ВАРИАБИЛЬНОСТЬ ФУНКЦИОНАЛЬНЫХ ПРИЗНАКОВ ЛИСТЬЕВ НЕКОТОРЫХ ВИДОВ ЛУГОВЫХ РАСТЕНИЙ
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Исследование внутривидовой изменчивости трех функциональных признаков листьев: площади – LA, сухой массы – LDW и удельной площади – SLA показало их взаимообусловленность и зависимость значений признаков от благопритяности условий местообитания и антропогенной нагрузки. Анализ полученных данных исследования показал, что универсальные информационные показатели LA и LDW являются низкими в неблагоприятных и низкопродуктивных местообитаниях и более высокими при изобилии ресурсов в более продуктивных условиях существования. Полученные значения SLA видов растений, произрастающих в сообществах интенсивно эксплуатируемых пастбищ, часто имеют более высокие значения. Возможно, адаптация в условиях постоянного изъятия биомассы на сенокосах и пастбищах идет в первую очередь через сокращение массы листьев при сохранении листовой поверхности. В сообществах мезофитных лугов в условиях заповедного режима, характеризующихся высокой продуктивностью, показатели функциональных признаков всех исследованных видов выше по сравнению с менее продуктивными лугами, существующими в условиях дефицита увлажнения. Пастбищные нагрузки, оказывающие отрицательное воздействие на луговые пастбищные травостои, вызывают не только сокращение запасов общей биомассы лугового сообщества, но и изменение индивидуальных функциональных признаков видов растений, их образующих. Библиографические ссылки 1. Воронов А.Г. Геоботаника. М.: Высшая школа, 1973. 384 с.2. Ackerly D., Knight C., Weiss S., Barton K., Starmer K. Leaf size, specific leaf area and microhabitat distribution of chaparral woody plants: contrasting patterns in species level and community level analyses // Oecologia. 2002. Vol. 130, №3. P. 449‒457. doi: 10.1007/s004420100805.3. Bolnick D.I., Svanbäck R., Fordyce J.A., Yang L.H., Davis J.M., Hulsey C.D., Forister M.L. The ecology of individuals: incidence and implications of individual specialization // The American naturalist. 2003. Vol. 161, №1. P. 1‒28. doi:10.1086/343878.4. Chapin F.S. The mineral-nutrition of wild plants // Annual review of ecology, eVolution, and systematics. 1980. Vol. 11. P. 233–260. doi:10.1146/annureVol.es.11.110180.001313.5. Cheng J., Chu P., Chen D., Bai Y., Niu S. Functional correlations between specific leaf area and specific root length along a regional environmental gradient in Inner Mongolia grasslands // Functional ecology. 2016. Vol. 30. P. 985–997. doi: 10.1111/1365-2435.12569.6. Chown S.L., Gaston K.J., Robinson D. Macrophysiology: large-scale patterns in physiological traits and their ecological implications // Functional ecology. 2004. Vol. 18. P. 159–167. doi: 10.1111/j.0269-8463.2004.00825.x.7. Davies C.E., Moss D., Hill M.O. EUNIS habitat classification revised 2004 // Report to: European Environment Agency – European Topic Centre on Nature Protection and Biodiversity. 2004. P. 127‒143.8. Firn J., McGree J.M., Harvey E., Flores-Moreno H., Schutz M., … Risch A.C. Leaf nutrients, not specific leaf area, are consistent indicators of elevated nutrient inputs // Nature ecology and eVolution. 2019. Vol. 3. P. 400–406. doi: 10.1038/s41559-018-0790-1.9. Funk J.L., Cornwell W.K. Leaf traits within communities: Context may affect the mapping of traits to function // Ecology. 2013. Vol. 94. P. 1893–1897. doi: 10.1890/12-1602.1.10. Garnier E. Resource capture, biomass allocation and growth in herbaceous plants // Trends in ecology and eVolution. 1991. VOL. 6. P. 126–131. doi: 10.1016/0169-5347(91)90091-B.11. Garnier E., Cortez J., Billes G., Navas M. L., Roumet C., Debussche M., … Toussaint J. P. Plant functional markers capture ecosystem properties during secondary succession // Ecology. 2004. Vol. 85. P. 2630–2637. doi: 10.1890/03-0799.12. Garnier E., Shipley B., Roumet C., Laurent G. A standardized protocol for the determination of specific leaf area and leaf dry matter content // Functional ecology. 2001. P. 688‒695.13. Givnish T.J. Leaf form in relation to environment: a theoretical study. Princeton University, 1976. 482 p.14. Grime J.P. Trait convergence and trait divergence in herbaceous plant communities: mechanisms and consequences // Journal of vegetation science. 2006. Vol. 17, №2. P. 255‒260. doi: 10.1111/j.1654-1103.2006.tb02444.x.15. Gunn S., Farrar J.F., Collis B.E., Nason M. Specific leaf area in barley: individual leaves versus whole plants // Newphytologist. 1999. Vol. 143. P. 45–51. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-8137.1999.00434.x.16. Hulshof C.M., Swenson N.G. Variation in leaf functional trait values within and across individuals and species: an example from a Costa Rican dry forest // Functional ecology. 2010. Vol. 24, №1. P. 217‒223. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2435.2009.01614.x.17. Lavorel S., Garnier É. Predicting changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning from plant traits: revisiting the Holy Grail // Functional ecology. 2002. Vol. 16, №5. P. 545‒556. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2435.2002.00664.x.18. Linhart Y.B., Grant M.C. Evolutionary significance of local genetic differentiation in plants // Annual review of ecology and systematics. 1996. Vol. 27, №1. P. 237‒277.19. Nicotra A.B., Atkin O.K., Bonser S.P., Davidson A.M., Finnegan E.J., Mathesius U., ... van Kleunen M. Plant phenotypic plasticity in a changing climate // Trends in plant science. 2010. Vol. 15, №12. P. 684‒692. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2010.09.008.20. Niklas K.J., Cobb E.D., Niinemets U., Reich P.B., Sellin A., Shipley B., Wright I.J. «Diminishing returns» in the scaling of functional leaf traits across and within species groups // PNAS. 2007. Vol. 104. P. 8891–8896. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0701135104.21. Pérez-Harguindeguy N., Díaz S., Garnier E., Lavorel S., Poorter H., … Cornelissen J.H.C. Corrigendum to: new handbook for standardized measurement of plant functional traits worldwide // Australian journal of botany. 2016. Vol. 64, №8. P. 715‒716. doi: 10.1071/BT12225_CO.22. Poorter H., Niinemets Ü., Poorter L., Wright I.J., Villar R. Causes and consequences of variation in leaf mass per area (LMA): a meta-analysis // New Phytologist. 2009. Vol. 182. P. 565–588. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02830.x.23. Poorter L., Wright S.J., Paz H., Ackerly D.D., Condit R., Ibarra-Manríquez G., … Wright I.J. Are functional traits good predictors of demographic rates? Evidence from five neotropical forests // Ecology. 2008. Vol. 89. P. 1908–1920. doi: 10.1890/07-0207.1.24. Reich P.B. The world-wide «fast-slow» plant economics spectrum: a traits manifesto // Journal of ecology. 2014. Vol. 102. P. 275–301. doi:10.1111/1365-2745.12211.25. Runions A., Fuhrer M., Lane B., Federl P., Rolland- Lagan A.-G., Prusinkiewicz P. Modeling and visualization of leaf venation patterns // ACM Transaction on Graphics. 2005. Vol. 24. P. 702–711. doi: 10.1145/1186822.1073251.26. Smith W.K., Vogelmann T.C., DeLucia E.H., Bell D.T., Shepherd K.A. Leaf form and photosynthesis: Do leaf structure and orientation interact to regulate internal light and carbon dioxide? // BioScience. 1997. Vol. 47. P. 785–793.27. Tichý L. JUICE, software for vegetation classification // Journal of vegetation science. 2002. Vol. 13, №3. P. 451‒453. doi: 10.1111/j.1654-1103.2002.tb02069.x.28. Violle C., Enquist B.J., McGill B.J., Jiang L.I.N., Albert C.H., Hulshof C., ... Messier J. The return of the variance: intraspecific variability in community ecology // Trends in ecology and eVolution. 2012. Vol. 27, №4. P. 244‒252. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2011.11.014.29. Whitlock C., Shafer S.L., Marlon J. The role of climate and vegetation change in shaping past and future fire regimes in the northwestern US and the implications for ecosystem management // Forest ecology and management. 2003. Vol. 178, №1‒2. P. 5‒21. doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(03)00051-3.30. Worthy S.J., Laughlin D.C., Zambrano J., Umana M.N., Zhang C., Lin L., Cao M., Swenson N.G. Alternative designs and tropical tree seedling growth performance landscapes // Ecology. 2020. Vol. 101. P. e03007. doi: 10.1002/ecy.3007.31. Wright I.J., Reich P.B., Westoby M., Ackerly D.D., Baruch Z., Bongers F., … Prior L. The worldwide leaf economics spectrum // Nature. 2004. Vol. 428. P. 821–827. doi: 10.1038/nature02403.32. Wright I.J., Reich P.B., Cornelissen J.H.C., Falster D.S., Groom P.K., ... Westoby M. Modulation of leaf economic traits and trait relationships by climate // Global ecology and biogeography. 2005. Vol. 14. P. 411–421. doi: 10.1111/j.1466-822x.2005.00172.x.33. Wright I.J., Westoby M. Leaves at low versus high rainfall: coordination of structure, lifespan and physiology // New phytologist. 2002. Vol. 155. P. 403–416. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-8137.2002.00479.x.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.011 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".