Taxa^†

Habitat

Productivity measure

Extent^‡

Grain^§

Comments

Relationship reported by author ^{||, ¶}

Included

Relationship reported here^||

Biomass

R²

Reference^‡‡

H, S, T

Sub Sahara, Africa

Rainfall

CG

C

2.5 × 2.5^o grids

+ve

Y

+ve

0.43

(Linder 2001)

H, S, T

South Africa

Rainfall

CG

C

0.25 × 0.25^o grids

+ve

Y

+ve

0.56

(Linder 1991)

H, S, T

Woody flora, South Africa

Rainfall

CG

C

20,000 km² grids

+ve

Y

+ve

0.78

(O'Brien 1993)

VP

North America

PET

CG

C

Generic richness

+ve

Y

+ve

0.93

(Qian 1998)

A

Global

PET

CG

C

The positive relationship was found in the absence of a water deficit greater than 750 mm/y. Selecting only those relationships in which a large water deficit did not exist, was done because temperature is an inappropriate surrogate for productivity when water deficits are high

+ve

Y

+ve

(Francis and Currie 2003)

T

Tropical forest, America

Tree turnover rate

CG

F

Data reanalyzed by us: OLS P_linear< 0.004, P_quad = 0.7; Residuals normally distributed (RJ= 0.973, P > 0.1) and symmetrical; Species richness in species/500 stems

+ve

Y

+ve

0.31

(Phillips et al. 1994)

P

Catalonia, Europe

T, moisture

R

C

10 × 10 km grids

+ve

Y

+ve

(Pausas et al. 2003)

VP

Iberia

AET

R

C

+ve

Y

+ve

0.17

(Rey-Banayas and Scheiner 2002)

T

New South Wales, Australia

T

R

F

+ve

Y

+ve

(Austin et al. 1996)

T

Forest, Amazon, Columbia

Canopy height

R

F

0.1-ha plots

+ve

Y

+ve

(Duivenvoorden 1996)

T

Forest, New Zealand

T, solar radiation, moisture.

R

F/C

0.4–4-ha plots

+ve

Y

+ve

(Leathwick et al. 1998)

VP

Iberia

AET

R

F

100-m² plots

+ve

Y

+ve

0.24

(Rey-Banayas and Scheiner 2002)

T

South Ontario, Canada

Timber volume increment /yr

R

F

Restricted latitude to avoid confounding with climate; 100-m² plots

NS

Y

NS

(Schamp et al. 2003)

VP

Wisconsin, USA

NPP

R

C

Stands selected on the basis of differing species composition rather than on a randomized or systematic basis; Stands > 48.6 ha

UM

Y

UM

(Scheiner and Jones 2002)

VP

Wisconsin, USA

NPP

R

C

As above; 6-ha plots

U-S

Y

U-S

(Scheiner and Jones 2002)

H, S, T.

Deciduous forest, Uppland, Sweden

Nitrogen

R

F

10–1000-m² plots

-ve

Y

-ve

0.40

0.70

0.65

(Dupre et al. 2002)

VP

Wisconsin, USA

NPP

R

C

12–24-ha plots

-ve

Y

-ve

(Scheiner and Jones 2002)

S, H

Patagonian steppe

Water availability

R

C

Data not tested for quadratic term; 0.25-ha plots

+ve

N

-

(Jobbagy et al. 1996)

H, S, T.

Deciduous forest, Oland, Sweden

pH

R

F

pH is confounded with reduced light intensity; 1-m² plots

-ve

N

(Dupre et al. 2002)

L

Forest Estonia

Nitrogen

R

F

Not all plant species were counted, therefore, the relationship may be influenced by vascular plants replacing mosses at greater nutrient status; 1-m² plots

-ve

N

(Ingerpuu et al. 2003)

H, S, vines

Forest, Kentucky

Light-moisture-herb cover

L

F

CCA axis 1 (associated with light, moisture and herb cover) was used as an index of productivity; 0.5-m² plots

+ve

Y

+ve

0.35

(Adkinson and Scott 2004)

S

Succulent shrubland

Rainfall

L

F

Rainfall 100-400 mm/yr; 100-m² plots

+ve

Y

+ve

0.25

(Otto et al. 2001)

T, S

Temperate to tropical overstorey

Biomass production

L

F

1-ha plots

+ve

Y

+ve

0.98

(Specht and Specht 1993)

S, H

Woodland/grassland New Mexico

SCB

L

F

0.25-m² plots

+ve

Y

+ve

(Forbes et al. 2001)

H, S

Woodland/grassland, Jornando, New Mexico

Biomass production

L

F

1-m² plots

UM

Y

UM

0.047

(Chalcraft et al. 2004)

H, S

Woodland/grassland, Jornando

Biomass production

L

F

Aggregation of plots, 49-m²

UM

Y

UM

0.34

(Chalcraft et al. 2004)

H, S

Woodland/grassland, Konza

Biomass production

L

F

50-m² plots

NS

Y

NS

(Chalcraft et al. 2004)

H, S

Woodland/grassland, Konza

Biomass production

L

C

Aggregation of plots, 200-m²

UM

Y

UM

0.35

(Chalcraft et al. 2004)

VP

Arctic tundra, Alaska

NPP (shoot growth)

L

F

9-m² plots

NS

Y

NS

(Gough et al. 2000)

VP

Conifer- hardwood,

NPP

L

C

Productivity estimates at scales much greater than the grain or focus used for species richness; Stands selected for unique species composition rather than by randomized method; 6-ha plots

NS

Y

NS

(Scheiner and Jones 2002)

VP

Pine savannah

NPP

L

C

As above;
6-ha plots

NS

Y

NS

(Scheiner and Jones 2002)

VP

Boreal forest

NPP

L

C

As above;
6-ha plots

NS

Y

NS

(Scheiner and Jones 2002)

VP

Oak savannah

NPP

L

C

As above;
6-ha plots

NS

Y

NS

(Scheiner and Jones 2002)

H

Grassland

Rainfall

L

F

P_quadratic = 0.056; 0.1 ha plots

UM

Y

NS

(Anderson et al. 2004)

H

Grassland

Rainfall

L

F

1-m² plots

NS

Y

NS

(Anderson et al. 2004)

VP

Hardwood forest

NPP

L

C

As above; 6-ha plots

U-S

Y

U-S

(Scheiner and Jones 2002)

VP

Prairie

NPP

L

C

As above; 6-ha plots

-ve

Y

-ve

(Scheiner and Jones 2002)

S, H

Woodland/grassland, USA

SCB

L

C

Plots > 256 m²

+ve

+ve

(Weiher and Howe 2003)

S, H

Woodland/grassland, USA

SCB

L

C

Plots < 64 m²

UM

UM

(Weiher and Howe 2003)

H

Herb field patches, Slovakia

SCB

L

F

Woody species not counted; Quadratic coefficient NS; 1-m² plots

-ve

-ve

0.29

(Safford et al. 2001)

T,H

Forest, Denmark

Basal area

L

F

Data not tested for quadratic term; 1 m² and 100-m²

+ve

N

(Borchsenius et al. 2004)

H, S, B, L

Deciduous forest, Germany

Soil moisture

L

F

Data not tested for quadratic term; 100-m² plots

+ve

N

(Hardtle et al. 2003)

H, S

Savanna, USA

SCB

L

F

N<10; 0.01–100-m² plots

+ve

N

(Kirkman et al. 2001)

B

Montane wetlands, Switzerland

SCB

L

F

The vegetation was modified by annual mowing; 0.04-m² plots

+ve

N

(Bergamini et al. 2001)

H, S,

Meadows and fens, Netherlands - Belgium

SCB

L

F

All sites modified by haymaking; 4-m² plots

NS

N

(Olde Venterink et al. 2001)

VP

Montane wetlands, Switzerland

SCB

L

F

The vegetation was modified by annual mowing; 0.04-m² plots

NS

N

(Bergamini et al. 2001)

H

Grassland, Spain

SCB

L

F

Highly modified farmland created from cleared woodland; 0.25-m² plots

UM

N

(Puerto et al. 1990)

H

Grassland

SCB

L

C

The vegetation was modified by sheep and cattle grazing; Native plants were mostly perennial; 625-m² plots

UM

N

(Allcock and Hik 2003)

H, S

Grassland, North America

SCB

L & R

F

Modified ecosystems (oldfields); NPP estimated from maximum standing crop and by regression for plots with high proportions of woody vegetation

Various

N

(Gross et al. 2000)

T

Based on the same plots as (Phillips et al. 1994)

N

(Clinebell II et al. 1995)

Based on the same data as (Weiher and Howe 2003)

(Weiher 2003)

H, S, T

Grassland-forest, Estonia

SCB

L

Same site as for (Zobel and Liira 1997)

(Liira and Zobel 2000)

Based on the same 99 plots as used in (Forbes et al. 2001)

(Weiher et al. 2004)