Biodiversity supports many ecosystem services, with uneven evidence
A peer-reviewed synthesis of 423 studies finds positive links between biodiversity and many ecosystem functions and services. Water quality and pollination often rose with diversity across the measured range. Marine carbon storage showed a strong association but rested on far fewer datasets than land-based storage, while geography and study design changed how broadly the findings apply.
Science··Morning
Water quality and pollination often rise with diversity
A peer-reviewed synthesis brought together 423 studies examining links between biodiversity and the functions and services of ecosystems.[1], [2]
It covered land, freshwater, marine and estuarine environments. Many services showed positive relationships with diversity. Water quality and pollination often followed a linear pattern within the measured range, with service delivery increasing as diversity rose. Other functions showed gains slowing beyond a certain level.[1]
Marine carbon storage rests on fewer datasets
The effect-size analysis used 1,959 datasets. Marine carbon sequestration was among the categories most strongly associated with diversity, but this finding rested on only 7 datasets. Terrestrial carbon sequestration had 154. Most of the underlying research was conducted on land and in developed countries, leaving marine and estuarine environments less represented. That imbalance limits how broadly the strongest marine association can be applied.[1]
Some services depend on distinctive species
Hazard regulation showed weak sensitivity to species diversity. The authors discuss foundational species with distinctive functions, including plants that stabilize dunes. A community with more species consequently does not provide an identical gain for every service. Relationships also changed with the area over which measurements were made, and different services did not always respond in the same direction.[1]
The synthesis combined experiments with observations. Environmental conditions can influence observational relationships, so an association alone cannot establish a direct causal effect. The findings concern context-dependent links across habitats and study designs rather than a universal amount of benefit supplied by each additional species.[1]
