Strategic grazing management for better sheep production at the forest-grass steppe ecotone in southern Patagonia

El manejo del pastoreo en sistemas ganaderos extensivos con múltiples ambientes se presenta como un desafío dadas las condiciones climáticas y la configuración de los ambientes en los grandes potreros (300-5000 ha) propios de estancias de Patagonia Sur. El presente trabajo plantea una propuesta de manejo que incluye la separación de ambientes y su uso en época adecuada con el objetivo de aumentar los índices de producción ovina. Esta propuesta se comparó con el manejo tradicional del pastoreo mediante el seguimiento de dos majadas (tratamientos) Corriedale durante 2 años. Los resultados del manejo propuesto han mostrado algunas ventajas en variables asociadas a la producción de carne y lana.Sin em bargo, también han puesto en relieve la necesidad de acompañar el manejo con un adecuado ajuste de la carga animal en la época crítica de la gestación ovina. Además, el estudio en dos ciclos productivos permitió relacionarla variación climática interanual y detectar que las ventajas del manejo propuesto en producción y calidad de lana se manifiestan principalmente bajo inviernos más rigurosos. Este tipo de estudios a escala real de producción (nivel de establecimiento) en  ecosistemas de ecotono de Patagonia Sur brinda mayor conocimiento para la definición de tecnologías de manejo ovino.Grazing in large extensive paddocks (300-5000 ha) with contrasting habitats are typical in southern Patagonia. This extensive livestock management becomes a challenge under harsh climatic conditions and complex habitat configuration. The present study evaluated a management proposal that includes spatial separations in homogenous areas and its strategic temporal use to increase the sheep production at ranch level. This new proposal was compared with the traditional management by monitoring two Corriedale flock (treatments) over 2 years of evaluation. For the studied ranch, the animal response to the new management plan showed good results in meat and wool production compared with the traditional management. Results highlighted the importance of stocking rate adjustment especially on critical gestation periods. In addition, after two years of evaluation the climatic variation between years determined that advantage of proposed management in wool production and quality occurred in rigorous winter. This work at real spatial and temporal scale (ranch level) provides knowledge for the definition of sheep management technologies in southern Patagonia.Fil: Ormaechea, Sebastián Gabriel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnologia Agropecuaria. Centro Regional.patagonia Sur. Estacion Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz.; ArgentinaFil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnologia Agropecuaria. Centro Regional.patagonia Sur. Estacion Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz.; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Anchorena, P. L. Instituto Nacional de Tecnologia Agropecuaria. Centro Regional.patagonia Sur. Estacion Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz.; ArgentinaFil: Cipriotti, Pablo Ariel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnologia Agropecuaria. Centro Regional.patagonia Sur. Estacion Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz.; Argentin

Compositional shifts of alpine plant communities across the high Andes.

Aim: Climate change is transforming mountain summit plant communities worldwide, but we know little about such changes in the High Andes. Understanding large-scale patterns of vegetation changes across the Andes, and the factors driving these changes, is fundamental to predicting the effects of global warming. We assessed trends in vegetation cover, species richness (SR) and community-level thermal niches (CTN) and tested whether they are explained by summits' climatic conditions and soil temperature trends. Location: High Andes. Time period: Between 2011/2012 and 2017/2019. Major taxa studied: Vascular plants. Methods: Using permanent vegetation plots placed on 45 mountain summits and soil temperature loggers situated along a ~6800 km N-S gradient, we measured species and their relative percentage cover and estimated CTN in two surveys (intervals between 5 and 8 years). We then estimated the annual rate of changes for the three variables and used generalized linear models to assess their relationship with annual precipitation, the minimum air temperatures of each summit and rates of change in the locally recorded soil temperatures. Results: Over time, there was an average loss of vegetation cover (mean = −0.26%/ yr), and a gain in SR across summits (mean = 0.38 species m2/yr), but most summits had significant increases in SR and vegetation cover. Changes in SR were positively related to minimum air temperature and soil temperature rate of change. Most plant communities experienced shifts in their composition by including greater abundances of species with broader thermal niches and higher optima. However, the measured changes in soil temperature did not explain the observed changes in CTN. Main conclusions: High Andean vegetation is changing in cover and SR and is shifting towards species with wider thermal niche breadths. The weak relationship with soil temperature trends could have resulted from the short study period that only marginally captures changes in vegetation through time.EEA Santa CruzFil: Cuesta, F. Universidad de las Américas. Grupo de Investigación en Biodiversidad Medio Ambiente y Salud – BIOMAS; Ecuador.Fil: Carilla, Julieta. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina.Fil: Carilla, Julieta. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional; Argentina.Fil: Llambí, L.D. Universidad de Los Andes. Instituto de Ciencias Ambientales y Ecológicas; Venezuela.Fil: Llambí, L.D. Consorcio para el Desarrollo Sostenible de la Ecorregión Andina (CONDESAN); Perú.Fil: Muriel, P. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador. Escuela de Ciencias Biológicas Laboratorio de Ecofisiología; Ecuador.Fil: Lencinas, María Vanessa. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Científicas (CADIC); Argentina.Fil: Meneses, R. I. Universidad Católica del Norte. Instituto de Investigaciones Arqueológicas y Museo; Chile.Fil: Feeley, K. J. University of Miami. Biology Department. Coral Gables; Estados UnidosFil: Pauli, H. Austrian Academy of Sciences. Institute for Interdisciplinary Mountain Research; Austria.Fil: Pauli, H. University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences. Department of Integrative Biology and Biodiversity Research; Austria.Fil: Aguirre, N. Universidad Nacional de Loja. Carrera de Ingeniería Forestal. Centro de Investigaciones Tropicales del Ambiente y Biodiversidad (CITAB); Ecuador.Fil: Beck, S. Museo Nacional de Historia Natural - Instituto de Ecología (UMSA). Herbario Nacional de Bolivia; Bolivia.Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina.Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina.Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina.Fil: Tovar, C. Royal Botanical Gardens Kew. Jodrell Laboratory; Reino Unid

Global transpiration data from sap flow measurements: the SAPFLUXNET database

Plant transpiration links physiological responses of vegetation to water supply and demand with hydrological, energy, and carbon budgets at the land–atmosphere interface. However, despite being the main land evaporative flux at the global scale, transpiration and its response to environmental drivers are currently not well constrained by observations. Here we introduce the first global compilation of whole-plant transpiration data from sap flow measurements (SAPFLUXNET, https://sapfluxnet.creaf.cat/, last access: 8 June 2021). We harmonized and quality-controlled individual datasets supplied by contributors worldwide in a semi-automatic data workflow implemented in the R programming language. Datasets include sub-daily time series of sap flow and hydrometeorological drivers for one or more growing seasons, as well as metadata on the stand characteristics, plant attributes, and technical details of the measurements. SAPFLUXNET contains 202 globally distributed datasets with sap flow time series for 2714 plants, mostly trees, of 174 species. SAPFLUXNET has a broad bioclimatic coverage, with woodland/shrubland and temperate forest biomes especially well represented (80 % of the datasets). The measurements cover a wide variety of stand structural characteristics and plant sizes. The datasets encompass the period between 1995 and 2018, with 50 % of the datasets being at least 3 years long. Accompanying radiation and vapour pressure deficit data are available for most of the datasets, while on-site soil water content is available for 56 % of the datasets. Many datasets contain data for species that make up 90 % or more of the total stand basal area, allowing the estimation of stand transpiration in diverse ecological settings. SAPFLUXNET adds to existing plant trait datasets, ecosystem flux networks, and remote sensing products to help increase our understanding of plant water use, plant responses to drought, and ecohydrological processes. SAPFLUXNET version 0.1.5 is freely available from the Zenodo repository (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3971689; Poyatos et al., 2020a). The “sapfluxnetr” R package – designed to access, visualize, and process SAPFLUXNET data – is available from CRAN.EEA Santa CruzFil: Poyatos, Rafael. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès); EspañaFil: Poyatos, Rafael. CREAF. Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès); EspañaFil: Granda, Víctor. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès); EspañaFil: Granda, Víctor. Joint Research Unit CREAF-CTFC. Bellaterra; EspañaFil: Flo, Víctor. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès); EspañaFil: Adams, Mark A. Swinburne University of Technology. Faculty of Science Engineering and Technology; Australia.Fil: Adams, Mark A. University of Sydney. School of Life and Environmental Sciences; Australia.Fil: Adorján, Balázs. University of Debrecen. Faculty of Science and Technology. Department of Botany; HungríaFil: Aguadé, David. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès); EspañaFil: Aidar, Marcos P. M. Institute of Botany. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry; BrasilFil: Allen, Scott. University of Nevada. Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Science; Estados UnidosFil: Alvarado-Barrientos, M. Susana. Instituto de Ecología A.C. Red Ecología Funcional; México.Fil: Anderson-Teixeira, Kristina J. Center for Tropical Forest Science-Forest Global Earth Observatory, Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute; PanamáFil: Anderson-Teixeira, Kristina J. Conservation Ecology Center. Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute; Estados UnidosFil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina.Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina.Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina.Fil: Martínez-Vilalta, Jordi. CREAF. Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès); EspañaFil: Martínez-Vilalta, Jordi. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès); Españ

The number of tree species on Earth

One of the most fundamental questions in ecology is how many species inhabit the Earth. However, due to massive logistical and financial challenges and taxonomic difficulties connected to the species concept definition, the global numbers of species, including those of important and well-studied life forms such as trees, still remain largely unknown. Here, based on global groundsourced data, we estimate the total tree species richness at global, continental, and biome levels. Our results indicate that there are ∼73,000 tree species globally, among which ∼9,000 tree species are yet to be discovered. Roughly 40% of undiscovered tree species are in South America. Moreover, almost one-third of all tree species to be discovered may be rare, with very low populations and limited spatial distribution (likely in remote tropical lowlands and mountains). These findings highlight the vulnerability of global forest biodiversity to anthropogenic changes in land use and climate, which disproportionately threaten rare species and thus, global tree richness.EEA Santa CruzFil: Cazzolla Gatti, Roberto. Purdue University. Department of Forestry and Natural Resources; Estados UnidosFil: Cazzolla Gatti, Roberto. University of Bologna. Department of Biological, Geological, and Environmental Sciences.Alma Mater Studiorum; ItaliaFil: Cazzolla Gatti, Roberto. Tomsk State University. Biological Institute; Rusia.Fil: Reichd, Peter B. University of Minnesota. Department of Forest Resources; Estados UnidosFil: Reichd, Peter B. University of Michigan. Institute for Global Change Biology and School for Environment and Sustainability; Estados UnidosFil: Reichd, Peter B. Western Sydney University. Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment; Australia.Fil: Gamarra, Javier G. P. FAO. Forestry Department; ItaliaFil: Crowtherh, Tom. Institute of Integrative Biology; SuizaFil: Hui, Cang. Stellenbosch University. iCentre for Invasion Biology. Department of Mathematical Sciences; SudáfricaFil: Hui, Cang. African Institute for Mathematical Sciences. Mathematical Biology Unit; SudáfricaFil: Morera, Albert. University of Lleida. Department of Crop and Forest Sciences; EspañaFil: Morera, Albert. Joint Research Unit CTFC–AGROTECNIO–CERCA; EspañaFil: Bastin, Jean-Francois. University of Liege. TERRA Teaching and Research Centre, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech; BélgicaFil: de-Miguel, Sergio. University of Lleida. Department of Crop and Forest Sciences; EspañaFil: de-Miguel, Sergio. Joint Research Unit CTFC–AGROTECNIO–CERCA; EspañaFil: Jan Nabuurs, Gert. Wageningen University. Research Forest Ecology and Forest Management Group; Países BajosFil: Svenning, Jens -Christian. Aarhus University. Center for Biodiversity Dynamics in a Changing World (BIOCHANGE). Department of Biology; DinamarcaFil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina.Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina.Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina.Fil: Liang, Jingjing. Purdue University. Department of Forestry and Natural Resources; Estados Unido

Ojos que no ven… ¿Qué podemos hacer para incluir más a la fracción subterránea en estudios de vegetación?

Conocer la estructura y el funcionamiento de la fracción subterránea de la vegetación es fundamental para comprender numerosos procesos que ocurren en distintos niveles de organización. Sin embargo, dicha fracción fue menos estudiada que su contraparte aérea, principalmente por el gran esfuerzo que demanda muestrearla a campo y procesarla en el laboratorio. En la XXVIII Reunión Argentina de Ecología (Mar del Plata, 2018) se realizaron dos simposios sobre la importancia de conocer las raíces en estudios ecológicos. De los simposios surgió la necesidad de 1) cuantificar los estudios que hayan evaluado las fracciones subterránea y aérea de la vegetación, y 2) determinar las metodologías empleadas y las variables de la fracción subterránea registradas en sistemas naturales (i.e., pastizales, estepas, bosques, arbustales y desierto) y antropizados (i.e., pasturas y cultivos) en seis provincias fitogeográficas de la Argentina y en dos regiones geomorfológicas de Uruguay. Se registraron 933 estudios publicados entre 1990 y 2019. El 57% y el 23% correspondieron a estudios exclusivos de la fracción aérea y de la subterránea, respectivamente, con un incremento exponencial en el tiempo de ambas fracciones. En la actualidad existe una tendencia a incorporar el compartimiento subterráneo en estudios ecológicos. Mediante un análisis sistemático se encontró que se emplearon seis métodos de muestreo (barreno, ruleros, planta entera, monolitos, rhizotron y estimación de la biomasa subterránea a partir de la biomasa aérea) para evaluar cuatro variables (biomasa subterránea, productividad primaria neta subterránea, algunos atributos radicales y tasa de descomposición radical). El método más empleado fue el del barreno y la variable más evaluada fue la biomasa subterránea. Proponemos fomentar la colaboración entre equipos de investigación y establecer comparaciones metodológicas para comprender los alcances de los resultados y obtener estimaciones más confiables sobre las consecuencias del cambio en el uso del suelo.To know the structure and functioning of the belowground vegetation compartment is essential to understand numerous processes that occur at different organization levels. However, the belowground vegetation compartment has traditionally been less studied than the above layer due to the great effort required for field sampling and laboratory processing. In the XXVIII Reunión Argentina de Ecología, Mar del Plata 2018, two symposia about the importance of root knowledge in ecological studies were conducted. From this exchange arose the need to 1) quantify studies that include data of belowground and aboveground vegetation, and 2) determine the methodologies and the variables of the belowground compartment recorded in natural (grasslands, steppes, forests, shrubs, and desert) and human modified systems (pastures, crops) in six Argentinean phytogeographic provinces and in two Uruguayan geomorphological regions. There were 933 published studies from 1990 to 2019. The 57% and 23% corresponded to exclusive studies of the above and belowground compartments respectively, with an exponential increase in the time of both fractions. Currently, there is a tendency to incorporate the underground compartment in ecological studies. Through systematic analysis, it was found that six sampling methods were used (soil core, ingrowth cores, trench, monoliths, rhizotron and belowground biomass estimation from aboveground biomass) where four variables of the belowground vegetation compartment were recorded (belowground biomass, belowground net primary productivity, root traits, and roots decomposition rate). Obtaining soil volumes by soil core was the most used method, while belowground biomass was the most evaluated variable. We propose to encourage collaboration between research teams and establish methodological comparisons to understand the scope of the results and obtain better estimates about the consequences of land-use change.EEA Santa CruzFil: López Mársico, Luis. Universidad de la República. Facultad de Ciencias. Instituto de Ecología y Ciencias Ambientales; UruguayFil: Pestoni, Sofía. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; ArgentinaFil: Conti, Georgina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; ArgentinaFil: Pérez-Harguindeguy, Natalia. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; ArgentinaFil: Martínez Pastur, Guillermo José. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Científicas. Laboratorio de Recursos Agroforestales; ArgentinaFil: Pinto, Priscila. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura; ArgentinaFil: Sarquis, Agustín. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura; ArgentinaFil: Reyes, María Fernanda. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura; Argentina. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Facultad de Ambiente y Salud. Laboratorio de Rehabilitación y Restauración de Ecosistemas Áridos y Semiáridos (LARREA); ArgentinaFil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Piñeiro, Gervasio. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura; Argentina. Universidad de la República. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Sistemas Ambientales; Urugua

Nitrogen but not phosphorus addition affects symbiotic N2 fixation by legumes in natural and semi‑natural grasslands located on four continents

The amount of nitrogen (N) derived from symbiotic N2 fixation by legumes in grasslands might be affected by anthropogenic N and phosphorus (P) inputs, but the underlying mechanisms are not known. Methods We evaluated symbiotic N2 fixation in 17 natural and semi-natural grasslands on four continents that are subjected to the same full-factorial N and P addition experiment, using the 15N natural abundance method. Results N as well as combined N and P (NP) addition reduced aboveground legume biomass by 65% and 45%, respectively, compared to the control, whereas P addition had no significant impact. Addition of N and/or P had no significant effect on the symbiotic N2 fixation per unit legume biomass. In consequence, the amount of N fixed annually per grassland area was less than half in the N addition treatments compared to control and P addition, irrespective of whether the dominant legumes were annuals or perennials. Conclusion Our results reveal that N addition mainly impacts symbiotic N2 fixation via reduced biomass of legumes rather than changes in N2 fixation per unit legume biomass. The results show that soil N enrichment by anthropogenic activities significantly reduces N 2 fixation in grasslands, and these effects cannot be reversed by additional P amendment.EEA Santa CruzFil: Vázquez, Eduardo. University of Bayreuth. Department of Soil Ecology. Bayreuth Center of Ecology and Environmental Research (BayCEER); AlemaniaFil: Vázquez, Eduardo. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Department of Soil and Environment; SueciaFil: Schleuss, Per‑Marten. University of Bayreuth. Department of Soil Ecology. Bayreuth Center of Ecology and Environmental Research (BayCEER); AlemaniaFil: Borer, Elizabeth T. University of Minnesota. Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior; Estados UnidosFil: Bugalho, Miguel N. University of Lisbon. Centre for Applied Ecology “Prof. Baeta Neves” (CEABN-InBIO). School of Agriculture; Portugal.Fil: Caldeira, Maria. C. University of Lisbon. Forest Research Centre. School of Agriculture; Portugal.Fil: Eisenhauer, Nico. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research; AlemaniaFil: Eisenhauer, Nico. Leipzig University. Institute of Biology; AlemaniaFil: Eskelinen, Anu. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research; AlemaniaFil: Eskelinen, Anu. Physiological Diversity, Helmholtz Centrefor Environmental Research; AlemaniaFil: Eskelinen, Anu. University of Oulu. Ecology & Genetics; FinlandiaFil: Fay, Philip A. Grassland Soil and Water Research Laboratory (USDA-ARS); Estados UnidosFil: Haider, Sylvia. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research; AlemaniaFil: Haider, Sylvia. Martin Luther University. Institute of Biology. Geobotany and Botanical Garden; AlemaniaFil: Jentsch, Anke. University of Bayreuth. Department of Soil Ecology. Bayreuth Center of Ecology and Environmental Research (BayCEER); AlemaniaFil: Kirkman, Kevin P. University of KwaZulu-Natal. School of Life Sciences; SudáfricaFil: McCulley, Rebecca L. University of Kentucky. Department of Plant and Soil Sciences; Estados UnidosFil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina.Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina.Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina.Fil: Price, Jodi. Charles Sturt University. Institute for Land, Water and Society; Australia.Fil: Richards, Anna E. CSIRO Land and Water. Northern Territory; Australia.Fil: Risch, Anita C. Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL; SuizaFil: Roscher, Christiane. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research; AlemaniaFil: Roscher, Christiane. Physiological Diversity, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research; AlemaniaFil: Schütz, Martin. Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL; SuizaFil: Seabloom, Eric William. University of Minnesota. Dept. of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior; Estados UnidosFil: Standish, Rachel J. Murdoch University. Harry Butler Institute; Australia.Fil: Stevens, Carly J. Lancaster University. Lancaster Environment Centre; Reino UnidoFil: Tedder, Michelle J. University of KwaZulu-Natal. School of Life Sciences; SudáfricaFil: Virtanen, Risto. University of Oulu. Ecology & Genetics; Finlandia.Fil: Spohn, Marie. University of Bayreuth. Department of Soil Ecology. Bayreuth Center of Ecology and Environmental Research (BayCEER); AlemaniaFil: Spohn, Marie. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Department of Soil and Environment; Sueci

Global transpiration data from sap flow measurements: the SAPFLUXNET database

Plant transpiration links physiological responses of vegetation to water supply and demand with hydrological, energy, and carbon budgets at the land?atmosphere interface. However, despite being the main land evaporative flux at the global scale, transpiration and its response to environmental drivers are currently not well constrained by observations. Here we introduce the first global compilation of whole-plant transpiration data from sap flow measurements (SAPFLUXNET, https://sapfluxnet.creaf.cat/, last access: 8 June 2021). We harmonized and quality-controlled individual datasets supplied by contributors worldwide in a semi-automatic data workflow implemented in the R programming language. Datasets include sub-daily time series of sap flow and hydrometeorological drivers for one or more growing seasons, as well as metadata on the stand characteristics, plant attributes, and technical details of the measurements. SAPFLUXNET contains 202 globally distributed datasets with sap flow time series for 2714 plants, mostly trees, of 174 species. SAPFLUXNET has a broad bioclimatic coverage, with woodland/shrubland and temperate forest biomes especially well represented (80 % of the datasets). The measurements cover a wide variety of stand structural characteristics and plant sizes. The datasets encompass the period between 1995 and 2018, with 50 % of the datasets being at least 3 years long. Accompanying radiation and vapour pressure deficit data are available for most of the datasets,while on-site soil water content is available for 56 % of the datasets. Many datasets contain data for species that make up 90 % or more of the total stand basal area, allowing the estimation of stand transpiration in diverse ecological settings. SAPFLUXNET adds to existing plant trait datasets, ecosystem flux networks, and remote sensing products to help increase our understanding of plant water use, plant responses to drought, and ecohydrological processes.Fil: Poyatos, Rafael. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona; EspañaFil: Granda, Víctor. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona; EspañaFil: Flo, Víctor. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona; EspañaFil: Adams, Mark A.. Swinburne University of Technology; Australia. University of Sydney; AustraliaFil: Adorján, Balázs. University of Debrecen; HungríaFil: Aguadé, David. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona; EspañaFil: Aidar, Marcos P. M.. Institute of Botany; BrasilFil: Allen, Scott. University of Nevada; Estados UnidosFil: Alvarado Barrientos, M. Susana. Instituto de Ecología A.C.; MéxicoFil: Anderson Teixeira, Kristina J.. Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute; PanamáFil: Aparecido, Luiza Maria. Arizona State University; Estados Unidos. Texas A&M University; Estados UnidosFil: Arain, M. Altaf. McMaster University; CanadáFil: Aranda, Ismael. National Institute for Agricultural and Food Research and Technology; EspañaFil: Asbjornsen, Heidi. University of New Hampshire; Estados UnidosFil: Robert Baxter. Durham University; Reino UnidoFil: Beamesderfer, Eric. McMaster University; Canadá. Northern Arizona University; Estados UnidosFil: Carter Berry, Z.. Chapman University; Estados UnidosFil: Berveiller, Daniel. Université Paris Saclay; Francia. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; FranciaFil: Blakely, Bethany. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Estados UnidosFil: Boggs, Johnny. United States Forest Service; Estados UnidosFil: Gil Bohrer. Ohio State University; Estados UnidosFil: Bolstad, Paul V.. University of Minnesota; Estados UnidosFil: Bonal, Damien. Université de Lorraine; FranciaFil: Bracho, Rosvel. University of Florida; Estados UnidosFil: Brito, Patricia. Universidad de La Laguna; EspañaFil: Brodeur, Jason. McMaster University; CanadáFil: Casanoves, Fernando. Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza; Costa RicaFil: Chave, Jérôme. Université Paul Sabatier; FranciaFil: Chen, Hui. Xiamen University; ChinaFil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro de Investigaciones y Transferencia de Santa Cruz. Universidad Tecnológica Nacional. Facultad Regional Santa Cruz. Centro de Investigaciones y Transferencia de Santa Cruz. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral. Centro de Investigaciones y Transferencia de Santa Cruz; Argentin

Linking changes in species composition and biomass in a globally distributed grassland experiment

Global change drivers, such as anthropogenic nutrient inputs, are increasing globally. Nutrient deposition simultaneously alters plant biodiversity, species composition and ecosystem processes like aboveground biomass production. These changes are underpinned by species extinction, colonisation and shifting relative abundance. Here, we use the Price equation to quantify and link the contributions of species that are lost, gained or that persist to change in aboveground biomass in 59 experimental grassland sites. Under ambient (control) conditions, compositional and biomass turnover was high, and losses (i.e. local extinctions) were balanced by gains (i.e. colonisation). Under fertilisation, the decline in species richness resulted from increased species loss and decreases in species gained. Biomass increase under fertilisation resulted mostly from species that persist and to a lesser extent from species gained. Drivers of ecological change can interact relatively independently with diversity, composition and ecosystem processes and functions such as aboveground biomass due to the individual contributions of species lost, gained or persisting.Fil: Ladouceur, Emma. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; Alemania. Universitat Leipzig; Alemania. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; AlemaniaFil: Blowes, Shane A.. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; Alemania. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; AlemaniaFil: Chase, Jonathan M.. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; Alemania. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; AlemaniaFil: Clark, Adam T.. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg; Alemania. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; Alemania. University of Graz; AustriaFil: Garbowski, Magda. German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Leipzig-Halle-Jena; Alemania. Universitat Leipzig; AlemaniaFil: Alberti, Juan. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras; ArgentinaFil: Arnillas, Carlos Alberto. University of Toronto; CanadáFil: Bakker, Jonathan. University of Washington; Estados UnidosFil: Barrio, Isabel C.. Agricultural University of Iceland; IslandiaFil: Bharath, Siddharth. Atria University; IndiaFil: Borer, Elizabeth. University of Minnesota; Estados UnidosFil: Brudvig, Lars A.. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Cadotte, Marc W.. University of Toronto; CanadáFil: Chen, Qingqing. Peking University; ChinaFil: Collins, Scott L.. University of New Mexico; Estados UnidosFil: Dickman, Christopher R.. The University Of Sydney; AustraliaFil: Donohue, Ian. Trinity College Dublin; IrlandaFil: Du, Guozhen. Lanzhou University; ChinaFil: Ebeling, Anne. Universitat Jena; AlemaniaFil: Eisenhauer, Nico. Martin Luther University Halle—Wittenberg; Alemania. German Centre For Integrative Biodiversity Research (idiv) Halle-jena-leipzig; AlemaniaFil: Fay, Philip A.. USDA-ARS Grassland Soil and Water Research Lab; Estados UnidosFil: Hagenah, Nicole. University Of Pretoria; SudáfricaFil: Hautier, Yann. University of Utrecht; Países BajosFil: Jentsch, Anke. University of Bayreuth; AlemaniaFil: Jónsdóttir, Ingibjörg S.. University of Iceland; IslandiaFil: Komatsu, Kimberly J.. Smithsonian Environmental Research Center; Estados UnidosFil: MacDougall, Andrew. University of Guelph; CanadáFil: Martina, Jason P.. Texas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Moore, Joslin L.. Arthur Rylah Institute For Environmental Research; Australia. Monash University; AustraliaFil: Morgan, John W.. La Trobe University; AustraliaFil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentin

MASTREE+ : time-series of plant reproductive effort from six continents

Significant gaps remain in understanding the response of plant reproduction to environmental change. This is partly because measuring reproduction in long-lived plants requires direct observation over many years and such datasets have rarely been made publicly available. Here we introduce MASTREE+, a data set that collates reproductive time-series data from across the globe and makes these data freely available to the community. MASTREE+ includes 73,828 georeferenced observations of annual reproduction (e.g. seed and fruit counts) in perennial plant populations worldwide. These observations consist of 5971 population-level time-series from 974 species in 66 countries. The mean and median time-series length is 12.4 and 10 years respectively, and the data set includes 1122 series that extend over at least two decades (≥20 years of observations). For a subset of well-studied species, MASTREE+ includes extensive replication of time-series across geographical and climatic gradients. Here we describe the open-access data set, available as a.csv file, and we introduce an associated web-based app for data exploration. MASTREE+ will provide the basis for improved understanding of the response of long-lived plant reproduction to environmental change. Additionally, MASTREE+ will enable investigation of the ecology and evolution of reproductive strategies in perennial plants, and the role of plant reproduction as a driver of ecosystem dynamics

TRY plant trait database - enhanced coverage and open access

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