Sampling plant functional traits: What proportion of the species need to be measured?

Applied Vegetation Science

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 91-96

  Pakeman, Robin J ^a   Quested, Helen M ^b  

^a SCOTTISH CROP RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

^b STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Ecosystem function; Effect trait; Machair; Mass ratio hypothesis; Response trait; Vegetation dynamics

Indexed keywords

EID: 35948942421     PISSN: 14022001     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1658/1402-2001(2007)10[91:SPFTWP]2.0.CO;2     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Cornelissen, J.H.C. & Thompson, K. 1997. Functional leaf attributes predict litter decomposition rate in herbaceous plants. New Phyt. 135: 109-114.
2. Cornelissen, J.H.C., Lavorel, S., Garnier, E., Díaz, S., Buchmann, N. et al. 2003. A handbook of protocols for standardised and easy measurement of plant functional traits worldwide. Aust. J. Bot. 51: 335-380.
3. th century cadastral maps and aerial photographs. Landscape Ecol. 16: 41-54.
4. Díaz, S., Hodgson, J.G., Thompson, K., Cabido, M., Cornellissen, J.H.C. et al. 2004. The plant traits that drive ecosystems: Evidence from three continents. J. Veg. Sci. 15: 295-304.
5. Garnier, E., Cortez, J., Billès, G., Navas, M.-L., Roumet, C. et al. 2004. Plant functional markers capture ecosystem properties during secondary succession. Ecology 85: 2630-2637.
6. Grime, J.P. 1998. Benefits of plant diversity to ecosystems: immediate, filter and founder effects. J. Ecol. 86: 902-910.
7. Hooper, D.U. & Vitousek, P.M. 1997. The effects of plant composition and diversity on nutrient cycling. Ecol. Monogr. 277: 1302-1305.
8. Lavorel, S. & Garnier, E. 2002. Predicting changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning from plant traits: revisiting the Holy Grail. Funct. Ecol. 16: 545-556.
9. Lavorel, S., McIntyre, S., Landsberg, J. & Forbes, T.D.A. 1997. Plant functional classifications: from general groups to specific groups based on response to disturbance. Trends Ecol. Evol. 12: 474-478.
10. Lavorel, S., Touzand, B., Lebreton, J.-D. & Clément, B. 1998. Identifying functional groups for response to disturbance in an abandoned pasture. Acta Oecol. 19: 227-240.
11. Pakeman, R.J. 2004. Consistency of plant species and trait responses to grazing along a productivity gradient: a multisite analysis. J. Ecol. 92: 893-905.
12. Pakeman, R.J. & Small, J.L. 2004. Using plant functional traits to analyse land use change in the Machair of South Uist. In: Green, D.R. (ed.) Delivering sustainable coasts: Connecting science and policy, pp. 559-564. Littoral 2004, September 2004. Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.
13. Quested, H.M., Callaghan, T.V., Cornelissen, J.H.C. & Press, M.C. 2005. The impact of hemiparasitic plant litter on decomposition: direct, seasonal and litter mixing effects. J. Ecol. 93: 87-98.
14. Reader, R.J. 1998. Relationship between species relative abundance and plant traits for an infertile habitat. Plant Ecol. 134: 43-51.
15. Smith, M.D. & Knapp, A.K. 2003. Dominant species maintain ecosystem function with non-random species loss. Ecol. Lett. 6: 509-517.
16. Warren Wilson, J. 1959. Analysis of the distribution of foliage area in grassland. Proceedings of the Sixth Easter School of Agricultural Science, University of Nottingham 1958. pp. 51-61. Butterworths, London, UK.