↓ Skip to main content

Functional traits can improve our understanding of niche- and dispersal-based processes

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
Title
Functional traits can improve our understanding of niche- and dispersal-based processes
Published in
Oecologia, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00442-018-4060-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Feng Jiang, Yanhan Xun, Huiying Cai, Guangze Jin

Abstract

Ecologists often determine the relative importance of niche- and dispersal-based processes via variation partitioning based on species composition. Functional traits and their proxies of phylogeny are expected to increase the detection of niche-based processes and reduce the unexplained variation relative to species identity. We collected eight adult tree traits and phylogenetic data of 41 species and employed a phylogenetic fuzzy weighting method to address this issue in a 9-ha temperate forest dynamics plot. We used redundancy analysis to relate species, phylogenetic and functional compositions to environmental (soil resources and topography) and spatial variables. We also performed multi-scaled analyses on spatial variables by adding environment as the covariates to determine if functional traits increase the detection of niche-based processes at broad scales. The functional traits and intraspecific variation of the wood density among ontogenetic stages could dramatically increase the detection of niche-based processes and reduce the unexplained variation relative to species identity. Phylogenetic and functional compositions were mainly driven by total soil P and elevation, while species composition was weakly affected by multiple environmental variables. After controlling for the environment, a larger amount of the compositional variations in seed mass and maximum height were explained by finer-scaled spatial variables, indicating that dispersal processes may be important at fine spatial scales. Our results suggested that considering functional traits and their intraspecific variations could improve our understanding of ecological processes and increase our ability to predict the responses of plants to environmental change.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 25%
Researcher 9 16%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 10 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 46%
Environmental Science 17 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 2%
Unknown 11 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 January 2018.
All research outputs
#18,584,192
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#3,665
of 4,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#331,573
of 443,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#55
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,236 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 443,289 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.