ArticleFrontiers in plant science2024
Assessing the functional vulnerability of woody plant communities within a large scale tropical rainforest dynamics plot.
Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Tropical forests are characterized by intricate mosaics of species-rich and structurally complex forest communities. Evaluating the functional vulnerability of distinct community patches is of significant importance in establishing conservation priorities within tropical forests. However, previous assessments of functional vulnerability in tropical forests have often focused solely on isolated factors or individual disturbance events, with limited consideration for a broad spectrum of disturbances and the responses of diverse species. Methods: We assessed the functional vulnerability of woody plant communities in a 60-ha dynamic plot within a tropical montane rainforest by conducting in silico simulations of a wide range disturbances. These simulations combined plant functional traits and community properties, including the distribution of functional redundancy across the entire trait space, the distribution of abundance across species, and the relationship between species trait distinctiveness and species abundance. We also investigated the spatial distribution patterns of functional vulnerability and their scale effects, and employed a spatial autoregressive model to examine the relationships between both biotic and abiotic factors and functional vulnerability at different scales. Results: The functional vulnerability of tropical montane rainforest woody plant communities was generally high (the functional vulnerability of observed communities was very close to that of the most vulnerable virtual community, with a value of 72.41% on average at the 20m×20m quadrat scale), and they exhibited significant spatial heterogeneity. Functional vulnerability decreased with increasing spatial scale and the influence of both biotic and abiotic factors on functional vulnerability was regulated by spatial scale, with soil properties playing a dominant role. Discussion: Our study provides new specific insights into the comprehensive assessment of functional vulnerability in the tropical rainforest. We highlighted that functional vulnerabilities of woody plant communities and their sensitivity to environmental factors varied significantly within and across spatial scales in the tropical rainforest landscape. Preserving and maintaining the functionality of tropical ecosystems should take into consideration the variations in functional vulnerability among different plant communities and their sensitivity to environmental factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.