Back

Unique belowground ecological strategies of subtropical and tropical plant species expand the root trait space

Guerrero Ramirez, N. R.; Weemstra, M.; Addo-Danso, S. D.; Andersen, K.; Arnaud, M.; Cordeiro, A. L.; Cusack, D. F.; Kotowska, M. M.; Lee, M. Y.; Leroy, C.; Lugli, L. F.; Pierick, K.; Smith-Martin, C. M.; Toro, L.; Umana, M. N.; Valverde-Barrantes, O. J.; Wong, M.; Fortunel, C.

2024-10-10 ecology
10.1101/2024.10.06.616893 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Root trait variation may reflect the ecological and evolutionary processes shaping biodiversity, but remains poorly quantified in the (sub)tropics. Here, we aim to further complete our knowledge of belowground functional strategies by assessing the contributions of subtropical and tropical species to global root trait diversity. We gathered root data for 1618 temperate, 341 subtropical, and 775 tropical species. We compared functional diversity among biomes and calculated the unique contribution of each biome to the global root economics space. Further, we determined if the within-variation of subtropical and tropical biomes is shaped by species niches and/or differences in evolutionary history. Root trait expressions differed among biomes, but root functional diversity did not. Furthermore, subtropical and tropical biomes accounted for 40% of the unique root functional space within the global traits space. Species climate niches and phylogenetic turnover explained variation in root traits (e.g., denser root tissue was associated with drier sites) among subtropical but not tropical species. Through their unique root traits, sub(tropical) species strongly expand the current global root trait space. This work underwrites their importance in conceptual models for more complete insights into how various belowground strategies drive plant functional biogeography and biodiversity globally.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.