Primary productivity is weakly related to floristic alpha and beta diversity across Australia

Aim Ecosystem functions such as productivity may be influenced not only by the biological diversity at each location (α‐diversity) but also by the biological turnover between locations (β‐diversity). We perform a continental‐scale test of the strength and direction of relationships between gross primary productivity (GPP) and both α‐ and β‐diversity. Location Continental Australia. Methods Species occurrence records were used to quantify the taxonomic α‐diversity of vascular plants in approximately 11,000 1 km × 1 km grid cells across Australia, and to calculate the average β‐diversity within a 10‐km radius around each cell. The magnitude and variability of monthly, MODIS‐derived remotely sensed GPP (2001–12) were summarized for continental Australia, as were rainfall and temperature over the same period. Generalized additive models were then used to test whether the magnitude or variability of GPP were distinctly influenced by either biodiversity measure, over and above the influence of environmental conditions. Results Precipitation and temperature explained large proportions of deviance in the magnitude (75.6%) and variability (38.3%) of GPP across the Australian continent. GPP was marginally more strongly related to species richness than it was to species turnover. However, neither diversity measure provided substantial increases in the explanatory power of GPP models over and above that of environment‐only models (always < 1%). Main conclusions The relationship between primary productivity and taxonomic α‐ and β‐diversity was weak for the Australian flora. Our findings question the generality of key assumptions, predictions and results in the literature regarding the strength of empirical relationships between productivity and biodiversity across multiple biological levels (α‐, β‐ and γ‐diversity) at macroecological scales.