Functional diversity indices reveal the impacts of land use intensification on plant community assembly

By R. Pakeman. 2011

222 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4aa710e83d7f0bb9bf27e7df76a59f3fe196cf7d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Global and Planetary Change

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Hierarchical effects of environmental filters on the functional structure of plant communities: a case study in the French Alps (2013, background): “Moreover, the functional structure of communities cannot be assessed by a single measure but rather needs a multi-faceted approach (Diaz et al. 2007, Pakeman 2011).”
Fertilization decreases species diversity but increases functional diversity: A three-year experiment in a Tibetan alpine meadow (2014, background): “to link biodiversity to productivity following fertilization are rare (but see Mason et al., 2011; Pakeman, 2011).”
Biotic homogenization: Loss of avian functional richness and habitat specialists in disturbed Andean temperate forests (2015, background): “…at large scales reported that changes in diversity across gradients of habitat disturbance result in the alteration of ecosystem functions provided bymultiple taxa, including insects, birds, andmammals (Benton et al., 2002; Donald et al., 2001; Flynn et al., 2009; Luck et al., 2013; Pakeman, 2011).”
Which trait dissimilarity for functional diversity: trait means or trait overlap? (2013, methodology): “The assumption Journal of Vegetation Science 4 Doi: 10.1111/jvs.12008© 2012 International Association for Vegetation Science of a reduction in species richness of around 80% from the species pool to the community level was based on field observations (Pärtel et al. 1996).”
Measuring the success of reforestation for restoring biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (2016, background): “Pakeman (2011) suggests that low levels of FEve can be indicative of sites with little 390 disturbance, where competition may be important in structuring the community, whereas in 391 habitats where competition is low, such as highly disturbed areas, FEve can be high (even 392 though FRic is low).”
Topography related habitat associations of tree species traits, composition and diversity in a Chinese tropical forest (2014, background): “Nowadays, functional diversity indices, including functional richness, functional evenness and functional divergence, are widely used to shed light on community assembly processes among different forest types (Villeger et al., 2008; Pakeman, 2011; Laliberté et al., 2013; Purschke et al., 2013), and ”
Functional trait metrics are sensitive to the completeness of the species' trait data? (2014, background): “This excluded the wetland and woodland sites referred to in previous papers as they shared few species with the other sites, and hence, the differences in species composition may have swamped the analysis described here (Pakeman 2011a,b; Pakeman, Lennon & Brooker 2011).”
A guide for using functional diversity indices to reveal changes in assembly processes along ecological gradients (2013, background): “Recent theoretical and practical advances in the measurement of functional diversity have led to an increase in the use of functional diversity indices to detect changes in community assembly processes along ecological gradients (Mason et al. 2011a,b; Pakeman 2011; Spasojevic & Suding 2012).”
Does pollen-assemblage richness reflect floristic richness? A review of recent developments and future challenges (2016, unknown): “…diversity 1195 Functional diversity (FD) is an important component of biodiversity that considers the range of 1196 functions that organisms perform in communities and ecosystems (Purvis and Hector, 2000; Hooper 1197 et al., 2002; Petchey and Gaston, 2002, 2006; Pakeman, 2011; Mace et al., 2014).”
Plant functional diversity and carbon storage – an empirical test in semi‐arid forest ecosystems (2013, methodology): “We chose this metric because it is a close multi-trait analogue of FDvar and has also been successfully applied to empirical studies with general objectives similar to ours (e.g. Mouillot et al. 2011; Pakeman 2011; Navas & Fayolle 2012).”
Contrasting changes in taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional diversity during a long‐term succession: insights into assembly processes (2013, background): “At the same time, lower levels of interspecific competition in the less dense vegetation of the early and early-mid successional habitats may allow the coexistence of functionally similar species (cf. Dinnage 2009; Pakeman 2011).”
Changes in assembly rules along a stress gradient from open dry grasslands to wetlands (2016, background): “This contradicts Coyle’s hypothesis, and is more in line with the findings and predictions of Pakeman (2011), Mason et al. (2012), Carboni et al. (2014), and supports Grime’s (2006) prediction that higher productivity leads to trait convergence.”