The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantifying the Contribution of Organisms to the Provision of Ecosystem Services
Open accessAbstract
Research on ecosystem services has grown rapidly over the last decade. Two conceptual frameworks have been published to guide ecological assessments of organisms that deliver services ' the concepts of service-providing units (SPUs) and ecosystem service providers(ESPs). Here, we unite these frameworks as the SPU-ESP continuum to offer a coherent conceptual approach for synthesising the latest developments in ecosystem service research and directing future studies at all levels of organisation. In particular, we show how the service provider concept can be applied at the population, functional group and community level. We strongly emphasise the need to identify and quantify the organisms and their characteristics (e.g.,functional traits) that provide services, and to assess service provision relative to the demands of human beneficiaries. Key examples from the literature are used to illustrate the new approach and highlight gaps in knowledge particularly in relation to the impact of species interactions and ecosystem dynamics on service provision.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems
Pharo, E., & Daily, G. C. (1998) · The Bryologist · doi:10.2307/3244191 · Cited by 5,261
Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: Current knowledge and future challenges
Loreau, M., Naeem, S., Inchausti, P., Bengtsson, J., Grime, J. P., Hector, A., Hooper, D. U., Huston, M. A., Raffaelli, D., Schmid, B., et al. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1064088 · Cited by 4,649
Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant biodiversity, ecosystem variability and productivity
van der Heijden, M. G. A., Klironomos, J. N., Ursic, M., Moutoglis, P., Streitwolf-Engel, R., Boller, T., Wiemken, A., & Sanders, I. R. (1998) · Nature · doi:10.1038/23932 · Cited by 3,553
Hanski, L. (1999) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198540663.001.0001 · Cited by 3,535
Lavorel, S., & Garnier, E. (2002) · Functional Ecology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2435.2002.00664.x · Cited by 3,452
Self-citationVive la différence: plant functional diversity matters to ecosystem processes
Dı́az, S., & Cabido, M. (2001) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(01)02283-2 · Cited by 3,306
Self-citationEcosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment
(2004) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.41-4645 · Cited by 2,846
Quantifying the evidence for biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning and services
Balvanera, P., Pfisterer, A. B., Buchmann, N., He, J., Nakashizuka, T., Raffaelli, D., & Schmid, B. (2006) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00963.x · Cited by 2,650
Biodiversity and ecosystem stability in a decade-long grassland experiment
Tilman, D., Reich, P. B., & Knops, J. M. H. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature04742 · Cited by 2,311
What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units
Boyd, J., & Banzhaf, S. (2007) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.01.002 · Cited by 2,143
Cited by
The IPBES Conceptual Framework — connecting nature and people
Díaz, S., Demissew, S., Carabias, J., Joly, C., Lonsdale, M., Ash, N., Larigauderie, A., Adhikari, J. R., Arico, S., Báldi, A., et al. (2015) · Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability · doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2014.11.002 · Cited by 2,617
Self-citationA meta-analysis of crop pest and natural enemy response to landscape complexity
Chaplin‐Kramer, R., O’Rourke, M. E., Blitzer, E. J., & Kremen, C. (2011) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01642.x · Cited by 1,037
Self-citationGomiero, T., Pimentel, D., & Paoletti, M. G. (2011) · Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences · doi:10.1080/07352689.2011.554355 · Cited by 915
Maes, J., Liquete, C., Teller, A., Erhard, M., Paracchini, M. L., Barredo, J. I., Grizzetti, B., Cardoso, A., Somma, F., Petersen, J.-E., et al. (2016) · Ecosystem Services · doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.10.023 · Cited by 561
Plant diversity enhances provision of ecosystem services: A new synthesis
Quijas, S., Schmid, B., & Balvanera, P. (2010) · Basic and Applied Ecology · doi:10.1016/j.baae.2010.06.009 · Cited by 240
Metadata
- Authors
- Luck, G. W., Harrington, R., Harrison, P. A., Kremen, C., Berry, P. M., Bugter, R., Dawson, T. P., de Bello, F., Díaz, S., Feld, C. K., Haslett, J. R., Hering, D., Kontogianni, A., Lavorel, S., Rounsevell, M., Samways, M. J., Sandin, L., Settele, J., Sykes, M. T., van den Hove, S., Vandewalle, M., & Zobel, M.
- Venue
- BioScience
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2009-03
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 223-235
- ISSN
- 0006-3568 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-3244
- OpenAlex
- W2115415124
- Cited by
- 375
- References
- 57
- FWCI
- 25.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Quantifying the Contribution of Organisms to the Provision of Ecosystem Services. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1525/bio.2009.59.3.7
- The paper
- Luck, G. W., Harrington, R., Harrison, P. A., Kremen, C., Berry, P. M., Bugter, R., Dawson, T. P., de Bello, F., Díaz, S., Feld, C. K., Haslett, J. R., Hering, D., Kontogianni, A., Lavorel, S., Rounsevell, M., Samways, M. J., Sandin, L., Settele, J., Sykes, M. T., . . . Zobel, M. (2009). Quantifying the Contribution of Organisms to the Provision of Ecosystem Services. BioScience. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2009.59.3.7
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.
