1
1
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
2
3
Appendix 1 Effects of phylogenetic age distance, analyses based on overyielding
4
5
Appendix 2 Effects of phylogenetic age distance, analyses based on raw measurement.
6
7
Appendix 3 List of invertebrate species and groups.
8
9
Appendix 4 Original data of mass loss, total N (%), total C (%), C/N, the change in C/N ratio and mean microbial biomass for each litter combination
10
11
Appendix 5 Invertebrate abundances in each litter combination
12
13
14
15
16
17
Appendix 6 Identifying effects of mixing per se vs. species selection using method of Loreau & Hector (2001)
2
18
Appendix 1 Effects of phylogenetic age distance and covariables, analyses based on overyielding. Age distances were taken from the sample size-optimized tree for
19
the European flora (Durka & Michalski 2012) and the genus age-optimized tree for the Dutch flora (Hermant et al. 2012). Ages distances were ln-transformed to
20
normalize distribution of residuals. Significant results are shown in bold, marginally significant values in italics, blank = variable excluded in best-subset search
21
(adjusted R square).
22
23
1) Effect on mass loss
Independent variables
Phylogenetic distance
Betulaceae
Salicaceae
Initial mass
Beta
-0.659
Sample size-optimized tree
B
t(dfres=11)
-0.283
-2.907
P
Beta
0.014
-0.659
Genus age-optimized tree
B
t(dfres=11)
-0.283
-2.907
P
0.014
24
25
26
2)
Effect on microbial biomass
Sample size-optimized tree
B
t(dfres= 9)
Independent variables
Beta
Phylogenetic distance
Betulaceae
Salicaceae
Mass-loss (overyielding)
-0.893
0.256
-0.054
0.122
-0.228
-0.112
Genus age-optimized tree
B
t(dfres= 9)
P
Beta
P
-3.641
1.044
0.005
0.324
-0.923
0.258
-0.054
0.123
-4.131
1.155
0.003
0.278
-1.131
0.287
-0.207
-0.102
-1.114
0.294
3
27
3) Effect on the change in C/N ratio
Independent variables
Beta
Sample size-optimized tree
B
t(dfres= 7)
P
Beta
Genus age-optimized tree
B
t(dfres= 7)
-0.784
-0.016
-2.799
0.027
-0.733
-0.014
-2.557
Phylogenetic distance
-0.393
-0.063
-1.960
0.091
-0.430
-0.069
-2.097
Betulaceae
0.775
0.112
2.934
0.022
0.741
0.107
2.709
Salicaceae
0.539
0.081
2.889
0.023
0.551
0.083
2.791
Mass-loss (overyielding)
28
29
4) Summary of effects on invertebrate, (presenting only the effect of phylogenetic age distance, without covariables)
Sample size-optimized tree
Genus age-optimized tree
Effect on invertebrate…
Effect on invertebrate…
…diversity
…abundance
…diversity
…abundance
Invertebrate group
(see Appendix 3)
t(dfres=10)
P
t(dfres= 11 or 8) P
t(dfres=11)
P
t(dfres= 8 or 11)
Collembola species
Meso-invertebrate groups
Macro-invertebrates
30
31
1.260
0.236
P
0.038
0.074
0.030
0.027
P
-1.385
0.203
-1.246
0.248
0.772
0.456
0.862
0.407
4
32
Appendix 2 Effects of phylogenetic age distance and covariables, analyses based on raw measurement. Age distances were taken from the sample size-optimized tree
33
for the European flora (Durka & Michalski 2012) and the genus age-optimized tree for the Dutch flora (Hermant et al. 2012). Ages distances were ln-transformed to
34
normalize distribution of residuals. Significant results are shown in bold, marginally significant values in italics, blank = variable excluded in best-subset search.
35
36
1) Effect on mass loss
Sample size-optimized tree
Independent variables
Phylogenetic age
distance
Fagaceae
Betulaceae
Salicaceae
Genus age-optimized tree
Beta
B
t(dfres=19)
P
Beta
B
t(dfres=21)
P
-0.061
-0.010
-0.613
0.546
-0.063
-0.010
-0.627
0.538
-0.978
-0.160
-0.610
-0.794
-0.130
-0.496
-7.987
-1.304
-4.987
<0.001
0.206
<0.001
-0.978
-0.158
-0.609
-0.794
-0.128
-0.494
-7.993
-1.290
-4.976
<0.001
0.211
<0.001
P
37
38
2) Effect on microbial biomass
Independent variables
Phylogenetic age
distance
Mass loss
Fagaceae
Betulaceae
Salicaceae
39
Beta
Sample size-optimized tree
B
t(dfres=19)
P
Beta
Genus age-optimized tree
B
t(dfres=19)
-0.405
-777.2
-2.745
0.013
-0.386
-770.9
-2.573
0.019
-0.721
-0.412
-0.256
0.114
-8640.4
-4010.3
-2491.1
1107.8
-2.264
-1.169
-1.354
0.437
0.035
0.257
0.192
0.667
-0.714
-0.411
-0.245
0.124
-8565.2
-4000.8
-2387.0
1207.1
-2.205
-1.148
-1.275
0.469
0.040
0.267
0.218
0.645
5
40
41
3) Effect on the change in C/N ratio
Independent variables
Phylogenetic age
distance
Mass loss
Fagaceae
Betulaceae
Salicaceae
42
43
44
Beta
Sample size-optimized tree
B
t(dfres=19)
Beta
Genus age-optimized tree
B
t(dfres=19)
P
P
-0.268
-0.031
-1.989
0.061
-0.292
-0.035
-2.222
0.039
-0.525
-0.753
-0.877
-0.278
-0.374
-0.436
-0.508
-0.161
-1.859
-2.348
-5.246
-1.188
0.079
0.030
<0.001
0.249
-0.533
-0.764
-0.871
-0.276
-0.3803
-0.442
-0.504
-0.160
-1.929
-2.432
-5.335
-1.207
0.069
0.025
<0.001
0.242
4) Summary of effects on invertebrates (presenting only the effect of phylogenetic age distance, without covariables)
Sample size-optimized tree
Genus age-optimized tree
Effect on invertebrate…
Effect on invertebrate…
…diversity
…abundance
..;diversity
…abundance
Invertebrate group
(see Append 3)
t(dfres=20)
P
t(dfres=20)
P
t(dfres=20)
P
t(dfres=20)
P
Collembola species
Meso-invertebrate
groups
Macro-invertebrates
-0.746
0.464
0.336
0.740
-0.805
0.430
0.146
0.886
-0.146
0.888
0.655
0.520
-0.276
0.785
0.577
0.571
0.652
0.522
0.454
0.655
0.615
0.546
0.585
0.565
6
45
Appendix 3 List of invertebrate species and groups
46
47
Collembola species: Anurida species, Ceratophysella species, Desoria species, Entomobrya multifasciata, Folsomia species, Hypogastrura species, Isotomiella
48
minor, Lepidocyrtus lignorum, Megalothorax minimus, Mesophorura macrochaeta, Neanura muscorum, Parisotoma notabilis, Protaphorura species, Sminthuridae,
49
Tullbergiinae
50
51
Meso-invertebrate groups: Collembola, Acari-Cryptostigmata, Acari-Parasitica, Acari-Mesostigmata, Diplura, Protura, Enchytraeidae
52
53
Macro-invertebrates: Isopoda-Philoscia muscorum, Isopoda-Porcellio scaber, Isopoda-Trachelipus rathkii, Isopoda-Trichoniscus pusillus s.l.,
54
Diplopoda-Brachydesmus superus, Diplopoda-Julus scandinavius, Diplopoda-Polydesmus angustus, Diplopoda-Proteroiulus fuscus, and represented groups at
55
higher taxonomic levels Coleoptera (Curculionidae, Lathriidae, Staphylinidae), others (Diptera, Myrmicae, Slugs).
56
7
57
Appendix 4 Original data of mass loss, C/N, the change in C/N ratio and mean microbial biomass for each litter combination (from 1-26: 1 (A. glutinosa, P. avium),
58
2(S. caprea, P. tremula), 3(A. glutinosa, A. incana), 4(S. caprea, S. cinerea), 5(P. avium), 6(A. glutinosa), 7(A. glutinosa, B. pendula), 8(P. tremula), 9(F. sylvatica),
59
10(S. caprea), 11(Q. petraea, A. glutinosa), 12(Q. petraea, Q. robur), 13(M. sylvestris), 14(B. pendula), 15(Q. petraea), 16(S. caprea, P. avium), 17(P. serotina),
60
18(Q. petraea, S. caprea), 19(S. caprea, A. glutinosa), 20(S. cinerea), 21(P. avium, M. sylvestris), 22(A. incana), 23(Q. petraea, P. avium), 24(P. avium, P. serotina),
61
25(Q. petraea, F. sylvatica), 26(Q. robur)). Note that both initial and after C/N ratios are given.
8
Litter combination
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
62
Mass loss
(%)
0.86
0.26
0.93
0.35
0.78
0.86
0.70
0.58
0.00
0.15
0.44
0.31
0.88
0.40
0.15
0.56
0.86
0.10
0.42
0.74
0.99
0.90
0.51
0.88
0.00
0.00
Initial C/N
After C/N
25.37
32.52
20.12
31.04
39.36
17.93
24.16
35.58
44.78
30.21
23.84
33.44
27.84
36.32
35.29
33.84
39.85
32.43
23.51
31.92
32.56
22.02
37.18
39.61
39.11
31.96
36.23
21.88
26.94
24.19
27.98
24.35
26.74
23.36
34.50
23.20
NA
26.88
23.18
29.37
32.74
24.34
26.56
30.23
23.60
26.28
27.21
22.64
31.57
27.20
31.72
26.36
Change in C/N ratio
(initial/after)
0.70
1.49
0.75
1.28
1.41
0.74
0.90
1.52
1.30
1.30
NA
1.24
1.20
1.24
1.08
1.39
1.50
1.07
1.00
1.21
1.20
0.97
1.18
1.46
1.23
1.21
Microbial biomass
(μg Cmic g-1 dw)
15348.24
19793.84
16777.79
22265.98
19913.49
17135.32
15863.01
27688.10
24220.05
24297.40
15000.01
15503.79
17372.69
23262.48
21152.38
17492.92
18821.28
19445.32
15583.40
20607.22
NA
8628.62
19167.64
14335.63
20406.88
19362.69
9
63
Appendix 5 Invertabrate abundances in each litter combination (from 1-26: 1 (A. glutinosa, P. avium), 2(S. caprea, P. tremula), 3(A. glutinosa, A. incana), 4(S.
64
caprea, S. cinerea), 5(P. avium), 6(A. glutinosa), 7(A. glutinosa, B. pendula), 8(P. tremula), 9(F. sylvatica), 10(S. caprea), 11(Q. petraea, A. glutinosa), 12(Q. petraea,
65
Q. robur), 13(M. sylvestris), 14(B. pendula), 15(Q. petraea), 16(S. caprea, P. avium), 17(P. serotina), 18(Q. petraea, S. caprea), 19(S. caprea, A. glutinosa), 20(S.
66
cinerea), 21(P. avium, M. sylvestris), 22(A. incana), 23(Q. petraea, P. avium), 24(P. avium, P. serotina), 25(Q. petraea, F. sylvatica), 26(Q. robur).
67
Part 1
Litter combination
68
Collembola
Anurida (2 ocelli)
Anurida (blind)
Ceratophysella spec.
Desoria spec.
Entomobrya
multifasciata
Folsomia (1 ocelli)
Hypogastrura spec.
Isotomiella minor
Lepidocyrtus spec.
Megalothorax minimus
Mesophorura spec.
Neanura muscorum
Parisotoma notabilis
Protaphorura spec.
Sminthuridae spec.
Tullbergiinae spec.
To be continued….
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
7
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
2
4
3
3
0
17
1
3
4
26
3
4
2
0
4
5
5
15
5
36
19
154
10
5
0
0
0
0
0
3
6
0
0
3
3
4
0
1
0
0
3
2
0
0
0
3
0
12
0
2
1
6
0
0
3
1
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
4
1
0
0
3
33
4
34
21
4
26
23
4
0
1
4
2
10
1
1
11
11
6
60
6
28
17
34
2
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
14
22
0
3
11
16
246
129
2
7
0
12
10
27
0
3
101
0
25
186
11
66
106
86
58
70
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
6
36
8
11
5
1
11
28
10
22
0
11
6
10
0
4
17
3
5
25
5
22
51
35
13
8
0
1
0
2
3
1
2
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
13
35
1
3
17
32
13
10
8
14
7
3
3
0
11
63
1
1
26
10
23
53
34
9
3
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
4
0
0
10
69
70
Part 2
Litter
combination
Cryptostigmata
Parasitica
Mesostigmata
Isopoda
Philoscia
muscorum
Porcellio scaber
Trachelipus rathkii
Trichoniscus
pusillus
Diplopoda
Brachydesmussupe
rus
Julius scandinavius
Polydesmus
angustus
Proteroiulus fuscus
Pauropoda
Chilopoda
Schendyla
nemorensis
Lamyctus
marginatus
Diplura
Protura
Enchytraeidae
Coleoptera
Curculionidae
Lathriidae
Staphylinidae
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
75
178
230
211
70
123
250
270
139
88
27
69
91
52
62
55
134
39
59
312
141
201
448
144
135
79
2
0
0
3
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
22
6
1
0
0
16
59
79
55
23
42
92
31
60
49
29
47
24
22
1
9
84
4
16
95
23
112
153
102
46
43
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
7
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
7
22
77
1
1
0
1
2
12
11
0
1
1
14
6
1
1
1
3
2
4
4
5
4
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
5
1
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
3
30
7
37
41
4
32
40
1
2
22
6
10
20
3
5
36
5
0
44
2
14
37
24
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
71
72
73
74
Part 3
Litter combination
Larvae
Coleoptera
Elateridae
Diptera
Formicidae
Myrmica spec 1
Myrmica spec 2
Slugs
species 1
species 2
species 3
Pseudoscorpionidae
Analida
Araneae
Psocoptera
Aphididae
Heteroptera
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
1
0
2
1
0
0
1
1
1
0
6
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
3
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28
0
0
0
49
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
2
1
0
0
10
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
6
1
1
0
0
1
0
4
1
0
5
2
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
2
1
0
0
5
2
0
4
0
2
1
2
3
0
5
0
2
0
5
2
0
0
2
2
1
0
0
7
0
0
1
0
0
3
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
1
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
75
Appendix 6 Identifying effects of mixing per se vs. species selection using method of Loreau & Hector (2001)
76
77
Our analytical approach allowed us to test the net effects of phylogenetic distance of litter species on the overyieldings, relative to what would be expected from
78
monocultures of the same species. However, not all species could be accounted for at all levels of phylogenetic distance (as this would have resulted in excessive
79
resampling of the same branches, see Methods). It is hence not impossible that the detected effects of phylogenetic distance reflect in part selecting of particular
80
species into mixtures of particular phylogenetic distances, rather than only mixing-per-se. Loreau and Hector developed a method to identify the role of each of
81
selection vs. mixing-per-se (Loreau & Hector 2001). This method can only be applied if even in the species mixtures the performance of each individual species is
82
known, i.e. in our case for microbial biomass. In fact we find that overyielding of microbial biomass reflects mixing per se and not selecting particular species (N=14
83
mixtures, r=0.75 and -0.40, P=0.007 and=0.223).
84
85
REFERENCE
86
Durka W, Michalski S,G. 2012 Daphne: a dated phylogeny of a large European flora for phylogenetically informed ecological analyses. Ecology 93, 2297-2297.
87
(doi:10.1890/12-0743.1)
88
Hermant M, Hennion F, Bartish IV, Yguel B, Prinzing A. 2012 Disparate relatives: Life histories vary more in genera occupying intermediate environments. Persp.
89
Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 14, 283-301. (doi:10.1016/j.ppees.2012.02.001)
90
Loreau M, Hector A. 2001 Partitioning selection and complementarity in biodiversity experiments. Nature, 412, 72-76. (doi:10.1038/35083573)
91