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. Geosphere-Biosphere Program (IGBP) and DIVERSITAS, the TRY database (TRY-not an acronym, rather a statement of sentiment; https ://www.try-db.org; Kattge et al., 2011) was proposed with the explicit assignment to improve the availability and accessibility of plant trait data for ecology and earth system sciences. The Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry (MPI-BGC) offered to host the database and the different groups joined forces for this community-driven program. Two factors were key to the success of TRY: the support and trust of leaders in the field of functional plant ecology submitting large databases and the long-term funding by the Max Planck Society, the MPI-BGC and the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, which has enabled the continuous development of the TRY database.

1. Modern tracking devices allow for the collection of high-volume animal tracking data at improved sampling rates over VHF radiotelemetry. Home range estimation is a key output from these tracking datasets, but the inherent properties of animal movement can lead traditional statistical methods to under-or overestimate home range areas.2. The Autocorrelated Kernel Density Estimation (AKDE) family of estimators were designed to be statistically efficient while explicitly dealing with the complexities of modern movement data: autocorrelation, small sample sizes, and missing or irregularly sampled data. Although each of these estimators has been described in separate technical papers, here we review how these estimators work and provide a user-friendly guide on how they may be combined to reduce multiple biases simultaneously.3. We describe the magnitude of the improvements offered by these estimators and their impact on home range area estimates, using both empirical case studies and simulations, contrasting their computational costs.4. Finally, we provide guidelines for researchers to choose among alternative estimators and an R script to facilitate the application and interpretation of AKDE home range estimates.

AbstractEncounter rates link movement strategies to intra- and inter-specific interactions, and therefore translate individual movement behavior into higher-level ecological processes. Indeed, a large body of interacting population theory rests on the law of mass action, which can be derived from assumptions of Brownian motion in an enclosed container with exclusively local perception. These assumptions imply completely uniform space use, individual home ranges equivalent to the population range, and encounter dependent on movement paths actually crossing. Mounting empirical evidence, however, suggests that animals use space non-uniformly, occupy home ranges substantially smaller than the population range, and are often capable of nonlocal perception. Here, we explore how these empirically supported behaviors change pairwise encounter rates. Specifically, we derive novel analytical expressions for encounter rates under Ornstein-Uhlenbeck motion, which features non-uniform space use and allows individual home ranges to differ from the population range. We compare OU-based encounter predictions to those of Reflected Brownian Motion, from which the law of mass action can be derived. For both models, we further explore how the interplay between the scale of perception and home range size affects encounter rates. We find that neglecting realistic movement and perceptual behaviors can systematically bias encounter rate predictions.

No abstract

Scientists often need to know whether pairs of entities tend to occur together or independently. Standard approaches to this issue use co-occurrence indices such as Jaccard, Sørensen-Dice, and Simpson. We show that these indices are sensitive to the prevalences of the entities they describe and that this invalidates their interpretability. We propose an index, α, that is insensitive to prevalences. Published datasets reanalyzed with both α and Jaccard’s index ( J ) yield profoundly different biological inferences. For example, a published analysis using J contradicted predictions of the island biogeography theory finding that community stability increased with increasing physical isolation. Reanalysis of the same dataset with the estimator α ˆ reversed that result and supported theoretical predictions. We found similarly marked effects in reanalyses of antibiotic cross-resistance and human disease biomarkers. Our index α is not merely an improvement; its use changes data interpretation in fundamental ways.

No abstract

The functioning of biological systems depends heavily on the interaction of its constituents at various levels of organization, be it at the subcellular level or at the ecosystem scale. To understand the complexity of such interactions in a more abstract yet workable way, people have turned to networks as a useful representation (Gosak et al., 2018;Gysi & Nowick, 2020). The use of network science and its tools in biology has exploded in the past two decades, owing to the burst of high-resolution data and improved computational capabilities. The application of network science has improved our fundamental understanding of many biological systems and structures, such as food webs (

Home‐range estimates are a common product of animal tracking data, as each range represents the area needed by a given individual. Population‐level inference of home‐range areas—where multiple individual home ranges are considered to be sampled from a population—is also important to evaluate changes over time, space or covariates such as habitat quality or fragmentation, and for comparative analyses of species averages. Population‐level home‐range parameters have traditionally been estimated by first assuming that the input tracking data were sampled independently when calculating home ranges via conventional kernel density estimation (KDE) or minimal convex polygon (MCP) methods, and then assuming that those individual home ranges were measured exactly when calculating the population‐level estimates. This conventional approach does not account for the temporal autocorrelation that is inherent in modern tracking data, nor for the uncertainties of each individual home‐range estimate, which are often large and heterogeneous. Here, we introduce a statistically and computationally efficient framework for the population‐level analysis of home‐range areas, based on autocorrelated kernel density estimation (AKDE), that can account for variable temporal autocorrelation and estimation uncertainty. We apply our method to empirical examples on lowland tapir Tapirus terrestris, kinkajou Potos flavus, white‐nosed coati Nasua narica, white‐faced capuchin monkey Cebus capucinus and spider monkey Ateles geoffroyi, and quantify differences between species, environments and sexes. Our approach allows researchers to more accurately compare different populations with different movement behaviours or sampling schedules while retaining statistical precision and power when individual home‐range uncertainties vary. Finally, we emphasize the estimation of effect sizes when comparing populations, rather than mere significance tests.