• Energy Research

AbstractAlpine grassland vegetation supports globally important biodiversity and ecosystems that are increasingly threatened by climate warming and other environmental changes. Trait-based approaches can support understanding of vegetation responses to global change drivers and consequences for ecosystem functioning. In six sites along a 1314 m elevational gradient in Puna grasslands in the Peruvian Andes, we collected datasets on vascular plant composition, plant functional traits, biomass, ecosystem fluxes, and climate data over three years. The data were collected in the wet and dry season and from plots with different fire histories. We selected traits associated with plant resource use, growth, and life history strategies (leaf area, leaf dry/wet mass, leaf thickness, specific leaf area, leaf dry matter content, leaf C, N, P content, C and N isotopes). The trait dataset contains 3,665 plant records from 145 taxa, 54,036 trait measurements (increasing the trait data coverage of the regional flora by 420%) covering 14 traits and 121 plant taxa (ca. 40% of which have no previous publicly available trait data) across 33 families.

AbstractAlpine grassland vegetation supports globally important biodiversity and ecosystems that are increasingly threatened by climate warming and other environmental changes. Trait-based approaches can support understanding of vegetation responses to global change drivers and consequences for ecosystem functioning. In six sites along a 1314 m elevational gradient in Puna grasslands in the Peruvian Andes, we collected datasets on vascular plant composition, plant functional traits, biomass, ecosystem fluxes, and climate data over three years. The data were collected in the wet and dry season and from plots with different fire histories. We selected traits associated with plant resource use, growth, and life history strategies (leaf area, leaf dry/wet mass, leaf thickness, specific leaf area, leaf dry matter content, leaf C, N, P content, C and N isotopes). The trait dataset contains 3,665 plant records from 145 taxa, 54,036 trait measurements (increasing the trait data coverage of the regional flora by 420%) covering 14 traits and 121 plant taxa (ca. 40% of which have no previous publicly available trait data) across 33 families.

AbstractAimThe scale of environmental data is often defined by their extent (spatial area, temporal duration) and resolution (grain size, temporal interval). Although describing climate data scale via these terms is appropriate for most meteorological applications, for ecology and biogeography, climate data of the same spatiotemporal resolution and extent may differ in their relevance to an organism. Here, we propose that climate proximity, or how well climate data represent the actual conditions that an organism is exposed to, is more important for ecological realism than the spatiotemporal resolution of the climate data.LocationTemperature comparison in nine countries across four continents; ecological case studies in Alberta (Canada), Sabah (Malaysia) and North Carolina/Tennessee (USA).Time Period1960–2018.Major Taxa StudiedCase studies with flies, mosquitoes and salamanders, but concepts relevant to all life on earth.MethodsWe compare the accuracy of two macroclimate data sources (ERA5 and WorldClim) and a novel microclimate model (microclimf) in predicting soil temperatures. We then use ERA5, WorldClim and microclimf to drive ecological models in three case studies: temporal (fly phenology), spatial (mosquito thermal suitability) and spatiotemporal (salamander range shifts) ecological responses.ResultsFor predicting soil temperatures, microclimf had 24.9% and 16.4% lower absolute bias than ERA5 and WorldClim respectively. Across the case studies, we find that increasing proximity (from macroclimate to microclimate) yields a 247% improvement in performance of ecological models on average, compared to 18% and 9% improvements from increasing spatial resolution 20‐fold, and temporal resolution 30‐fold respectively.Main ConclusionsWe propose that increasing climate proximity, even if at the sacrifice of finer climate spatiotemporal resolution, may improve ecological predictions. We emphasize biophysically informed approaches, rather than generic formulations, when quantifying ecoclimatic relationships. Redefining the scale of climate through the lens of the organism itself helps reveal mechanisms underlying how climate shapes ecological systems.

AbstractAimThe scale of environmental data is often defined by their extent (spatial area, temporal duration) and resolution (grain size, temporal interval). Although describing climate data scale via these terms is appropriate for most meteorological applications, for ecology and biogeography, climate data of the same spatiotemporal resolution and extent may differ in their relevance to an organism. Here, we propose that climate proximity, or how well climate data represent the actual conditions that an organism is exposed to, is more important for ecological realism than the spatiotemporal resolution of the climate data.LocationTemperature comparison in nine countries across four continents; ecological case studies in Alberta (Canada), Sabah (Malaysia) and North Carolina/Tennessee (USA).Time Period1960–2018.Major Taxa StudiedCase studies with flies, mosquitoes and salamanders, but concepts relevant to all life on earth.MethodsWe compare the accuracy of two macroclimate data sources (ERA5 and WorldClim) and a novel microclimate model (microclimf) in predicting soil temperatures. We then use ERA5, WorldClim and microclimf to drive ecological models in three case studies: temporal (fly phenology), spatial (mosquito thermal suitability) and spatiotemporal (salamander range shifts) ecological responses.ResultsFor predicting soil temperatures, microclimf had 24.9% and 16.4% lower absolute bias than ERA5 and WorldClim respectively. Across the case studies, we find that increasing proximity (from macroclimate to microclimate) yields a 247% improvement in performance of ecological models on average, compared to 18% and 9% improvements from increasing spatial resolution 20‐fold, and temporal resolution 30‐fold respectively.Main ConclusionsWe propose that increasing climate proximity, even if at the sacrifice of finer climate spatiotemporal resolution, may improve ecological predictions. We emphasize biophysically informed approaches, rather than generic formulations, when quantifying ecoclimatic relationships. Redefining the scale of climate through the lens of the organism itself helps reveal mechanisms underlying how climate shapes ecological systems.