4.7 Article Data Paper

The global spectrum of plant form and function: enhanced species-level trait dataset

期刊

SCIENTIFIC DATA
卷 9, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41597-022-01774-9

关键词

-

资金

  1. TRY initiative on plant traits
  2. European BACI project (Towards a Biosphere Atmosphere change Index, EU) [640176]
  3. FONCyT
  4. CONICET
  5. Universidad Nacional de Cordoba
  6. Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research
  7. Newton Fund (NERC UK -CONICET ARG)
  8. RSF [19-14-00038p]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The 'Global Spectrum of Plant Form and Function Dataset' provides species mean values for six vascular plant traits on a global scale. Based on a large number of trait records, the dataset is the largest and most accurate compilation of vascular plant species mean traits to date, with comprehensive quality control.
Here we provide the 'Global Spectrum of Plant Form and Function Dataset', containing species mean values for six vascular plant traits. Together, these traits -plant height, stem specific density, leaf area, leaf mass per area, leaf nitrogen content per dry mass, and diaspore (seed or spore) mass - define the primary axes of variation in plant form and function. The dataset is based on ca. 1 million trait records received via the TRY database (representing ca. 2,500 original publications) and additional unpublished data. It provides 92,159 species mean values for the six traits, covering 46,047 species. The data are complemented by higher-level taxonomic classification and six categorical traits (woodiness, growth form, succulence, adaptation to terrestrial or aquatic habitats, nutrition type and leaf type). Data quality management is based on a probabilistic approach combined with comprehensive validation against expert knowledge and external information. Intense data acquisition and thorough quality control produced the largest and, to our knowledge, most accurate compilation of empirically observed vascular plant species mean traits to date

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据