Jan Altman

Dr. Jan Altman

Institute of Botany of the CAS, v. v. i.
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

15Years (2012-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
19 November 2018 in Nature Ecology & Evolution
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HBHelge Bruelheide
Helge Bruelheide
JDJürgen Dengler
Jürgen Dengler
OPOliver Purschke
Oliver Purschke
JLJonathan Lenoir
Jonathan Lenoir
BJBorja Jiménez-Alfaro
Borja Jiménez-Alfaro
UJUte Jandt
Ute Jandt
Plant functional traits directly affect ecosystem functions. At the species level, trait combinations depend on trade-offs representing different ecological strategies, but at the community level trait combinations are expected to be decoupled from these trade-offs because different strategies can facilitate co-existence within communities. A key question is to what extent community-level trait composition is globally filtered and how well it is related to global versus local environmental drivers. Here, we perform a global, plot-level analysis of trait–environment relationships, using a database with more than 1.1 million vegetation plots and 26,632 plant species with trait information. Although we found a strong filtering of 17 functional traits, similar climate and soil conditions support communities differing greatly in mean trait values. The two main community trait axes that capture half of the global trait variation (plant stature and resource acquisitiveness) reflect the trade-offs at the species level but are weakly associated with climate and soil conditions at the global scale. Similarly, within-plot trait variation does not vary systematically with macro-environment. Our results indicate that, at fine spatial grain, macro-environmental drivers are much less important for functional trait composition than has been assumed from floristic analyses restricted to co-occurrence in large grid cells. Instead, trait combinations seem to be predominantly filtered by local-scale factors such as disturbance, fine-scale soil conditions, niche partitioning and biotic interactions.

11 February 2022 in Global Change Biology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JLJonas Lembrechts
Jonas Lembrechts
JHJohan van Den Hoogen
Johan van Den Hoogen
JAJuha Aalto
Juha Aalto
MAMichael B. Ashcroft
Michael B. Ashcroft
PFPieter De Frenne
Pieter De Frenne
JLJonathan Lenoir
Jonathan Lenoir
Research in global change ecology relies heavily on global climatic grids derived from estimates of air temperature in open areas at around 2 m above the ground. These climatic grids do not reflect conditions below vegetation canopies and near the ground surface, where critical ecosystem functions occur and most terrestrial species reside. Here, we provide global maps of soil temperature and bioclimatic variables at a 1‐km2resolution for 0–5 and 5–15 cm soil depth. These maps were created by calculating the difference (i.e. offset) between in situ soil temperature measurements, based on time series from over 1200 1‐km2pixels (summarized from 8519 unique temperature sensors) across all the world's major terrestrial biomes, and coarse‐grained air temperature estimates from ERA5‐Land (an atmospheric reanalysis by the European Centre for Medium‐Range Weather Forecasts). We show that mean annual soil temperature differs markedly from the corresponding gridded air temperature, by up to 10°C (mean = 3.0 ± 2.1°C), with substantial variation across biomes and seasons. Over the year, soils in cold and/or dry biomes are substantially warmer (+3.6 ± 2.3°C) than gridded air temperature, whereas soils in warm and humid environments are on average slightly cooler (−0.7 ± 2.3°C). The observed substantial and biome‐specific offsets emphasize that the projected impacts of climate and climate change on near‐surface biodiversity and ecosystem functioning are inaccurately assessed when air rather than soil temperature is used, especially in cold environments. The global soil‐related bioclimatic variables provided here are an important step forward for any application in ecology and related disciplines. Nevertheless, we highlight the need to fill remaining geographic gaps by collecting more in situ measurements of microclimate conditions to further enhance the spatiotemporal resolution of global soil temperature products for ecological applications.

20 April 2020 in Global Change Biology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JLJonas Lembrechts
Jonas Lembrechts
JAJuha Aalto
Juha Aalto
MAMichael Ashcroft
Michael Ashcroft
PFPieter De Frenne
Pieter De Frenne
MKMartin Kopecký
Martin Kopecký
INIvan Nijs
Ivan Nijs

25 August 2021 in Nature
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ACAida Cuni-Sanchez
Aida Cuni-Sanchez
MSMartin Sullivan
Martin Sullivan
PPPhilip J. Platts
Philip J. Platts
SLSimon L. Lewis
Simon L. Lewis
RMRob Marchant
Rob Marchant
EZEtienne Zibera
Etienne Zibera

12 May 2022 in Global Ecology and Biogeography
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
CRCaio Graco Rodrigues Leandro Roza
Caio Graco Rodrigues Leandro Roza
SASonja Aarnio
Sonja Aarnio
NANerea Abrego
Nerea Abrego
AAAlicia T. R. Acosta
Alicia T. R. Acosta
JAJanne Alahuhta
Janne Alahuhta
JSJanne Soininen
Janne Soininen
Aim: Understanding the variation in community composition and species abundances (i.e., β‐diversity) is at the heart of community ecology. A common approach to examine β‐diversity is to evaluate directional variation in community composition by measuring the decay in the similarity among pairs of communities along spatial or environmental distance. We provide the first global synthesis of taxonomic and functional distance decay along spatial and environmental distance by analysing 148 datasets comprising different types of organisms and environments.Location: Global.Time period: 1990 to present.Major taxa studied: From diatoms to mammals.Method: We measured the strength of the decay using ranked Mantel tests (Mantel r) and the rate of distance decay as the slope of an exponential fit using generalized linear models. We used null models to test whether functional similarity decays faster or slower than expected given the taxonomic decay along the spatial and environmental distance. We also unveiled the factors driving the rate of decay across the datasets, including latitude, spatial extent, realm and organismal features.Results: Taxonomic distance decay was stronger than functional distance decay along both spatial and environmental distance. Functional distance decay was random given the taxonomic distance decay. The rate of taxonomic and functional spatial distance decay was fastest in the datasets from mid‐latitudes. Overall, datasets covering larger spatial extents showed a lower rate of decay along spatial distance but a higher rate of decay along environmental distance. Marine ecosystems had the slowest rate of decay along environmental distances.Main conclusions: In general, taxonomic distance decay is a useful tool for biogeographical research because it reflects dispersal‐related factors in addition to species responses to climatic and environmental variables. Moreover, functional distance decay might be a cost‐effective option for investigating community changes in heterogeneous environments.

8 August 2022 in Nature Ecology & Evolution
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JLJingjing Liang
Jingjing Liang
JGJavier G. P. Gamarra
Javier G. P. Gamarra
NPNicolas Picard
Nicolas Picard
MZMo Zhou
Mo Zhou
BPBryan Pijanowski
Bryan Pijanowski
CHCang Hui
Cang Hui