{"id":5367,"date":"2024-08-05T08:00:12","date_gmt":"2024-08-05T08:00:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/the-jena-experiment.de\/?p=5367"},"modified":"2024-08-05T08:20:52","modified_gmt":"2024-08-05T08:20:52","slug":"new-publicaion-from-lipoma-et-al-in-global-ecology-biogeography","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/the-jena-experiment.de\/index.php\/2024\/08\/05\/new-publicaion-from-lipoma-et-al-in-global-ecology-biogeography\/","title":{"rendered":"New Publicaion from Lipoma et al. in Global Ecology & Biogeography: No general support for functional diversity enhancing resilience across terrestrial plant communities"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Aim<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Understanding the mechanisms promoting resilience in \nplant communities is crucial in times of increasing disturbance and \nglobal environmental change. Here, we present the first meta-analysis \nevaluating the relationship between functional diversity and resilience \nof plant communities. Specifically, we tested whether the resilience of \nplant communities is positively correlated with interspecific trait \nvariation (following the niche complementarity hypothesis) and the \ndominance of acquisitive and small-size species (following the mass \nratio hypothesis), and for the context-dependent effects of ecological \nand methodological differences across studies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Location<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Global.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Time Period<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

2004\u20132021.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Major Taxa Studied<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Vascular plants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Methods<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

We compiled a dataset of 69 independent sites from 26 \nstudies that have quantified resilience. For each site, we calculated \nfunctional diversity indices based on the floristic composition and \nfunctional traits of the plant community (obtained from the TRY \ndatabase) which we correlated with resilience of biomass and floristic \ncomposition. After transforming correlation coefficients to Fisher’s Z<\/em>-scores,\n we conducted a hierarchical meta-analysis, using a multilevel \nrandom-effects model that accounted for the non-independence of multiple\n effect sizes and the effects of ecological and methodological \nmoderators.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Results<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In general, we found no positive functional \ndiversity\u2013resilience relationships of grand mean effect sizes. In \ncontrast to our expectations, we encountered a negative relationship \nbetween resilience and trait variety, especially in woody ecosystems, \nwhereas there was a positive relationship between resilience and the \ndominance of acquisitive species in herbaceous ecosystems. Finally, the \nfunctional diversity\u2013resilience relationships were strongly affected by \nboth ecological (biome and disturbance properties) and methodological \n(temporal scale, study design and resilience metric) characteristics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Main Conclusions<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

We rejected our hypothesis of a general positive functional diversity\u2013resilience relationship. In addition to strong context dependency, we propose that idiosyncratic effects of single resident species present in the communities before the disturbances and biological legacies could play major roles in the resilience of terrestrial plant communities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Reference:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Lipoma, L., S. Kambach, S. D\u00edaz, F. M. Sabatini, G. Damasceno, et al. (n.d.). No general support for functional diversity enhancing resilience across terrestrial plant communities. Global Ecology and Biogeography n\/a:e13895. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/geb.13895<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Aim Understanding the mechanisms promoting resilience in plant communities is crucial in times of increasing disturbance and global environmental change. Here, we present the first meta-analysis evaluating the relationship between…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":5371,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[15,13],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/the-jena-experiment.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5367"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/the-jena-experiment.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/the-jena-experiment.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/the-jena-experiment.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/the-jena-experiment.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5367"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/the-jena-experiment.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5367\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5369,"href":"https:\/\/the-jena-experiment.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5367\/revisions\/5369"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/the-jena-experiment.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5371"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/the-jena-experiment.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5367"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/the-jena-experiment.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5367"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/the-jena-experiment.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5367"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}