4.7 Article

Traditional plant functional groups explain variation in economic but not size-related traits across the tundra biome

Journal

GLOBAL ECOLOGY AND BIOGEOGRAPHY
Volume 28, Issue 2, Pages 78-95

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/geb.12783

Keywords

cluster analysis; community composition; ecosystem function; plant functional groups; plant functional types; plant traits; tundra biome; vegetation change

Funding

  1. Natural Environment Research Council [NE/M016323/1, NE/L002558/1]
  2. Academy of Finland [256991]
  3. ArcticNet
  4. Arctic Research Centre
  5. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
  6. Carlsberg Foundation [2013-01-0825]
  7. Danish Council for Independent Research [DFF 4181-00565]
  8. European Research Council [ERC-SyG-2013-610028 IMBALANCE-P]
  9. Synthesis Centre of the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig [DFG FZT 118]
  10. JPI Climate [291581]
  11. Marie Sklodowska Curie Actions [INCA 600398]
  12. Montagna di Torricchio Nature Reserve
  13. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  14. US National Science Foundation [DEB-1637686, DEB-1234162, DEB-1242531]
  15. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  16. Organismo Autonomo Parques Nacionales
  17. Polar Continental Shelf Program
  18. Royal Canadian Mounted Police
  19. Russian Science Foundation [14-50-000290]
  20. Swedish Research Council [2015-00465 015-00498]
  21. Swiss National Science Foundation
  22. University of Zurich
  23. U.S. Department of Energy
  24. NERC [NE/M016323/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  25. Natural Environment Research Council [1523208] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

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.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available