; BélgicaFil: Barrio, Isabel C.. Agricultural University of Iceland; IslandiaFil: Graff, Barbara Pamela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura; ArgentinaFil: Bagchi, Sumanta. Indian Institute of Science; IndiaFil: Arnillas, Carlos Alberto. University of Toronto; CanadáFil: Bakker, Jonathan. University of Washington; Estados UnidosFil: Blumenthal, Dana M.. USDA Agricultural Research Service; Estados UnidosFil: Boughton, Elizabeth H.. Buck Island Ranch; Estados UnidosFil: Brudvig, Lars A.. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Bugalho, Miguel N.. Universidade Nova de Lisboa; PortugalFil: Cadotte, Marc W.. University of Toronto; CanadáFil: Caldeira, Maria C.. Universidade Nova de Lisboa; PortugalFil: Dickman, Chris R.. University of Technology Sydney; AustraliaFil: Donohue, Ian. Trinity College Dublin; IrlandaFil: Grégory, Sonnier. Buck Island Ranch; Estados UnidosFil: Hautier, Yann. Utrecht University; Países BajosFil: Jónsdóttir, Ingibjörg S.. University of Iceland; IslandiaFil: Lannes, Luciola S.. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasi