CCPortal
DOI10.1111/geb.12783
Traditional plant functional groups explain variation in economic but not size-related traits across the tundra biome
Thomas, H. J. D.1; Myers-Smith, I. H.1; Bjorkman, A. D.1,2,3; Elmendorf, S. C.4; Blok, D.5; Cornelissen, J. H. C.6; Forbes, B. C.7; Hollister, R. D.8; Normand, S.2; Prevey, J. S.9; Rixen, C.9; Schaepman-Strub, G.10; Wilmking, M.11; Wipf, S.9; Cornwell, W. K.12; Kattge, J.13,14; Goetz, S. J.15; Guay, K. C.16; Alatalo, J. M.17; Anadon-Rosell, A.11,18,19; Angers-Blondin, S.1; Berner, L. T.15; Bjork, R. G.20,21; Buchwal, A.22,23; Buras, A.24; Carbognani, M.25; Christie, K.26; Collier, L. Siegwart27; Cooper, E. J.28; Eskelinen, A.14,29,30; Frei, E. R.31; Grau, O.32; Grogan, P.33; Hallinger, M.34; Heijmans, M. M. P. D.35; Hermanutz, L.27; Hudson, J. M. G.36; Huelber, K.37; Iturrate-Garcia, M.10; Iversen, C. M.38,39; Jaroszynska, F.40; Johnstone, J. F.41; Kaarlejarvi, E.42,43,44; Kulonen, A.9,40; Lamarque, L. J.45,46; Levesque, E.45,46; Little, C. J.10,47; Michelsen, A.48,49; Milbau, A.50; Nabe-Nielsen, J.2; Nielsen, S. S.2; Ninot, J. M.18,19; Oberbauer, S. F.51; Olofsson, J.42; Onipchenko, V. G.52; Petraglia, A.25; Rumpf, S. B.37; Semenchuk, P. R.28,37; Soudzilovskaia, N. A.53; Spasojevic, M. J.54; Speed, J. D. M.55; Tape, K. D.56; te Beest, M.42,57; Tomaselli, M.25; Trant, A.27,58; Treier, U. A.2; Venn, S.59,60; Vowles, T.20; Weijers, S.61; Zamin, T.33; Atkin, O. K.59; Bahn, M.62; Blonder, B.63,64; Campetella, G.65; Cerabolini, B. E. L.66; Chapin, F. S., III67; Dainese, M.68; de Vries, F. T.69; Diaz, S.70,71; Green, W.72; Jackson, R. B.73; Manning, P.3; Niinemets, U.74; Ozinga, W. A.35; Penuelas, J.32,75; Reich, P. B.76,77; Schamp, B.78; Sheremetev, S.79; van Bodegom, P. M.53
发表日期2019
ISSN1466-822X
EISSN1466-8238
卷号28期号:2页码:78-95
英文摘要

Aim Plant functional groups are widely used in community ecology and earth system modelling to describe trait variation within and across plant communities. However, this approach rests on the assumption that functional groups explain a large proportion of trait variation among species. We test whether four commonly used plant functional groups represent variation in six ecologically important plant traits. Location Tundra biome. Time period Data collected between 1964 and 2016. Major taxa studied 295 tundra vascular plant species. Methods We compiled a database of six plant traits (plant height, leaf area, specific leaf area, leaf dry matter content, leaf nitrogen, seed mass) for tundra species. We examined the variation in species-level trait expression explained by four traditional functional groups (evergreen shrubs, deciduous shrubs, graminoids, forbs), and whether variation explained was dependent upon the traits included in analysis. We further compared the explanatory power and species composition of functional groups to alternative classifications generated using post hoc clustering of species-level traits. Results Traditional functional groups explained significant differences in trait expression, particularly amongst traits associated with resource economics, which were consistent across sites and at the biome scale. However, functional groups explained 19% of overall trait variation and poorly represented differences in traits associated with plant size. Post hoc classification of species did not correspond well with traditional functional groups, and explained twice as much variation in species-level trait expression. Main conclusions Traditional functional groups only coarsely represent variation in well-measured traits within tundra plant communities, and better explain resource economic traits than size-related traits. We recommend caution when using functional group approaches to predict tundra vegetation change, or ecosystem functions relating to plant size, such as albedo or carbon storage. We argue that alternative classifications or direct use of specific plant traits could provide new insights for ecological prediction and modelling.


WOS研究方向Environmental Sciences & Ecology ; Physical Geography
来源期刊GLOBAL ECOLOGY AND BIOGEOGRAPHY
文献类型期刊论文
条目标识符http://gcip.llas.ac.cn/handle/2XKMVOVA/91369
作者单位1.Univ Edinburgh, Sch GeoSci, Crew Bldg, Edinburgh EH9 3FF, Midlothian, Scotland;
2.Aarhus Univ, Dept Biosci, Ecoinformat & Biodivers, Aarhus, Denmark;
3.Senckenberg Gesell Naturforschung, Biodivers & Climate Res Ctr SBiK F, Frankfurt, Germany;
4.Univ Colorado, Inst Arctic & Alpine Res, Boulder, CO 80309 USA;
5.Lund Univ, Dept Phys Geog & Ecosyst Sci, Lund, Sweden;
6.Vrije Univ, Dept Ecol Sci, Amsterdam, Netherlands;
7.Univ Lapland, Arct Ctr, Rovaniemi, Finland;
8.Grand Valley State Univ, Biol Dept, Allendale, MI 49401 USA;
9.WSL Inst Snow & Avalanche Res SLF, Davos, Switzerland;
10.Univ Zurich, Dept Evolutionary Biol & Environm Studies, Zurich, Switzerland;
11.Greifswald Univ, Inst Bot & Landscape Ecol, Greifswald, Germany;
12.Univ New South Wales, Sch Biol Earth & Environm Sci, Sydney, NSW, Australia;
13.Max Planck Inst Biogeochem, Jena, Germany;
14.German Ctr Integrat Biodivers Res iDiv, Halle Jena Leipzig, Germany;
15.Northen Arizona Univ, Sch Informat Comp & Cyber Syst, Flagstaff, AZ 86011 USA;
16.Bigelow Lab Ocean Sci, Boothbay, ME USA;
17.Qatar Univ, Dept Biol & Environm Sci, Doha, Qatar;
18.Univ Barcelona, Dept Evolutionary Biol Ecol & Environm Sci, Barcelona, Spain;
19.Univ Barcelona, Biodivers Res Inst, Barcelona, Spain;
20.Univ Gothenburg, Dept Earth Sci, Gothenburg, Sweden;
21.Gothenburg Global Biodivers Ctr, Gothenburg, Sweden;
22.Adam Mickiewicz Univ, Inst Geoecol & Geoinformat, Poznan, Poland;
23.Univ Alaska Anchorage, Dept Biol Sci, Anchorage, AK USA;
24.Wageningen Univ & Res, Forest Ecol & Forest Management, Wageningen, Netherlands;
25.Univ Parma, Dept Chem Life Sci & Environm Sustainabil, Parma, Italy;
26.Alaska Dept Fish & Game, Juneau, AK USA;
27.Mem Univ, Dept Biol, St John, NF, Canada;
28.UiT Arct Univ Norway, Dept Arct & Marine Biol, Tromso, Norway;
29.UFZ, Helmholtz Ctr Environm Res, Dept Physiol Div, Leipzig, Germany;
30.Univ Oulu, Dept Ecol & Genet, Oulu, Finland;
31.Univ British Columbia, Dept Geog, Vancouver, BC, Canada;
32.UAB UB, CSIC, CREAF, Global Ecol Unit, Bellaterra, Spain;
33.Queens Univ, Dept Biol, Kingston, ON, Canada;
34.Swedish Agr Univ SLU, Biol Dept, Uppsala, Sweden;
35.Wageningen Univ & Res, Plant Ecol & Nat Conservat Grp, Wageningen, Netherlands;
36.British Columbia Publ Serv, Victoria, BC, Canada;
37.Univ Vienna, Dept Bot & Biodivers Res, Vienna, Austria;
38.Oak Ridge Natl Lab, Climate Change Sci Inst, Oak Ridge, TN USA;
39.Oak Ridge Natl Lab, Environm Sci Div, Oak Ridge, TN USA;
40.Univ Bergen, Dept Biol, Bergen, Norway;
41.Univ Saskatchewan, Dept Biol, Saskatoon, SK, Canada;
42.Umea Univ, Dept Ecol & Environm Sci, Umea, Sweden;
43.VUB, Dept Biol, Brussels, Belgium;
44.Univ Helsinki, Fac Biol & Environm Sci, Helsinki, Finland;
45.Univ Quebec Trois Rivieres, Dept Sci Environm, Trois Rivieres, PQ, Canada;
46.Univ Quebec Trois Rivieres, Ctr Etudes Nord, Trois Rivieres, PQ, Canada;
47.Eawag Swiss Fed Inst Aquat Sci & Technol, Dubendorf, Switzerland;
48.Univ Copenhagen, Dept Biol, Copenhagen, Denmark;
49.Univ Copenhagen, Ctr Permafrost CENPERM, Copenhagen, Denmark;
50.Res Inst Nat & Forest INBO, Brussels, Belgium;
51.Florida Int Univ, Dept Biol Sci, Miami, FL 33199 USA;
52.Lomonosov Moscow State Univ, Dept Geobot, Moscow, Russia;
53.Leiden Univ, CML, Dept Inst Environm Sci, Environm Biol, Leiden, Netherlands;
54.Univ Calif Riverside, Dept Biol, Riverside, CA 92521 USA;
55.Norwegian Univ Sci & Technol, NTNU Univ Museum, Trondheim, Norway;
56.Univ Alaska, Water & Environm Res Ctr, Fairbanks, AK 99701 USA;
57.Univ Utrecht, Copernicus Inst Sustainable Dev, Environm Sci, Utrecht, Netherlands;
58.Univ Waterloo, Sch Environm Resources & Sustainabil, Waterloo, ON, Canada;
59.Australian Natl Univ, Res Sch Biol, Acton, ACT, Australia;
60.Deakin Univ, Sch Life & Environm Sci, Ctr Integrat Ecol, Burwood, Vic, Australia;
61.Univ Bonn, Dept Geog, Bonn, Germany;
62.Univ Innsbruck, Dept Ecol, Innsbruck, Austria;
63.Univ Oxford, Sch Geog & Environm, Environm Change Inst, Oxford, England;
64.Rocky Mt Biol Labs, Crested Butte, CO USA;
65.Univ Camerino, Sch Biosci & Vet Med, Plant Divers & Ecosyst Management Unit, Camerino, Italy;
66.Univ Insubria, DiSTA, Varese, Italy;
67.Univ Alaska, Inst Arctic Biol, Fairbanks, AK 99775 USA;
68.Univ Wurzburg, Dept Anim Ecol & Trop Biol, Wurzburg, Germany;
69.Univ Manchester, Sch Earth & Environm Sci, Manchester, Lancs, England;
70.Univ Nacl Cordoba, CONICET, Inst Multidisciplinario Biol Vegetal IMBIV, Cordoba, Argentina;
71.Univ Nacl Cordoba, FCEFyN, Cordoba, Argentina;
72.Harvard Univ, Dept Organism & Evolutionary Biol, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA;
73.Stanford Univ, Dept Earth Syst Sci, Stanford, CA 94305 USA;
74.Estonian Univ Life Sci, Inst Agr & Environm Sci, Tartu, Estonia;
75.CREAF, Cerdanyola Del Valles, Spain;
76.Univ Minnesota, Dept Forest Resources, St Paul, MN 55108 USA;
77.Western Sydney Univ, Hawkesbury Inst Environm, Penrith, NSW, Australia;
78.Algoma Univ, Dept Biol, Sault Ste Marie, ON, Canada;
79.Komarov Bot Inst, St Petersburg, Russia
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714
Thomas, H. J. D.,Myers-Smith, I. H.,Bjorkman, A. D.,et al. Traditional plant functional groups explain variation in economic but not size-related traits across the tundra biome[J],2019,28(2):78-95.
APA Thomas, H. J. D..,Myers-Smith, I. H..,Bjorkman, A. D..,Elmendorf, S. C..,Blok, D..,...&van Bodegom, P. M..(2019).Traditional plant functional groups explain variation in economic but not size-related traits across the tundra biome.GLOBAL ECOLOGY AND BIOGEOGRAPHY,28(2),78-95.
MLA Thomas, H. J. D.,et al."Traditional plant functional groups explain variation in economic but not size-related traits across the tundra biome".GLOBAL ECOLOGY AND BIOGEOGRAPHY 28.2(2019):78-95.
条目包含的文件
条目无相关文件。
个性服务
推荐该条目
保存到收藏夹
导出为Endnote文件
谷歌学术
谷歌学术中相似的文章
[Thomas, H. J. D.]的文章
[Myers-Smith, I. H.]的文章
[Bjorkman, A. D.]的文章
百度学术
百度学术中相似的文章
[Thomas, H. J. D.]的文章
[Myers-Smith, I. H.]的文章
[Bjorkman, A. D.]的文章
必应学术
必应学术中相似的文章
[Thomas, H. J. D.]的文章
[Myers-Smith, I. H.]的文章
[Bjorkman, A. D.]的文章
相关权益政策
暂无数据
收藏/分享

除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。