Intraspecific trait variability in four geographically widespread peatland plant species in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plant traits directly influence ecosystem carbon exchange through photosynthesis and respiration, and indirectly control nutrient cycling through structural and chemical characteristics. Efforts to understand the role of plant traits in peatland ecosystem functioning under natural and disturbed conditions have primarily focused on community and species means. However, within-species (‘intraspecific’) variability may contribute to plant and ecosystem responses to environmental change. We measured vascular plant traits that influence carbon and nutrient cycling: leaf size (LS), specific leaf area (SLA), leaf dry matter content (LDMC), leaf thickness (L th ), and plant height. For non-vascular Sphagnum moss species, we focused on traits associated with the capacity to carry water and photosynthesize: fascicle density (FD), capitulum mass (M cap ), and length-specific stem mass (M stem ). Our objective was to determine the range and potential drivers of intraspecific trait variation (ITV) at a broad environmental scale. We selected geographically widespread species Carex aquatilis, Rhododendron groenlandicum, Sphagnum fuscum , and S. magellanicum complex and sampled plants from 17 sites within Canada, from Alberta to Quebec. All vascular traits varied between species with C. aquatilis being, on average, taller with thinner and larger leaves but similar structural investment (LDMC) relative to R. groenlandicum . Across all sites, R. groenlandicum had a larger range of variation for height and LS whereas C. aquatilis ranged more in LDMC. Between sites, R. groenlandicum varied more in height whereas C. aquatilis varied more in SLA. Moss traits varied between species, with S. fuscum being, on average, smaller with greater FD than S. magellanicum complex. Across all sites, S. fuscum and S. magellanicum complex had a similar range in trait variation, but contrasting responses in ITV to climate, geography, and vapour pressure deficit. Climatic differences among sites are indicated as potential drivers of ITV in these key plant traits, with implications for ecosystem carbon and nutrient cycling.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".