A global distribution of biodiversity inferred from climatic constraints: results from a process‐based modelling study

We investigated the connection between plant species diversity and climate by using a process‐based, generic plant model. Different ‘species' were simulated by different values for certain growth‐related model parameters. Subsequently, a wide range of values were tested in the framework of a ‘Monte Carlo' simulation for success; that is, the capability of each plant with these parameter combinations to reproduce itself during its lifetime. The range of successful parameter combinations approximated species diversity. This method was applied to a global grid, using daily atmospheric forcing from a climate model simulation. The computed distribution of plant ‘species' diversity compares very well with the observed, global‐scale distribution of species diversity, reproducing the majority of ‘hot spot' areas of biodiversity. A sensitivity analysis revealed that the predicted pattern is very robust against changes of fixed model parameters. Analysis of the climatic forcing and of two additional sensitivity simulations demonstrated that the crucial factor leading to this distribution of diversity is the early stage of a plant's life when water availability is highly coupled to the variability in precipitation because in this stage root‐zone storage of water is small. We used cluster analysis in order to extract common sets of species parameters, mean plant properties and biogeographic regions (biomes) from the model output. The successful ‘species' cannot be grouped into typical parameter combinations, which define the plant's functioning. However, the mean simulated plant properties, such as lifetime and growth, can be grouped into a few characteristic plant ‘prototypes', ranging from short‐lived, fast growing plants, similar to grasses, to long‐lived, slow growing plants, similar to trees. The classification of regions with respect to similar combinations of successful ‘species' yields a distribution of biomes similar to the observed distribution. Each biome has typical levels of climatic constraints, expressed for instance by the number of ‘rainy days' and ‘warm days'. The less the number of days favourable for growth, the greater the level of constraints and the less the ‘species' diversity. These results suggest that climate as a fundamental constraint can explain much of the global scale, observed distribution of plant species diversity.

[1]  Guido D. Salvucci,et al.  Characteristic rate scale and timescale of supply‐limited transpiration under a Richards‐Cowan Framework , 1999 .

[2]  S. Hagemann,et al.  The influence of rooting depth on the simulated hydrological cycle of a GCM , 1999 .

[3]  Wilhelm Barthlott,et al.  Terminological and methodological aspects of the mapping and analysis of the global biodiversity , 1999 .

[4]  Axel Kleidon,et al.  A method of determining rooting depth from a terrestrial biosphere model and its impacts on the global water and carbon cycle , 1998 .

[5]  I. C. Prentice,et al.  An integrated biosphere model of land surface processes , 1996 .

[6]  V. Heywood,et al.  Global Biodiversity Assessment , 1996 .

[7]  Jörg Kaduk,et al.  A prognostic phenology scheme for global terrestrial carbon cycle models , 1996 .

[8]  Wilhelm Barthlott,et al.  Global distribution of species diversity in vascular plants : towards a world map of phytodiversity , 1996 .

[9]  M. Claussen,et al.  The atmospheric general circulation model ECHAM-4: Model description and simulation of present-day climate , 1996 .

[10]  Wolfgang Knorr,et al.  Impact of drought stress and other factors on seasonal land biosphere CO2 exchange studied through an atmospheric tracer transport model , 1995 .

[11]  M. G. Ryan.  Foliar maintenance respiration of subalpine and boreal trees and shrubs in relation to nitrogen content , 1995 .

[12]  B. Pavlik.  Species Diversity in Ecological Communities: Historical and Geographical Perspectives by R. E. Ricklefs, D. Schluter , 1995 .

[13]  J. Downing,et al.  Biodiversity and stability in grasslands , 1996, Nature.

[14]  M. Wigmosta,et al.  A distributed hydrology-vegetation model for complex terrain , 1994 .

[15]  P. Milly,et al.  Sensitivity of the Global Water Cycle to the Water-Holding Capacity of Land , 1994 .

[16]  J. Randerson,et al.  Terrestrial ecosystem production: A process model based on global satellite and surface data , 1993 .

[17]  Dolph Schluter,et al.  Species diversity in ecological communities: historical and geographical perspectives. , 1993 .

[18]  W. Cramer,et al.  A global biome model based on plant physiology and dominance, soil properties and climate , 1992 .

[19]  E. Todini,et al.  A rainfall–runoff scheme for use in the Hamburg climate model , 1992 .

[20]  F. Woodward,et al.  Patterns in tree species richness as a test of the glacial extinction hypothesis , 1989, Nature.

[21]  William H. Press,et al.  Book-Review - Numerical Recipes in Pascal - the Art of Scientific Computing , 1989 .

[22]  A. Gentry,et al.  Changes in Plant Community Diversity and Floristic Composition on Environmental and Geographical Gradients , 1988 .

[23]  David J. Currie,et al.  Large-scale biogeographical patterns of species richness of trees , 1987, Nature.

[24]  Fionn Murtagh,et al.  Cluster Dissection and Analysis: Theory, Fortran Programs, Examples. , 1986 .

[25]  Christopher B. Field,et al.  photosynthesis--nitrogen relationship in wild plants , 1986 .

[26]  Elgene O. Box,et al.  Tasks for Vegetation Science I: Macroclimate and Plant Forms: An Introduction to Predictive Modeling in Phytogeography , 2011 .

[27]  E. Matthews.  Global Vegetation and Land Use: New High-Resolution Data Bases for Climate Studies , 1983 .

[28]  C. Federer,et al.  Transpirational supply and demand: Plant, soil, and atmospheric effects evaluated by simulation , 1982 .

[29]  S. Pickett,et al.  PHYSIOLOGICAL ECOLOGY OF TROPICAL SUCCESSION: A Comparative Review , 1980 .

[30]  J. Monteith.  Climate and the efficiency of crop production in Britain , 1977 .

[31]  H. Lieth.  Modeling the Primary Productivity of the World , 1975 .

[32]  M. Rosenzweig.  Net Primary Productivity of Terrestrial Communities: Prediction from Climatological Data , 1968, The American Naturalist.

[33]  T. Kira,et al.  A QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF PLANT FORM-THE PIPE MODEL THEORY : II. FURTHER EVIDENCE OF THE THEORY AND ITS APPLICATION IN FOREST ECOLOGY , 1964 .

[34]  G. E. Hutchinson,et al.  Homage to Santa Rosalia or Why Are There So Many Kinds of Animals? , 1959, The American Naturalist.

[35]  M. Monsi.  Uber den Lichtfaktor in den Pflanzengesellschaften und seine Bedeutung fur die Stoffproduktion , 1953 .