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.
The eighteenth-century Malthusian prediction of population growth outstripping food production has not yet come to bear. Unprecedented agricultural land expansions since 1700, and technological innovations that began in the 1930s, have enabled more calorie production per capita than was ever available before in history. This remarkable success, however, has come at a great cost. Agriculture is a major cause of global environmental degradation. Malnutrition persists among large sections of the population, and a new epidemic of obesity is on the rise. We review both the successes and failures of the global food system, addressing ongoing debates on pathways to environmental health and food security. To deal with these challenges, a new coordinated research program blending modern breeding with agro-ecological methods is needed. We call on plant biologists to lead this effort and help steer humanity toward a safe operating space for agriculture.
In agricultural and natural systems researchers have demonstrated large effects of plant-soil feedback (PSF) on plant growth. However, the concepts and approaches used in these two types of systems have developed, for the most part, independently. Here, we present a conceptual framework that integrates knowledge and approaches from these two contrasting systems. We use this integrated framework to demonstrate (i) how knowledge from complex natural systems can be used to increase agricultural resource-use efficiency and productivity and (ii) how research in agricultural systems can be used to test hypotheses and approaches developed in natural systems. Using this framework, we discuss avenues for new research toward an ecologically sustainable and climate-smart future.
International agreements aim to conserve 17% of Earth's land area by 2020 but include no area-based conservation targets within the working landscapes that support human needs through farming, ranching, and forestry. Through a review This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Amidst widespread concerns about biodiversity loss, a single clear conservation message is 11 engaging leading conservationists: the proposal to give half the surface of the Earth back to 12 nature. Depending on the landscape conservation strategy, we find that globally 15-31% of 13 cropland, 10-45% of pasture land, 23-25% of non-food calories, and 3-29% of food calories 14 from crops could be lost if half of Earth's terrestrial ecoregions were given back to nature. 15 16 The Convention on Biological Diversity, signed by 196 parties, is the world's primary multi-17 lateral, legally binding, treaty for protection and sustainable use of the planet's biological 18 resources. Through it, world leaders made a commitment to halt biodiversity loss by 2010, but 19 failed 1 . This led to the development of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020, and twenty 20 ambitious Aichi Biodiversity Targets 2 . With less than two years to go, these complex and 21 ambiguous targets to halt biodiversity loss by 2020 seem out of reach 3 . 23Amidst these signs of likely failure, prominent conservation leaders are congregating around an 24 even more ambitious goal to give half the surface of the Earth back to nature (http://www.half-25 earthproject.org/; http://natureneedshalf.org/). This proposal roughly equates with expanding the 26 -yet to be achieved -Aichi Target 11, to conserve 17% of world's terrestrial and 10% of marine 27 areas, by roughly 3 and 5 times, respectively. In doing so, the project claims the potential to 28 conserve ~85% of existing species 4 , by moving towards a system of interconnected high quality 29 habitats of sufficient scale locally, regionally and globally to support the persistence of natural 30 populations 5 . The added value of Half-Earth is also in its branding: the idea is conceptually 31 simple and visionary, creating a single banner under which other scattered conservation 32 initiatives could operate. As an aspirational goal, it is a powerful message that could motivate 33 and empower the public and local organizations to take positive action to protect the biosphere at 34 the level needed for reducing biodiversity decline. 35 36 Yet, despite these benefits, the practical costs of Half Earth incurred through trade-offs with 37 other land uses, and its impacts on already disadvantaged populations around the world, remain 38 poorly understood 6,7 . Possibly the greatest trade-off embedded in the Half Earth proposal is with 39 agriculture: the dominant land use competing for space with other species on this planet and the 40 nexus of multiple Sustainable Development Goals linked to human health and wellbeing, climate 41 change, biodiversity loss and water security 8 . While relationships between food production and 42 biodiversity conservation have been analyzed previously 9,10 , the food production costs of Half 43 Earth have yet to be assessed. 44 48 wild lands while minimizing crop calorie losses caused by displacing arable agriculture. We 49 conduct analysis at the global, countr...
Global policies call for connecting protected areas (PAs) to conserve the flow of animals and genes across changing landscapes, yet whether global PA networks currently support animal movement—and where connectivity conservation is most critical—remain largely unknown. In this study, we map the functional connectivity of the world’s terrestrial PAs and quantify national PA connectivity through the lens of moving mammals. We find that mitigating the human footprint may improve connectivity more than adding new PAs, although both strategies together maximize benefits. The most globally important areas of concentrated mammal movement remain unprotected, with 71% of these overlapping with global biodiversity priority areas and 6% occurring on land with moderate to high human modification. Conservation and restoration of critical connectivity areas could safeguard PA connectivity while supporting other global conservation priorities.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.