# Reconciling links between diversity and population stability across global plant communities

## TL;DR

This study shows that higher plant diversity can destabilize ecosystems, especially when considering dominant species and long-term changes.

## Contribution

The study reconciles conflicting findings by showing how different diversity and stability metrics affect the diversity-stability relationship.

## Key findings

- Abundance-weighted stability metrics show a stronger destabilizing effect of diversity.
- Cumulative richness reveals a stronger destabilizing effect than average annual richness.
- More species increase interspecific competition, destabilizing dominant species in ecosystems.

## Abstract

Maintaining ecological stability is essential for sustaining ecosystem functions and the benefits they provide to society. Ecological theory predicts that plant diversity destabilizes local populations, yet empirical studies report variable effects.We hypothesize that this discrepancy arises at least in part from differences captured by different diversity (average vs cumulative richness, i.e. the mean annual richness vs the cumulative richness across years) and stability metrics (abundance‐unweighted vs weighted mean population stability). To test this, we analyzed data from > 8000 permanent vegetation plots across biomes on five continents.We found a negative (i.e. destabilizing) diversity–stability relationship when using abundance‐weighted rather than unweighted measures of population stability, which are more influenced by dominant species. Similarly, cumulative richness – capturing total species occurrence over time and long‐term turnover – reveals a stronger destabilizing effect compared to average annual richness.Our findings reveal that, when specific metrics of diversity and stability are considered, more species and potentially the associated increase in interspecific competition tend to destabilize populations across natural ecosystems world‐wide – particularly those of dominant species.

Maintaining ecological stability is essential for sustaining ecosystem functions and the benefits they provide to society. Ecological theory predicts that plant diversity destabilizes local populations, yet empirical studies report variable effects.

We hypothesize that this discrepancy arises at least in part from differences captured by different diversity (average vs cumulative richness, i.e. the mean annual richness vs the cumulative richness across years) and stability metrics (abundance‐unweighted vs weighted mean population stability). To test this, we analyzed data from > 8000 permanent vegetation plots across biomes on five continents.

We found a negative (i.e. destabilizing) diversity–stability relationship when using abundance‐weighted rather than unweighted measures of population stability, which are more influenced by dominant species. Similarly, cumulative richness – capturing total species occurrence over time and long‐term turnover – reveals a stronger destabilizing effect compared to average annual richness.

Our findings reveal that, when specific metrics of diversity and stability are considered, more species and potentially the associated increase in interspecific competition tend to destabilize populations across natural ecosystems world‐wide – particularly those of dominant species.