Understanding of the role of body mass in structural-functional relationships is pressing, particularly because species losses often occur non-randomly with respect to body size. Our study examined the effects of dung beetle body mass on dung removal at two levels. First, we used the lab experiment to evaluate the efficiency of eight dung beetle species belonging to two functional groups (tunnelers, dwellers) on dung removal. Second, the same species employed in the lab were used in field mesocosms to examine the effects of the two functional groups on dung removal maintaining realistic differences in the total body mass between tunneler and dweller assemblages. Furthermore, the experimental assemblages contained one and four species within each functional group, so the effect of body mass heterogeneity was examined. We used a statistical approach (offset method) which took into account a priori constraints due to the study design allowing us to analyse the effect of larger species in mesocosm style experiments. Body size played a crucial role in dung removal: large beetles were more efficient than small ones and the percentage of removed dung increased with higher body mass heterogeneity. Tunnelers were more efficient than dwellers over both short and long time periods (one month and one year). Significant effects of dwellers were found only after one year. Moreover, our study showed that not including the body mass as an offset in the model resulted in sometimes different results, as the offset expresses dung removal independently of the body mass. This approach confirmed that body size is likely a pivotal factor controlling dung removal efficiency at multiple levels, from single species to overall dung beetle assemblages. Even though other specific traits should be examined, this study has begun to address the consequences of losing individuals with specific traits that are especially sensitive to perturbations.

Aim: Urban biodiversity, and its associated ecosystem services, is an important component of the quality of life of urban residents. The "luxury effect" posits a positive association between biodiversity and socioeconomic status in urban areas, and is thus reflective of environmental injustice, as the benefits associated with biodiversity are not equitably shared across society. We aimed to determine the generality of the luxury effect, and to identify the factors causing its variation across published studies.Location: Urbanized landscapes globally.Time period: Current.Major taxa studied: Terrestrial animals and plants.Methods: We tested the luxury effect across a sample of 337 estimates of the relationship between biodiversity measures and socioeconomic status from 96 studies via a meta‐analysis, addressing three hypotheses: (a) the luxury effect is more pronounced where water availability is limited, (b) the luxury effect is more pronounced in developing than developed countries, (c) the luxury effect is stronger in exotic compared to native species.Results: There was a significant overall luxury effect: there was a positive association between terrestrial biodiversity measures and socioeconomic status. The strength of the luxury effect was greater in arid areas. There was limited support for a stronger luxury effect in exotic species, but no support for any association with development status.Main conclusions: Many key and emerging climate impacts are concentrated in urban areas. Therefore, the degree of environmental injustice represented by the luxury effect may be amplified in the future, especially in arid regions. The objective to increase urban biodiversity through more equitable management and provision of water resources could form part of a wider strategy for sustainable development of cities to promote environmental justice, enhancing the quality of life of urban residents across all sectors of society. Challenges remain to ensure that any such strategy prioritizes conservation goals for native biodiversity.