Below- and aboveground traits explain local abundance,and regional,continental and global occurrence frequencies of grassland plants

Plants vary widely in how common or rare they are, but whether commonness of species is associated with functional traits is still debated. This might partly be because commonness can be measured at different spatial scales, and because most studies focus solely on aboveground functional traits. We measured five root traits and seed mass on 241 central European grassland species, and extracted their specific leaf area, height, mycorrhizal status and bud-bank size from databases. Then we tested if trait values are associated with commonness at seven spatial scales, ranging from abundance in 16-m² grassland plots, via regional and European-wide occurrence frequencies, to worldwide naturalization success. At every spatial scale, commonness was associated with at least three traits. The traits explained the greatest proportions of variance for abundance in grassland plots (42%) and naturalization success (41%) and the least for occurrence frequencies in Europe and the Mediterranean (2%). Low root tissue density characterized common species at every scale, whereas other traits showed directional changes depending on the scale. We also found that many of the effects had significant non-linear effects, in most cases with the highest commonness-metric value at intermediate trait values. Across scales, belowground traits explained overall more variance in species commonness (19.4%) than aboveground traits (12.6%). The changes we found in the relationships between traits and commonness, when going from one spatial scale to another, could at least partly explain the maintenance of trait variation in nature. Most importantly, our study shows that within grasslands, belowground traits are at least as important as aboveground traits for species commonness. Therefore, belowground traits should be more frequently considered in studies on plant functional ecology.     

Description of the first species of Pseudoendorchis (Cestoda: Proteocephalidae) with uniloculate suckers from the pimelodid catfish Megalonema platycephalum,with comments on the taxonomic importance of the terminal vagina

Systematic Parasitology - The proteocephalid genus Pseudoendorchis (Cestoda: Onchoproteocephalidea) has recently been proposed to accommodate seven species/species-level lineages of tapeworm...     

A social panorama within the life cycle thinking and the circular economy: a literature review

Purpose

This literature review aims to present the current methodologies that have been developed to perform a social life cycle assessment (sLCA) and to display the main differences among them. In addition to that, to identify the nexus between sLCA and circular economy (CE) and to what extent this life cycle technique has been involved within CE studies.

Methods

An analysis of scientific literature using online databases was made. A total of 76 publications, including all industry sectors worldwide, were chosen spanning 11 years, from 2009 to 2020. Special attention was made to the methodology used to assess the social impacts, the impact categories analyzed, and whether there is or not a circular economy case. All the impact categories of both UNEP/SETAC and PSIA were taken into account when doing the review, and the top three of the categories are mentioned here.

Results and discussion

The leadership of the UNEP/SETAC methodology is clear with 58 cases. Almost 90% of the case studies are focused on products while the remaining ones are related with services. Workers are the most considered stakeholder when conducting an sLCA research, followed by local communities and society. Regarding the impact assessment, the performance reference point (PRP) was the most common method used. When considering the CE even when some cases included the end-of-life stage in the system boundaries, the studies did not consider the actors from that stage; excluding these cases, one out of four articles has a link with CE, a promising proportion taking into account the early stage of both concepts (i.e., sLCA and CE).

Conclusions

UNEP/SETAC guidelines seem to be the most promising methodology due to its reception among the scientific community. However, a more industry-oriented approach is proposed by the Roundtable for Product Social Metrics (PSIA) in a way to respond to manufacturing companies’ demand. Regardless of the type of methodology to be implemented, workers represent the key stakeholder when assessing social impacts. The change in usual patterns is leading to a change in the way how stakeholders interact and therefore new and more impacts may arise, and that is the reason why it is important to include the CE into the sLCA. A series of challenges such as the feasibility of aggregating all the life cycle techniques to one (life cycle sustainability assessment), data availability, and quality are still present for the moment.