4.8 Article

Longer growing seasons shift grassland vegetation towards more-productive species

Journal

NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE
Volume 6, Issue 9, Pages 865-868

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/NCLIMATE3032

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. US National Science Foundation [DEB 1242529]
  2. Division Of Environmental Biology
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences [1242529] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite advances in plant functional ecology that provide a framework for predicting the responses of vegetation to environmental change(1-3), links between plant functional strategies and elevated temperatures are poorly understood(3-5). Here, we analyse the response of a species-rich grassland in northern England to two decades of temperature and rainfall manipulations in the context of the functional attributes of 21 coexisting species that represent a large array of resource-use strategies. Three principal traits, including body size (canopy height), tissue investment (leaf construction cost), and seed size, varied independently across species and reflect tradeoffs associated with competitiveness, stress tolerance, and colonization ability. Unlike past studies(5-7), our results reveal a strong association between functional traits and temperature regime; species favoured by extended growing seasons have taller canopies and faster assimilation rates, which has come at the expense of those species of high tissue investment. This trait-warming association was three times higher in deep soils, suggesting species shifts have been strongly mediated by competition(8). In contrast, vegetation shifts from rainfall manipulations have been associated only with tissue investment. Functional shifts towards faster growing species in response to warming may be responsible for a marginal increase in productivity in a system that was assumed to be nutrient-limited(9).

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available