MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396915447 · doi:10.1139/er-2023-0128

Applications of structural equation modeling in plant functional trait research

2024· article· en· W4396915447 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGreenhouse Technology and Climate Control
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Hunan ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsStructural equation modelingTraitEcologyBiologyPsychologyEconometricsBiological systemEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(1) Plant functional traits, which encompass morphological, physiological, and ecological characteristics, are key to plant adaptation, growth, and development. In recent years, the structural equation model (SEM) has gained widespread use as a powerful statistical tool for studying plant functional traits and conducting research in this field. Its ability to distinguish between direct and indirect effects makes the SEM a robust method for investigating the complex relationships among environment components, traits, and ecosystem functions. (2) Here, we review and discuss four commonly used SEMs: (1) the covariance-based structural equation model, (2) the piecewise structural equation model, (3) the Bayesian structural equation model, and (4) the partial least squares structural equation model. We also explore their applications in three typical ecosystems—forest, grassland, and wetland ecosystems—and investigate these forms of SEM in the context of their use in trait-ecosystem function research. 3. Our specific objectives were to: (i) compare the advantages and disadvantages of these four types of SEMs; (ii) analyze the current state of research on SEM applications in plant functional traits across diverse ecosystems; and (iii) highlight new approaches and potential research areas for the future application of SEM in plant functional traits. 4. In this paper, several key findings were obtained: (i) the selection of SEM type is influenced by the different spatial scales of the study; (ii) latent and composite variables were less commonly utilized in recent SEM studies; and (iii) while SEMs have proven effective in distinguishing between direct and indirect effects to unravel the complex relationships among multiple variables, indirect effects deserve more attention in general studies. We propose that future applications of SEMs in plant functional traits should incorporate a broader spectrum of traits as well as the trade-offs between them. Larger and more diverse databases of plant functional traits would help make SEM analyses more accurate across different scales.

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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.167 · 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