Table 3 Ecosystem service bundle composition using unsupervised bundling.

From: The relationship between ecosystem services and human modification displays decoupling across global delta systems

Intactness

Productivity

Food

Other

85% robust

Times selected in this bundle (of 6)

82% robust

Times selected in this bundle (of 6)

76% robust

Times selected in this bundle (of 6)

50% robust

Times selected in this bundle (of 6)

Soil carbon density

6

Actual NPP

6

Food calories

6

Wetlands

4

Soil N

6

Potential NPP

6

Food area

6

Seabird richness

4

Soil water availability

6

Amphibian richness

6

Feed calories

6

Pasture area

4

Soil carbon

6

Bird richness

6

Nonfood calories

6

Navigable water

3

Amphib. unthreatened

5

Mammal richness

6

Nonfood area

6

Oil area

3

Alpha diversity intactness

5

Plant richness

6

Water withdrawal

6

Discharge

2

Biodiversity abundance

5

Carbon vegetation

5

Fish marine

4

Sediment

2

Biodiversity richness

5

Carbon vegetation pot.

5

Attainable yield

3

Available water

2

Marine unthreatened

5

Forest cover

4

Food value

3

  

Seabird unthreatened

5

Marine animal richness

4

Nonfood value

3

  

Soil loss

5

Marine plant richness

4

Aquaculture

3

  

Soil cation-exchange cap.

5

Bird unthreatened

4

Fish river

3

  

Coast flooding

5

Pollination supply

2

    

Water quality

5

      

Mammal unthreatened

4

      

River flooding

4

      
  1. We used an ensemble of six clustering methods to identify four bundles of ecosystem services. The number beside each ecosystem service indicates how many times it was clustered in that bundle, out of six methods. The percentage robustness for each bundle is the average times each ecosystem service a bundle contains was selected within it (see Method and Fig. 5 for more details). We also created bundles using ecosystem service cascade and MEA frameworks (see Supplementary Note 7).
Back to article page