甚至没有错：回复Wagg等人
Not even wrong: Reply to Wagg et al
摘要：
我们证明，Wagg等人（2019）对我们论文的评论（Pillai和Gouvillas，2019）中描述的问题都是由于对成对效应的影响的误解，我们的框架和Loreau-Hector（LH）分割方案中零基线的性质（即，单一培养物的中点），以及非线性对LH分配结果的影响。具体来说，我们表明，（i）成对效应可以在任何时间范围内计算，因此并不意味着稳定的共存，（ii）单一栽培的中点对应于一个中立的社区，因此共存总是LH基线的一部分，（iii）与Wagg等人的建议相反，广义多样性相互作用模型不能解释（事实上可能加剧）单一文化中的非线性问题，这夸大了LH净生物多样性效应，并产生了对选择和互补性的错误估计。因此，我们所有关于生物多样性生态系统功能研究中固有的琐碎性和LH分配方案的问题的原始主张都成立。
英文摘要：
We demonstrate that the issues described in the Wagg et al. (2019) Comment on our paper (Pillai and Gouhier, 2019) are all due to misunderstandings about the implications of pairwise effects, the nature of the null baseline in both our framework and in the Loreau-Hector (LH) partitioning scheme (i.e., the midpoint of the monocultures), and the impact of nonlinearity on the LH partitioning results. Specifically, we show that (i) pairwise effects can be computed over any time horizon and thus do not imply stable coexistence, (ii) the midpoint of the monocultures corresponds to a neutral community so coexistence was always part of the LH baseline, and (iii) contrary to what Wagg et al. suggested, generalized diversity-interaction models do not account for (and may in fact exacerbate) the problem of nonlinearity in monocultures, which inflates the LH net biodiversity effect and generates incorrect estimates of selection and complementarity. Hence, all of our original claims about the triviality inherent in biodiversity-ecosystem functioning research and the issues with the LH partitioning scheme hold.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
