The “guild” concept in riparian ecology: Use, limitations and prospects for improving the reproducibility and transferability of results

IF 7 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Ecological Indicators Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-02 DOI:10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113152
Philippe Janssen
{"title":"The “guild” concept in riparian ecology: Use, limitations and prospects for improving the reproducibility and transferability of results","authors":"Philippe Janssen","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In riparian ecology, the use of information contained in quantitative and qualitative traits to reconstruct plant “guilds” is widespread in the scientific literature. This was formalized by Merritt et al. 2010 with the concept of “riparian vegetation-flow response guilds”, with the aims to develop general frameworks and transfer patterns from one system to another. Here, I reviewed the scientific literature that has applied the “guild” concept to study riparian plant communities. The aim was to highlight the advantages and disadvantages of this approach, in a context of generalization, comparison and reproducibility of results. I identified 24 original research articles and extracted information on the traits used, guild construction methods and study contexts. Results showed that an average of 14 traits out of a total of 74 were used to construct an average of 7 guilds. Most of these traits, however, were common to no more than three studies, and most studies mixed traits related to plant morphology with ecological “traits” describing abiotic tolerance of species, obtained without replicable protocols. Most studies have also mixed quantitative traits with qualitative or nominal traits to produce guilds. This discretization process results in a loss of information that is useful for understanding variations in community response to environmental changes. This is further amplified by the use of Gower distance to construct guilds, which produces a disproportionate contribution of the qualitative traits to multi-trait dissimilarity. Guild naming was also specific to each study, with frequent use of words related to growth form, plant size and habitat requirements. Although the guild approach has advantages for transferring results to managers or simplifying communities for modeling purposes, the way it is implemented does not allow for generalization of results. To improve the comparability of studies between riparian systems, but also to obtain a more mechanistic and reproducible understanding of the effects of environmental change on riparian plant community, it would be beneficial i) to focus on a more limited number of traits, shared between studies; ii) to preserve as much as possible the information contained in quantitative traits; iii) not to mix traits reflecting the morphological response of species with traits linked to their ecological requirements; iv) to always test the relationship between each individual trait and the environmental variables studied.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11459,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Indicators","volume":"171 ","pages":"Article 113152"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X25000810","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In riparian ecology, the use of information contained in quantitative and qualitative traits to reconstruct plant “guilds” is widespread in the scientific literature. This was formalized by Merritt et al. 2010 with the concept of “riparian vegetation-flow response guilds”, with the aims to develop general frameworks and transfer patterns from one system to another. Here, I reviewed the scientific literature that has applied the “guild” concept to study riparian plant communities. The aim was to highlight the advantages and disadvantages of this approach, in a context of generalization, comparison and reproducibility of results. I identified 24 original research articles and extracted information on the traits used, guild construction methods and study contexts. Results showed that an average of 14 traits out of a total of 74 were used to construct an average of 7 guilds. Most of these traits, however, were common to no more than three studies, and most studies mixed traits related to plant morphology with ecological “traits” describing abiotic tolerance of species, obtained without replicable protocols. Most studies have also mixed quantitative traits with qualitative or nominal traits to produce guilds. This discretization process results in a loss of information that is useful for understanding variations in community response to environmental changes. This is further amplified by the use of Gower distance to construct guilds, which produces a disproportionate contribution of the qualitative traits to multi-trait dissimilarity. Guild naming was also specific to each study, with frequent use of words related to growth form, plant size and habitat requirements. Although the guild approach has advantages for transferring results to managers or simplifying communities for modeling purposes, the way it is implemented does not allow for generalization of results. To improve the comparability of studies between riparian systems, but also to obtain a more mechanistic and reproducible understanding of the effects of environmental change on riparian plant community, it would be beneficial i) to focus on a more limited number of traits, shared between studies; ii) to preserve as much as possible the information contained in quantitative traits; iii) not to mix traits reflecting the morphological response of species with traits linked to their ecological requirements; iv) to always test the relationship between each individual trait and the environmental variables studied.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
河岸生态学中的“行会”概念:利用、限制和提高结果可重复性和可转移性的前景
在河岸生态学中,利用含有定量和定性特征的信息来重建植物“行会”在科学文献中广泛存在。Merritt等人在2010年正式提出了“河岸植被-流量响应协会”的概念,其目的是开发从一个系统到另一个系统的一般框架和转移模式。在此,我回顾了应用“行会”概念研究河岸植物群落的科学文献。其目的是在结果的概括、比较和可重复性方面突出这种方法的优点和缺点。我确定了24篇原创研究文章,并提取了关于所使用的特征,公会构建方法和研究背景的信息。结果表明,在74个特征中,平均有14个特征被用来构建平均7个行会。然而,大多数这些性状在不超过三个研究中是共同的,并且大多数研究将与植物形态相关的性状与描述物种非生物耐受性的生态“性状”混合在一起,没有可复制的方案。大多数研究还将数量特征与定性或名义特征混合在一起,以产生行会。这种离散化过程导致信息的丢失,而这些信息对于理解社区对环境变化的反应变化是有用的。通过使用高尔距离来构建行会,这进一步放大了这一点,这导致了质量特征对多特征不相似性的不成比例的贡献。协会的命名也是针对每项研究的,经常使用与生长形式、植物大小和栖息地要求相关的词汇。尽管公会方法在将结果传递给管理者或简化社区以实现建模目的方面具有优势,但它的实现方式不允许结果的泛化。为了提高河岸系统之间研究的可比性,同时也为了获得对环境变化对河岸植物群落影响的更机械和可重复的理解,将是有益的:(1)关注更有限数量的特征,在研究之间共享;Ii)尽可能保留数量性状中包含的信息;Iii)不将反映物种形态响应的性状与与其生态需求相关的性状混合;Iv)始终测试每个个体特征与所研究的环境变量之间的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ecological Indicators
Ecological Indicators 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
11.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
1163
审稿时长
78 days
期刊介绍: The ultimate aim of Ecological Indicators is to integrate the monitoring and assessment of ecological and environmental indicators with management practices. The journal provides a forum for the discussion of the applied scientific development and review of traditional indicator approaches as well as for theoretical, modelling and quantitative applications such as index development. Research into the following areas will be published. • All aspects of ecological and environmental indicators and indices. • New indicators, and new approaches and methods for indicator development, testing and use. • Development and modelling of indices, e.g. application of indicator suites across multiple scales and resources. • Analysis and research of resource, system- and scale-specific indicators. • Methods for integration of social and other valuation metrics for the production of scientifically rigorous and politically-relevant assessments using indicator-based monitoring and assessment programs. • How research indicators can be transformed into direct application for management purposes. • Broader assessment objectives and methods, e.g. biodiversity, biological integrity, and sustainability, through the use of indicators. • Resource-specific indicators such as landscape, agroecosystems, forests, wetlands, etc.
期刊最新文献
Spatio-temporal dynamics and restoration mechanisms of plant-soil-microbe interactions following ecosystem engineering by plateau pikas in alpine meadows Time-lag and cumulative drought effects decouple vegetation sensitivity from damage risk in the upper Yangtze River basin Optimal stimulation of rhizosphere nutrient mobilization and grassland plant growth by intermediate but not by high diversity of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi Synchronous coupling dominates human–nature interactions in China: Evidence from nine-quadrant trajectory analysis Integrated linear and non-linear assessment of remote sensing drought indices for soil moisture monitoring across multiple temporal scales in China
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1