Questions related to Functional Ecology
I was wondering if any of you have recently (2021/2022) submitted a manuscript to Environmental Microbiology or Functional Ecology and what are your thoughts?
I recently submitted my manuscript to a journal that provided only one reviewer (unprofessional for such an established journal!), and I am considering withdrawing the manuscript and submitting to one of the Wiley journals.
Have you had any experience, what is the quality of peer review in these two journals and how long it took for the paper to be rejected or accepted? Thank you in advance!
Leaves are one of key components of a plant which play a remarkable role in food manufacturing, therefore it is called as photosynthetic machinery. Moreover, leaves are more sensitive than other components, they also act as receivers of external environment. Therefore, if any changes occur in the environment and if the changes persist and are prolonged, leaves can be affected by changes. Therefore, morphological traits like leaf area, thickness, surface, texture, leaf mass, tissue density etc, will exhibit some indication of receiving climate change. Thus, it could be an indicator of changing climate.
what is the general trend in the R:S ratio of tree species at the seedling stage? early-successional vs. late-successional which ones have big R:S ratio? i see some contradicting results published. Plus, could these trend vary with tropical and temperate tree species?
I'm studying functional trait variation within and between tree species growing in natural conditions. The trees have a considerable variation in size (height and DBH), and I want to know how size affects functional traits. I performed some linear models including size as a covariate like this:
Do you recommend any other method/or any article to correct by size effects?
I have built a phylogenetic tree using categorical functional traits, such as pollination and dispersion syndromes, phenology, etc. Now, I can see the dicotomies and the points in which the plant species diverge, lineages, and so on. However, the interpretation itself seems to be a little tricky because I want to go with quantitative and qualitative discussion but don't know where to start from.
I am now compiling the bibliography for the paper on the importance of the biological age concept for system ecology and look for the references to the ecological models describing the effect of environmental conditions on the organism development.
In the course of microscopic observations on the litter system of a Scots pine stand, I found that the dominant ectomycorrhizal fungus (a basidiomycete belonging to the genus Hyphodontia, identified through its typical cystidia found in the mycorrhizal mantle) was also a white-rot fungus (still identified by its numerous cystidia within root debris). The observation was reported in the following paper:
More details can be found in the following technical report:
This allowed me to build a work hypothesis about the role of (at least some) ectomycorrhizal fungi in the carbon economy of pine stands. If it could be possible to grow on or several pine seedlings in xenobiotic conditions with this fungus (or other paying a similar role) as a mycorrhizal partner, decaying wood could be added as a potential carbon source under reduced light conditions, as this occurs during winter or in suppressed conditions. Hence a balance between two physiological strategies involving a plant and a fungus, the balance between both strategies being regulated by light intensity. Unfortunately researches were discontinued because of my specialization in soil fauna studies and lack of financial support for the use of tracer isotopes. If my hypothesis is true, it can have some importance for understanding how the well of the community overcomes that of the individual (an essential issue in evolutionary science), as well as applications in sustainable forestry. Catch as catch can…
Technical Report The soil under the microscope: the optical examination of a ...
Hello to all
The relationship between species diversity and ecosystem stability and its maintenance mechanism has been one of the main topic in ecology research.
In the past, diversity indices frequently used for assessing of community stability. in other words, each community that had more diversity, it was more stable. in the last decade, Functional diversity (FD) that defined as the value, range, distribution and relative abundance of the functional characteristics of organisms in a community, was the most popular methods for evaluation of community stability and functioning. While, in the recent years, Functional Redundancy (FR) that defined as some species perform similar roles in communities and ecosystems, and redundant species can therefore be lost with minimal impact on ecosystem processes. In other words, redundant species are considered necessary to ensure ecosystem resilience (resilience and resistance are two concept of stability). The redundancy hypothesis predicts that the species redundancy in a plant community enhances community stability.
Now, my main question is that: Is there another index that measure plant community stability directly?
When we analyze phylogenetic structure of a species community, we need a phylogenetic tree to generate phylogenetic indexes to analyze the phylogenetic patterns. How accurately the phylogenetic tree should be built ? A tree based on morphological traits (based from the morphological taxonomy) or a ML tree based from one gene or several gene? A bayesian tree based also from one or several gene?
I have studied an area of rain forest which presents a strong gradient of variation in soil moisture and nutrient, established in a short distance (150 - 200 meters). After the florestal inventory were detected three distinct plants communities, varying strongly across the environmental gradient - 1) A floodable plain forest in a organic soil; 2) Intermediary assembly located in a soil with a steep slope; and 3) a dry forest located in the highest place, with poor white sand soil.
For now, i intend to investigate anatomical and functional traits, searching for common patterns that could explain the establishment of these plant assemblies.
I have measured several functional traits mainly leaf traits (SLA, LDMC, LT …), root length and weight above-ground standing biomass, Branching architecture. I know Paula et al(2009) review article which introduced possible traits related to fire considering resprouting and regeneration traits. Could leaf traits and allocations also be considered as representative traits for interpretation of fire effects?
It would be my pleasure to have your advice
Which is more important? How to interpret? When should to use?
For example, following this pattern in Amazon rain forests: Hyperdominance in Amazonian forest carbon cycling (Fauset et al. 2014),
The dominance of forest function is even more concentrated in a few species than is dominance of tree abundance, with only 1% of Amazon tree species responsible for 50% of carbon storage and productivity.
I'm looking for papers in which researchers accessed the role of floral parts as signal (or mechanical-fit) trait by removing (or modifying) them and then recorded flower visits and plant fitness. Could anyone help me?
Pool et al (2014) quantify alpha functional diversity as the volume of the convex hull filled by the fish species of each community in two-dimensional functional space using the values from the first two functional axes.
But I wonder taxonomic alpha diversity is simply the species richness, so the alpha functional diversity can be functional richness...
Hello, we are working on biological traits analysis with fuzzy coding and would like to make the link with abiotic conditions.
How do you do it?
In the exploratory analysis of my data, I see a clear pattern of relationships between certain environmental variables and species traits. When I carry out a fourth corner analysis it points out to those relationships, but with the p adjustments the significance is lost.
I want an ecological explanation: H' and E are theoretically kept in stable assemblages, so stable ecosystems.
I worked in disturbed areas affected by desertification, but planted with different species like prickly pear, pine and olive trees.
In these plantations, H and E have automatically increased in spring (increase therophytes after rain).
My question is: can we speak of a balanced plant assemblage in a degraded environment, disturbed even if planted because the H' and E are elevated?
Ecologists use different terms to understand the function of ecological patterns and species response to environment. I am interested to know what are plant ecologists ideas about these terms.
In the text books of plant functional ecology (Pugnaire and Valladares, 2007) and plant physiological ecology (Lambers et al,2008; Larcher,1994), their border or definition is not very clear. I couldn't find in other references either.
Could we select any of these terms as main branches of ecology and others as sub branches? Are there any differences in the views of ecologists, biochemists and plant physiologists? Is functional ecology similar to only comparative functional ecology or does it also cover plant physiological ecology? It would be my pleasure to know researchers' ideas about these specialties.
The cost-benefit model for the evolution of carnivory in plants, proposed by Thomas Givnish (1984), was experimentally tested only a few times and the results are quite contradictory. Certain studies show the results expected according the model (Farnsworth & Ellison, 2008; Pavlovic, 2009), while others show the contrary (Mendéz and Karlsson, 1999; Wakefield et al. 200; Adamec, 2008). In spite of this ambiguity, Givnish’s theory is still considered to be true, at least by most authors. Is this the result of some kind of inertia in the area or because of the lack of a better explanation?
I am studying the functional significance of tree species diversity on soil C, N and pH in mature semi-natural forests. We have plots selected with a rigorous selection procedures based on basal area threshold, soil types, previous land-use history, management, aspect, climatic factors. We established a gradient of 1-5 tree species richness. Apart from basal area threshold,we have also evenness restriction to each species in the plot (how much percentage of the basal area per plot a particular species should account for).
I am here to learn from your experiences if any of the researchers in the field have addressed the issue before.
Since the study focuses on the effect(s) of diversity, the main goal is to demonstrate whether diversity is positively, negatively or none related to the soil properties in question.
Using diversity indices and calculating net diversity effects (relative yield) can be two of the options.
1. How to address the diversity effect ? Many measure Diversity (richness, evenness, or both) using different indices. Which one of the known indices is more appropriate in this situation?
2. If you were calculating net diversity effects (observed yield in mixtures minus the expected yield in the corresponding mono-cultures) how did you take into account the variation of individual trees and their influence? i.e did you apply some weighting? if yes, which parameters of the trees (basal area, biomass, volume, height etc) you had weighted and how?
I need advice for which plants I should resemble.
Inspired by Sapir and Dudley (2013), I would like to make some artificial flowers to attract free-ranging hummingbirds to test how floral orientation effects flight (e.g. flowers oriented horizontally and tilted 45° downwards).
I would like to resemble plants that occur in the study area and that have different floral orientation. Further, they should not be too difficult to resemble in plastic.
I'm interested in three different areas:
1. Ontario in Canada
2. U.S. state of Washington
3. The southern pacific region of Costa Rica
Sapir, N. and R. Dudley. 2013. Implications of floral orientation for flight kinematics and metabolic expenditure of hover-feeding hummingbirds. Functional Ecology 27:227-235.
I have repeated measurements on wingbeat frequencies (WBF) on many individuals belonging to different hummingbird species. I would like to relate WBF to body mass (regression, mixed effect model), controlling for repeated measurements by including "ID" as random effect. I would also include "species" as a random effect to control for repeated measurements and to control for variation associated with species. I'm a bit unsure whether to include both as separate random effects ("crossed design") or is it more proper to use "nested design" (i.e. "ID" nested in "species")?
I use R and my script is:
Crossed: lmerfit1<-lmer(WBF~BM+(1|Species) + (1|ID), data=Wingbeat)
Nested: lmerfit2<-lmer(WBF~BM+(1|Species/ID), data=Wingbeat)
Due to native biodiversity loss as a consequence of anthropogenic factors (e.g. land use changes, invasive species, contamination, overexploitation, emergent diseases, climate change, between others)?