I do not expect to observe the relationship between regional and local species richness in nature because the slope of the line is greater than 1, which is virtually impossible to achieve in nature. The slope of this line is greater than one because there are a greater amount of local species richness than regional species richness. This is impossible in nature because the spatial area of a region is larger than that of a local area.
Based on this study, I believe that regional processes are the dominant driver of this pattern displayed in the graph. My first reason for this is the fact that the slope is slightly below 1, but does not level off (i.e. plateau) as regional species richness increases. Also, the local richness values are lower than regional richness values, but still increase with them proportionally in Study area 1, which is common of a regional process being the dominant driver in an area.
Based on the equilibrium theory of island biogeography, I believe that the regional species richness on the mainland will affect how many species are predicted to be found on other islands. This theory talks about how immigration and extinction can affect the number of species on the smaller islands scattered around the mainland. Over time, an equilibrium is said to be made between these two rates, which will affect how many species are on other islands.