Fig. 1: The contribution of species’ effect traits to different types of human well-being.

Effect traits eliciting a well-being response, with n = 1,815 unique effect trait–well-being combinations. a, The number of unique effect trait–well-being combinations broken down by effect trait type and well-being type. b, The shape of the species–effect trait relationship for each type of well-being. For the line colour code, see c. c, Ordination based on non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) of a Bray–Curtis dissimilarity matrix. The positions of points (effect trait–well-being combinations, shaped by trait type) represent dissimilarity in the number of incidences that effect traits elicited different types of well-being. The labelled effect traits are indicators of each well-being type (Supplementary Table 1). Large circles represent mean centroids for each well-being type, with horizontal and vertical error bars showing 95% confidence intervals. A low level of stress (<0.05) indicated excellent fit. Note, no incidences meant it was not possible to create centroids for negative cognitive, social or global well-being.