Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 306

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 104 of the 104 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Designing forest biodiversity experiments: general considerations illustrated by a new large experiment in subtropicalChina

Open access
Bruelheide, Helge, Nadrowski, Karin, Assmann, Thorsten, Bauhus, Jürgen, Both, Sabine, Buscot, François, Chen, Xiao‐Yong, Ding, Bingyang, Durka, Walter, Erfmeier, Alexandra, Gutknecht, Jessica L. M., Guo, Dali, Guo, Liang‐Dong, Härdtle, Werner, He, Jin‐Sheng, Klein, Alexandra‐Maria, Kühn, Peter, Liang, Yu, Liu, Xiaojuan, Michalski, Stefan, Niklaus, Pascal A., Pei, Kequan, Scherer‐Lorenzen, Michael, Scholten, Thomas, Schuldt, Andreas, Seidler, Gunnar, Trogisch, Stefan, von Oheimb, Goddert, Welk, Erik, Wirth, Christian, Wubet, Tesfaye, Yang, Xuefei, Yu, Mingjian, Zhang, Shouren, Zhou, Hongzhang, Fischer, Markus, Ma, Keping, Schmid, Bernhard·2014·Methods in Ecology and Evolution

Abstract

Summary: Biodiversity–ecosystem functioning (BEF) experiments address ecosystem‐level consequences of species loss by comparing communities of high species richness with communities from which species have been gradually eliminated.BEF experiments originally started with microcosms in the laboratory and with grassland ecosystems. A new frontier in experimental BEF research is manipulating tree diversity in forest ecosystems, compelling researchers to think big and comprehensively. We present and discuss some of the major issues to be considered in the design of BEF experiments with trees and illustrate these with a new forest biodiversity experiment established in subtropical C hina (X ingangshan,J iangxi P rovince) in 2009/2010. Using a pool of 40 tree species, extinction scenarios were simulated with tree richness levels of 1, 2, 4, 8 and 16 species on a total of 566 plots of 25·8 × 25·8 m each. The goal of this experiment is to estimate effects of tree and shrub species richness on carbon storage and soil erosion; therefore, the experiment was established on sloped terrain. The following important design choices were made: (i) establishing many small rather than fewer larger plots, (ii) using high planting density and random mixing of species rather than lower planting density and patchwise mixing of species, (iii) establishing a map of the initial ‘ecoscape’ to characterize site heterogeneity before the onset of biodiversity effects and (iv) manipulating tree species richness not only in random but also in trait‐oriented extinction scenarios. Data management and analysis are particularly challenging in BEF experiments with their hierarchical designs nesting individuals within‐species populations within plots within‐species compositions. Statistical analysis best proceeds by partitioning these random terms into fixed‐term contrasts, for example, species composition into contrasts for species richness and the presence of particular functional groups, which can then be tested against the remaining random variation among compositions. We conclude that forest BEF experiments provide exciting and timely research options. They especially require careful thinking to allow multiple disciplines to measure and analyse data jointly and effectively. Achieving specific research goals and synergy with previous experiments involves trade‐offs between different designs and requires manifold design decisions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/2041-210x.12126

Cites

104 of 104 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 104 references

Cited by

See all 306

Metadata

Authors
Bruelheide, H., Nadrowski, K., Assmann, T., Bauhus, J., Both, S., Buscot, F., Chen, X., Ding, B., Durka, W., Erfmeier, A., Gutknecht, J. L. M., Guo, D., Guo, L., Härdtle, W., He, J., Klein, A., Kühn, P., Liang, Y., Liu, X., Michalski, S., Niklaus, P. A., Pei, K., Scherer‐Lorenzen, M., Scholten, T., Schuldt, A., Seidler, G., Trogisch, S., von Oheimb, G., Welk, E., Wirth, C., Wubet, T., Yang, X., Yu, M., Zhang, S., Zhou, H., Fischer, M., Ma, K., & Schmid, B.
Venue
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-11-22
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
74-89
ISSN
2041-210X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2106432912
Cited by
306
References
104
FWCI
16.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Designing forest biodiversity experiments: general considerations illustrated by a new large experiment in subtropicalChina. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/2041-210x.12126
The paper
Bruelheide, H., Nadrowski, K., Assmann, T., Bauhus, J., Both, S., Buscot, F., Chen, X., Ding, B., Durka, W., Erfmeier, A., Gutknecht, J. L. M., Guo, D., Guo, L., Härdtle, W., He, J., Klein, A., Kühn, P., Liang, Y., Liu, X., . . . Schmid, B. (2014). Designing forest biodiversity experiments: general considerations illustrated by a new large experiment in subtropicalChina. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12126

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.