↓ Skip to main content

Species’ traits do not converge on optimum values in preferred habitats

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
Title
Species’ traits do not converge on optimum values in preferred habitats
Published in
Oecologia, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00442-017-4041-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rachel M. Mitchell, Justin P. Wright, Greg M. Ames

Abstract

Plant trait expression is shaped by filters, which can alter trait means and variances, theoretically driving species toward an "optimum" trait value for a set of environmental conditions. Recent research has highlighted the ubiquity of intraspecific variation in functional traits, which can cause plants to diverge from a hypothesized "optimum". We examined whether species occurring in "core" habitats (where they occur frequently, abundantly, and consistently) express traits that are nearer to "optimum", as captured by the community-weighted mean (CWM). We also asked whether trait variance showed signs of environmental filtering. We used cluster analysis to group plots based on environmental factors along a wet-to-dry ecotone. We used indicator species analysis to identify species with strong associations within each cluster. Trait means and variances were compared, and evidence of variance filtering was tested using a null-model approach. Trait means and trait variances respond to local-scale environmental filtering and species in core habitats were not necessarily nearer to the CWM than in other habitats. Intraspecific trait variability shows a strong signal of filtering, as variability was reduced for nearly all species and all traits compared to estimates of variability generated in the absence of environmental filtering. Our results provide strong evidence that species traits are not necessarily near "optimum" trait values in core habitats, and that trait distributions within species are strongly shaped by the environment. Future analyses should account for this divergence when calculating metrics of functional diversity, and extrapolating to ecosystem function.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 90 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 22%
Researcher 17 19%
Student > Master 14 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 11 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 45 50%
Environmental Science 29 32%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 1%
Neuroscience 1 1%
Unknown 14 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 January 2018.
All research outputs
#6,371,205
of 23,509,253 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#1,378
of 4,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,396
of 441,771 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#34
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,509,253 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,286 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 441,771 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.