When and how should intraspecific variability be considered in trait-based plant ecology?

By Cécile H. Albert, F. Grassein, Frank M. Schurr, G. Vieilledent, C. Violle. 2011

573 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Genetics, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/dfff56cb416638d21ff417280b705899b968ca07

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 Genetics

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Designing resilient and sustainable grasslands for a drier future: Adaptive strategies, functional traits and biotic interactions (2013, background): “In plant ecology working on native plant species, the inter-specific variability of functional traits has been recently challenged by the increasingly recognized importance of intra-specific and ecotypic variability (Albert et al. 2011; Violle et al. 2012).”
Biodiversity of Palaearctic grasslands: a synthesis (2014, background): “While ecosystem functioning at a given time is chiefly determined by trait values of the dominant contributors to plant biomass (biomass-ratio hypothesis: Grime, 1998), intraspecific trait variability should be considered when studying responses in ecosystem functioning over longer time scales (Albe”
Spatial scale and intraspecific trait variability mediate assembly rules in alpine grasslands (2017, background): “(iii) Finally, we make the hypothesis that the inclusion of ITV is more relevant for inferring community assembly processes at a small spatial scale where species turnover is less pervasive than at large spatial scale (Albert et al. 2011; Siefert et al. 2015).”
Functional richness: Overview of indices and underlying concepts (2018, background): “…account the intraspecific trait variability: the emergence of new approaches In this work, we consider the taking into account of intraspecific trait variability (ITV) as the fact that a functional trait is considered as a random variable drawn from a probability distribution (Albert et al. 2011).”
Grazing‐induced shifts in community functional composition and soil nutrient availability in Tibetan alpine meadows (2016, background): “Conversely, a functional response driven by species turnover suggests community function will more likely be disrupted by disturbance (Albert et al. 2011; Bolnick et al. 2011; Violle et al. 2012).”
Functional trait metrics are sensitive to the completeness of the species' trait data? (2014, background): “The trade-off, however, is exacerbated if there is considerable intraspecific variation in the traits of interest (Albert et al. 2011; Pakeman 2013); the same amount of effort is needed to measure the traits of 20% of the species under Scenario 2 as for all the species under Scenarios 1 and 3.”