Traditional plant functional groups explain variation in economic but not size-related traits across the tundra biome.
H J D ThomasI H Myers-SmithA D BjorkmanS C ElmendorfD BlokJ H C CornelissenB C ForbesR D HollisterS NormandJ S PrevéyC RixenG Schaepman-StrubM WilmkingS WipfW K CornwellJ KattgeS J GoetzK C GuayJ M AlataloA Anadon-RosellS Angers-BlondinL T BernerR G BjörkA BuchwalA BurasM CarbognaniK ChristieL Siegwart CollierE J CooperA EskelinenE R FreiO GrauP GroganM HallingerM M P D HeijmansL HermanutzJ M G HudsonK HülberM Iturrate-GarciaC M IversenF JaroszynskaJ F JohnstoneE KaarlejärviA KulonenL J LamarqueE LévesqueC J LittleA MichelsenA MilbauJ Nabe-NielsenS S NielsenJ M NinotS F OberbauerJ OlofssonV G OnipchenkoA PetragliaS B RumpfP R SemenchukN A SoudzilovskaiaM J SpasojevicJ D M SpeedK D TapeM Te BeestM TomaselliA TrantU A TreierS VennT VowlesS WeijersT ZaminO K AtkinM BahnB BlonderG CampetellaB E L CeraboliniF S Chapin IiiM DaineseF T de VriesS DíazW GreenR B JacksonP ManningÜ NiinemetsW A OzingaJ PeñuelasP B ReichB SchampS SheremetevP M van BodegomPublished in: Global ecology and biogeography : a journal of macroecology (2018)
Traditional functional groups only coarsely represent variation in well-measured traits within tundra plant communities, and better explain resource economic traits than size-related traits. We recommend caution when using functional group approaches to predict tundra vegetation change, or ecosystem functions relating to plant size, such as albedo or carbon storage. We argue that alternative classifications or direct use of specific plant traits could provide new insights for ecological prediction and modelling.