Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 557

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A multi‐trait approach reveals the structure and the relative importance of intra‐ vs. interspecific variability in plant traits

Open access
Albert, Cécile Hélène, Thuiller, Wilfried, Yoccoz, Nigel Gilles, Douzet, Rolland, Aubert, Serge, Lavorel, Sandra·2010·Functional Ecology

Abstract

Summary: 1. Functional traits have been extensively used to describe, group and rank species according to their functions. There is now growing evidence that intraspecific functional variability, as well as interspecific variability, can have significant effects on community dynamics and ecosystem functioning. A core hypothesis for the use of functional traits expressed as species means, that their intraspecific variability is negligible compared with their interspecific variability, has however been too rarely tested empirically. We then addressed four questions: Is intraspecific functional variability across species ranges negligible compared with interspecific variability? Are the major resource economics trade‐off and functional strategies robust to individual trait variability? Are species rankings or ordination robust across species ranges once considering intraspecific variability? Can species be discriminated by their leaf traits? 2. Using an environmentally stratified sampling design within an alpine catchment, we collected five functional traits for 13 common plant species with contrasting life histories and traits. Several populations from a range of environmental conditions were then sampled for each species across their ranges. 3. With an original combination of single‐trait and multi‐trait analyses, we highlighted a non‐negligible contribution of intraspecific variability to overall functional trait variability (∼30%). Although not affecting general and well‐known functional trade‐offs and strategies, intraspecific functional variability had the potential to alter species ordination and produced a functional continuum rather than a clear‐cut species classification. 4. Deciding whether intraspecific functional variability can be considered as negligible – species being represented by mean trait values –, or not – species being represented by multivariate trait distributions –, is an essential question for multiple ecological issues. However, this decision cannot be generic, but will depend on the studied system and selected traits and species, as well as on study objectives.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2435.2010.01727.x

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 557

Metadata

Authors
Albert, C. H., Thuiller, W., Yoccoz, N. G., Douzet, R., Aubert, S., & Lavorel, S.
Venue
Functional Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-11-24
Volume
24
Issue
6
Pages
1192-1201
ISSN
  • 0269-8463 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2435
OpenAlex
W2147370568
Cited by
557
References
4
FWCI
18.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A multi‐trait approach reveals the structure and the relative importance of intra‐ vs. interspecific variability in plant traits. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2010.01727.x
The paper
Albert, C. H., Thuiller, W., Yoccoz, N. G., Douzet, R., Aubert, S., & Lavorel, S. (2010). A multi‐trait approach reveals the structure and the relative importance of intra‐ vs. interspecific variability in plant traits. Functional Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2010.01727.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.