Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,358

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Relationship Between Productivity and Species Richness

Waide, R. B., Willig, M. R., Steiner, C. F., Mittelbach, G., Gough, L., Dodson, S. I., Juday, G. P., Parmenter, R.·1999·Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics

Abstract

▪ Abstract Recent overviews have suggested that the relationship between species richness and productivity (rate of conversion of resources to biomass per unit area per unit time) is unimodal (hump-shaped). Most agree that productivity affects species richness at large scales, but unanimity is less regarding underlying mechanisms. Recent studies have examined the possibility that variation in species richness within communities may influence productivity, leading to an exploration of the relative effect of alterations in species number per se as contrasted to the addition of productive species. Reviews of the literature concerning deserts, boreal forests, tropical forests, lakes, and wetlands lead to the conclusion that extant data are insufficient to conclusively resolve the relationship between diversity and productivity, or that patterns are variable with mechanisms equally varied and complex. A more comprehensive survey of the ecological literature uncovered approximately 200 relationships, of which 30% were unimodal, 26% were positive linear, 12% were negative linear, and 32% were not significant. Categorization of studies with respect to geographic extent, ecological extent, taxonomic hierarchy, or energetic basis of productivity similarly yielded a heterogeneous distribution of relationships. Theoretical and empirical approaches increasingly suggest scale-dependence in the relationship between species richness and productivity; consequently, synthetic understanding may be contingent on explicit considerations of scale in analytical studies of productivity and diversity.

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 · 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.30.1.257

Cites

9 of 9 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 9 references

Cited by

See all 1,358

Metadata

Authors
Waide, R. B., Willig, M. R., Steiner, C. F., Mittelbach, G., Gough, L., Dodson, S. I., Juday, G. P., & Parmenter, R.
Venue
Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics
Published
1999-11
Volume
30
Issue
1
Pages
257-300
ISSN
0066-4162 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2111537201
Cited by
1,358
References
9
FWCI
40.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: The Relationship Between Productivity and Species Richness. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.30.1.257
The paper
Waide, R. B., Willig, M. R., Steiner, C. F., Mittelbach, G., Gough, L., Dodson, S. I., Juday, G. P., & Parmenter, R. (1999). The Relationship Between Productivity and Species Richness. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.30.1.257

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.