MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224242175 · doi:10.1111/1365-2745.13894

Above‐ and belowground drivers of intraspecific trait variability across subcontinental gradients for five ubiquitous forest plants in North America

2022· article· en· W4224242175 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Françoise Cardou, Alison D. Munson, Laura Boisvert‐Marsh, Madhur Anand, André Arsenault, Frederick W. Bell, Yves Bergeron, Isabelle Boulangeat, Sylvain Delagrange, Nicole J. Fenton, Dominique Gravel, Benoı̂t Hamel, François Hébert, Jill F. Johnstone, Bright B. Kumordzi, S. Ellen Macdonald, Azim U. Mallik, Anne C.S. McIntosh, Jennie R. McLaren, Christian Messier, Dave Morris, Bill Shipley, Luc Sirois, Nelson Thiffault, Isabelle Aubin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ecology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Energy, Northern Development and MinesUniversity of AlbertaUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisUniversity of TorontoUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-TémiscamingueUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité du Québec à RimouskiLakehead UniversityOntario Forest Research InstituteUniversity of GuelphNatural Resources CanadaUniversité LavalThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of SaskatchewanCanadian Forest Service
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Resources CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAbiotic componentIntraspecific competitionEnvironmental gradientCanopyBiologyEcologyTraitUnderstorySpecific leaf areaBotanyHabitatPhotosynthesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Intraspecific trait variability (ITV) provides the material for species' adaptation to environmental changes. To advance our understanding of how ITV can contribute to species' adaptation to a wide range of environmental conditions, we studied five widespread understorey forest species exposed to both continental‐scale climate gradients, and local soil and disturbance gradients. We investigated the environmental drivers of between‐site leaf and root trait variation, and tested whether higher between‐site ITV was associated with increased trait sensitivity to environmental variation (i.e. environmental fit). We measured morphological (specific leaf area: SLA, specific root length: SRL) and chemical traits (Leaf and Root N, P, K, Mg, Ca) of five forest understorey vascular plant species at 78 sites across Canada. A total of 261 species‐by‐site combinations spanning ~4300 km were sampled, capturing important abiotic and biotic environmental gradients (neighbourhood composition, canopy structure, soil conditions, climate). We used multivariate and univariate linear mixed models to identify drivers of ITV and test the association of between‐site ITV with environmental fit. Between‐site ITV of leaf traits was primarily driven by canopy structure and climate. Comparatively, environmental drivers explained only a small proportion of variability in root traits: these relationships were trait specific and included soil conditions (Root P), canopy structure (Root N) and neighbourhood composition (SRL, Root K). Between‐site ITV was associated with increased environmental fit only for a minority of traits, primarily in response to climate (SLA, Leaf N, SRL). Synthesis . By studying how ITV is structured along environmental gradients among species adapted to a wide range of conditions, we can begin to understand how individual species might respond to environmental change. Our results show that generalisable trait–environment relationships occur primarily aboveground, and only accounted for a small proportion of variability. For our group of species with broad ecological niches, variability in traits was only rarely associated with higher environmental fit, and primarily along climatic gradients. These results point to promising research avenues on the various ways in which trait variation can affect species' performance along different environmental gradients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EcologySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207