Pubblicazioni Scientifiche

Filtri di ricerca 3 risultati
Reset
Pubblicazioni per anno
TRY plant trait database – enhanced coverage and open access
Kattge , Jens , Bönisch , Gerhard , Díaz , Sandra M. , Lavorel , Sandra , Prentice , Iain Colin , Leadley , Paul W. , Tautenhahn , Susanne , Werner , Gijsbert , Aakala , Tuomas , Abedi , Mehdi , Acosta , Alicia Teresa Rosario , Adamidis , George C. , Adamson , Kairi , Aiba , Masahiro , Albert , Cécile Hélène , Alcántara , Julio M. , Alcázar C , Carolina , Aleixo , Izabela , Ali , Hamada E. , Amiaud , Bernard , Ammer , Christian , Amoroso , Mariano Martín , Anand , Madhur , Anderson , Carolyn G. , Anten , Niels P.R. , Antos , Joseph A. , Apgaua , Deborah Mattos Guimarães , Ashman , Tia Lynn , Asmara , Degi Harja , Asner , Gregory P. , Aspinwall , Michael J. , Atkin , Owen K. , Aubin , Isabelle , Baastrup-Spohr , Lars , Bahalkeh , Khadijeh , Bahn , Michael , Baker , Timothy R. , Baker , William J. , Bakker , Jan P. , Baldocchi , Dennis D. , Baltzer , Jennifer L. , Banerjee , Arindam , Baranger , Anne , Barlow , Jos B. , Barneche , Diego R. , Baruch , Zdravko , Bastianelli , Denis , Battles , John J. , Bauerle , William L. , Bauters , Marijn , Bazzato , Erika , Beckmann , Michael , Beeckman , Hans , Beierkuhnlein , Carl , Bekker , Renée M. , Belfry , Gavin , Belluau , Michaël , Beloiu Schwenke , Mirela , Benavides , Raquel , Benomar , Lahcen , Berdugo-Lattke , Mary Lee , Berenguer , Erika , Bergamin , Rodrigo Scarton , Bergmann , Joana , Carlucci , Marcos B. , Berner , Logan T. , Bernhardt-Römermann , Markus , Bigler , Christof , Bjorkman , Anne D. , Blackman , Chris J. , Blanco , Carolina Casagrande , Blonder , Benjamin Wong , Blumenthal , Dana M. , Bocanegra-González , Kelly Tatiana , Boeckx , Pascal , Bohlman , Stephanie Ann , Böhning-Gaese , Katrin , Boisvert-Marsh , Laura , Bond , William J. , Bond-Lamberty , Ben P. , Boom , Arnoud , Boonman , Coline C.F. , Bordin , Kauane Maiara , Boughton , Elizabeth H. , Boukili , Vanessa K.S. , Bowman , David M.J.S. , Bravo , Sandra Josefina , Brendel , Marco R. , Broadley , Martin R. , Brown , Kerry A. , Bruelheide , Helge , Brumnich , Federico , Bruun , Hans Henrik , Bruy , David , Buchanan , Serra Willow , Bucher , Solveig Franziska , Buchmann , Nina , Buitenwerf , Robert , Bunker , Daniel E. , Bürger , Jana
functional diversity data coverage data integration data representativeness plant traits try plant trait database
Mostra abstract
Plant traits—the morphological, anatomical, physiological, biochemical and phenological characteristics of plants—determine how plants respond to environmental factors, affect other trophic levels, and influence ecosystem properties and their benefits and detriments to people. Plant trait data thus represent the basis for a vast area of research spanning from evolutionary biology, community and functional ecology, to biodiversity conservation, ecosystem and landscape management, restoration, biogeography and earth system modelling. Since its foundation in 2007, the TRY database of plant traits has grown continuously. It now provides unprecedented data coverage under an open access data policy and is the main plant trait database used by the research community worldwide. Increasingly, the TRY database also supports new frontiers of trait-based plant research, including the identification of data gaps and the subsequent mobilization or measurement of new data. To support this development, in this article we evaluate the extent of the trait data compiled in TRY and analyse emerging patterns of data coverage and representativeness. Best species coverage is achieved for categorical traits—almost complete coverage for ‘plant growth form’. However, most traits relevant for ecology and vegetation modelling are characterized by continuous intraspecific variation and trait–environmental relationships. These traits have to be measured on individual plants in their respective environment. Despite unprecedented data coverage, we observe a humbling lack of completeness and representativeness of these continuous traits in many aspects. We, therefore, conclude that reducing data gaps and biases in the TRY database remains a key challenge and requires a coordinated approach to data mobilization and trait measurements. This can only be achieved in collaboration with other initiatives. © 2019 The Authors. Global Change Biology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd
🔗 Vai alla pubblicazione
2020
Rivista
Global Change Biology
Dettagli
Vol. 26 (1) pp. 119 - 188
DOI
Words apart: Standardizing forestry terms and definitions across European biodiversity studies
Trentanovi , Giovanni , Campagnaro , Thomas , Sitzia , Tommaso , Chianucci , Francesco , Vacchiano , Giorgio , Ammer , Christian , Ciach , Michał , Nagel , Thomas A. , del Río , Miren , Paillet , Yoan , Munzi , Silvana , Vandekerkhove , Kris , Bravo-Oviedo , Andrés , Cutini , Andrea , D'Andrea , Ettore , de Smedt , Pallieter , Doerfler , Inken , Fotakis , Dimitrios G. , Heilmann-Clausen , Jacob , Hofmeister , Jeňýk , Hošek , Jan , Janssen , Philippe , Kepfer-Rojas , Sebastian , Korboulewsky , Nathalie , Kovács , Bence , Kozák , Daniel , Lachat , Thibault , Mårell , Anders , Matula , Radim , Mikoláš , Martin , Nordén , Björn , Ódor , Péter , Perović , Marko , Pötzelsberger , Elisabeth , Schall , Peter , Svoboda , Miroslav , Tinya , Flóra , Ujházyová , Mariana , Burrascano , Sabina
forest management silviculture multi-taxon data harmonization terminology
Mostra abstract
Forest biodiversity studies conducted across Europe use a multitude of forestry terms, often inconsistently. This hinders the comparability across studies and makes the assessment of the impacts of forest management on biodiversity highly context-dependent. Recent attempts to standardize forestry and stand description terminology mostly used a top-down approach that did not account for the perspectives and approaches of forest biodiversity experts. This work aims to establish common standards for silvicultural and vegetation definitions, creating a shared conceptual framework for a consistent study on the effects of forest management on biodiversity. We have identified both strengths and weaknesses of the silvicultural and vegetation information provided in forest biodiversity studies. While quantitative data on forest biomass and dominant tree species are frequently included, information on silvicultural activities and vegetation composition is often lacking, shallow, or based on broad and heterogeneous classifications. We discuss the existing classifications and their use in European forest biodiversity studies through a novel bottom-up and top-driven review process, and ultimately propose a common framework. This will enhance the comparability of forest biodiversity studies in Europe, and puts the basis for effective implementation and monitoring of sustainable forest management policies. The standards here proposed are potentially adaptable and applicable to other geographical areas and could be extended to other forest interventions. © 2023 The Authors
🔗 Vai alla pubblicazione
2023
Rivista
Forest Ecosystems
Dettagli
Vol. 10
DOI
Handbook of field sampling for multi-taxon biodiversity studies in European forests
Burrascano , Sabina , Trentanovi , Giovanni , Paillet , Yoan , Heilmann-Clausen , Jacob , Giordani , P. , Bagella , Simonetta , Bravo-Oviedo , Andrés , Campagnaro , Thomas , Campanaro , Alessandro , Chianucci , Francesco , de Smedt , Pallieter , Itziar , García Mijangos , Matošević , Dinka , Sitzia , Tommaso , Aszalós , Réka , Brazaitis , Gediminas , Cutini , Andrea , D'Andrea , Ettore , Doerfler , Inken , Hofmeister , Jeňýk , Hošek , Jan , Janssen , Philippe , Kepfer-Rojas , Sebastian , Korboulewsky , Nathalie , Kozák , Daniel , Lachat , Thibault , Lõhmus , Asko , López , Rosana , Mårell , Anders , Matula , Radim , Mikoláš , Martin , Munzi , Silvana , Nordén , Björn , Pärtel , Meelis , Penner , Johannes , Runnel , Kadri , Schall , Peter , Svoboda , Miroslav , Tinya , Flóra , Ujházyová , Mariana , Vandekerkhove , Kris , Verheyen , Kris , Xystrakis , Fotios , Ódor , Péter
biodiversity forest stand structure multi-taxon field methods indicators sampling protocol
Mostra abstract
Forests host most terrestrial biodiversity and their sustainable management is crucial to halt biodiversity loss. Although scientific evidence indicates that sustainable forest management (SFM) should be assessed by monitoring multi-taxon biodiversity, most current SFM criteria and indicators account only for trees or consider indirect biodiversity proxies. Several projects performed multi-taxon sampling to investigate the effects of forest management on biodiversity, but the large variability of their sampling approaches hampers the identification of general trends, and limits broad-scale inference for designing SFM. Here we address the need of common sampling protocols for forest structure and multi-taxon biodiversity to be used at broad spatial scales. We established a network of researchers involved in 41 projects on forest multi-taxon biodiversity across 13 European countries. The network data structure comprised the assessment of at least three taxa, and the measurement of forest stand structure in the same plots or stands. We mapped the sampling approaches to multi-taxon biodiversity, standing trees and deadwood, and used this overview to provide operational answers to two simple, yet crucial, questions: what to sample? How to sample? The most commonly sampled taxonomic groups are vascular plants (83% of datasets), beetles (80%), lichens (66%), birds (66%), fungi (61%), bryophytes (49%). They cover different forest structures and habitats, with a limited focus on soil, litter and forest canopy. Notwithstanding the common goal of assessing forest management effects on biodiversity, sampling approaches differed widely within and among taxonomic groups. Differences derive from sampling units (plots size, use of stand vs. plot scale), and from the focus on different substrates or functional groups of organisms. Sampling methods for standing trees and lying deadwood were relatively homogeneous and focused on volume calculations, but with a great variability in sampling units and diameter thresholds. We developed a handbook of sampling methods (SI 3) aimed at the greatest possible comparability across taxonomic groups and studies as a basis for European-wide biodiversity monitoring programs, robust understanding of biodiversity response to forest structure and management, and the identification of direct indicators of SFM. © 2021 The Authors
🔗 Vai alla pubblicazione
2021
Rivista
Ecological Indicators
Dettagli
Vol. 132
DOI