MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410417322 · doi:10.1002/ecm.70018

Raunkiæran shortfalls: Challenges and perspectives in trait‐based ecology

2025· article· en· W4410417322 on OpenAlexaff
Francesco de Bello, Felícia M. Fischer, Javier Puy, Bill Shipley, Miguel Verdú, Lars Götzenberger, Sandra Lavorel, Marco Moretti, Ian J. Wright, Matty P. Berg, Carlos P. Carmona, Johannes H. C. Cornelissen, André T. C. Dias, Heloise Gibb, Jan Lepš, Joshua S. Madin, Maria Májeková, Juli G. Pausas, Jules Segrestin, Mar Sobral, Amy E. Zanne, Éric Garnier

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Monographs · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónAkademie Věd České RepublikyMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónEesti Teadusagentuur
KeywordsEcologyTraitBiologyGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Trait‐based ecology, a prominent research field identifying traits linked to the distribution and interactions of organisms and their impact on ecosystem functioning, has flourished in the last three decades. Yet, the field still grapples with critical challenges, broadly framed as Raunkiæran shortfalls. Recognizing and interconnecting these limitations is vital for designing and prioritizing research objectives and mainstreaming trait‐based approaches across a variety of organisms, trophic levels, and biomes. This strategic review scrutinizes eight major limitations within trait‐based ecology, spanning scales from organisms to the entire biosphere. Challenges range from defining and measuring traits (SF 1), exploring intraspecific variability within and across individuals and populations (SF 2), understanding the complex relationships between trait variation and fitness (SF 3), and discerning trait variations with underlying evolutionary patterns (SF 4). This review extends to community assembly (SF 5), ecosystem functioning and multitrophic relationships (SFs 6 and 7), and global repositories and scaling (SF 8). At the core of trait‐based ecology lies the ambition of scaling up processes from individuals to ecosystems by exploring the ecological strategies of organisms and connecting them to ecosystem functions across multiple trophic levels. Achieving this goal necessitates addressing key limitations embedded in the foundations of trait‐based ecology. After identifying key SFs, we propose pathways for advancing trait‐based ecology, fortifying its robustness, and unlocking its full potential to significantly contribute to ecological understanding and biodiversity conservation. This review underscores the significance of systematically evaluating the performance of organisms in standardized conditions, encompassing their responses to environmental variation and effects on ecosystems. This approach aims to bridge the gap between easily measurable traits, species ecological strategies, their demography, and their combined impacts on ecosystems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0080.016
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0050.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations30
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological MonographsSame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207