8 research outputs found
The link between product market reform and macro-economic performance
No full textValue-added per capita in EU countries has lagged behind the US. This is despite widespread reforms to product markets across EU countries aimed at increasing growth. This study analyses the macro-economic impact of product market reforms undertaken in the European Union over the 1980s and 1990s by examining a large number of regulations and reforms across EU countries.product market, product market reforms, regulations, macro-economic performance, allocative efficiency, productive efficiency, dynamic efficiency, aggregate economy, Griffith, Harisson
Pluralismo e crise de sentido no sistema jurídico
No full textEste trabalho busca contribuir com a discussão a respeito da descrição do sentido das
comunicações sociais, proposto por Niklas Luhmann, a partir da identificação de uma
dimensão espacial de sentido, ao lado das dimensões objetiva, social e temporal já
diagnosticadas pelo autor. Vale-se, para tanto, da interseção das análises de Harisson C.
White, Ignácio Farías e Hugo Cadenãs para formular o conceito de “mundos plurais”,
entendidos como níveis intermediários entre as interações e os sistemas sociais, que surgem
em razão da performação de elementos sociomateriais, narrativas, estilos e valores comuns.
Luhmann não considerou a formação de ‘grupos’ dentro de seu esquema de planos de
diferenciação social, destacando somente as interações, organizações e sociedade, e incluindo,
apenas tardiamente, os movimentos de protesto. Do mesmo modo, ao tratar da ‘cultura’
considerou-o como um tema demasiado amplo, inviável à observação social.
Contudo, acredita-se que, ao se reformular o conceito de cultura, é possível observar outros
planos de diferenciação social que interagem com os sistemas funcionais, ao demarcarem
‘zonas de comunicação’ que atuam na formação das escolhas sistêmicas. Apesar de não serem
sistemas funcionais, os “mundos plurais” formados pela distinção cultural compartilham
importantes características de outros sistemas sociais, como a estruturação de um meio
próprio de generalização simbólica capaz de potencializar as chances de êxito das
comunicações sistêmicas ao reforçar o lado da forma familiar para as comunicações que
espelhem o mesmo padrão de sentidos por eles selecionados.
Entende-se, assim, que os “mundos plurais” formados pela cultura e os sistemas sociais
encontram-se conectados por contextos comunicativos particulares que ativam formas
imunizantes de crises sistêmicas episódicas decorrentes da clausura cognitiva pela reprodução
compulsiva de feedbacks positivos anteriores.
Especificamente quanto ao sistema jurídico, os “mundos plurais” permitem o equilíbrio entre
estabilidade e instabilidade, mudança e conservação; e mais, por darem origem ao metacódigo
da cultura, permitem a interpenetração entre as sistemas funcionais e sistemas psíquicos ao
chamar as consciências à aceitação de suas ofertas comunicativasThis study propose to contribute with the discussion about the description of the meaning of
social communications, in the way as proposed by Niklas Luhmann, from the identification of
a spatial dimension of meaning, alongside the objective, social and temporal dimensions
already diagnosed by the author.
It uses, therefore, intersection of Harisson C. White, Ignácio Farías e Hugo Cadenãs’s
analyzes to formulate the concept of "plural worlds," understood as intermediate levels
between interactions and social systems, arising from the performation of common
sociomaterial elements, narratives, styles, and values.
Luhmann did not consider the formation of 'groups' within his scheme of social differentiation
plans, highlighting only interactions, organizations and society, and including, only belatedly,
protest movements. Likewise, in dealing with the theme of 'culture' he considered it as too
broad a theme, unfeasible to social observation.
However, this study sustain that in reformulating the concept of culture, it becomes possible
to observe other plans of social differentiation that interact with the functional systems, by
demarcating 'communication zones' that act in the formation of the systemic choice.
Although they are not functional systems, the "plural worlds" formed by the cultural
distinction share important characteristics of other social systems, such as the structuring a
“medium of symbolic generalization” capable of enhancing the chances of success of
systemic communications by reinforcing the form side familiar for the communication that
resembles the same pattern of senses they select.
It is understood, therefore, that the "plural worlds" formed by culture and social systems are
connected by particular communicative contexts that activate immunizing forms of episodic
systemic crises arising from the cognitive closure by the compulsive reproduction of previous
positive feedbacks.
Specifically regarding the legal system, the "plural worlds" allow the balance between
stability and instability, change and conservation; and more, by giving rise to the metacode of
culture, allow the interpenetration between functional systems and psychic systemsCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - CAPE
Population and Environment
No full textThe past fifty years have witnessed two simultaneous and accelerating trends: an explosive growth in population and a steep increase in resource depletion and environmental degradation. These trends have fueled the debate on the link between population and environment that began 150 years earlier, when Malthus voiced his concern about the ability of the earth and its finite resources to feed an exponentially growing population. The purpose of this study is to review the literature on population and environment and to identify the main strands of thought and the assumptions that lie behind them. The author begins with a review of the historical perspective. He then reviews and assesses the evidence on the relationship between population and environment, focusing on selected natural and environmental resources: land use, water use, local pollution, deforestation and climate change. The author also reviews selected recent macro and micro perspectives. The new macro perspective introduces the environment-income relationship and examines the role of population growth and density in mediating this relationship. The new micro perspective introduces the close relationship between poverty and environmental degradation, also examining the roles of gender in decision-making and the role of children as economic assets in fertility decisions. Finally, the author carries out a comparative assessment of the approaches and methods employed in the literature to explain the wide variation in findings and predictions. This literature review demonstrates that there is little agreement on the relationship between population and growth, and even whether any relationship exists at all. Empirical research has been unable to resolve the issue because of limited data, divergent methodologies, and varying levels of analysis.Population, Environment, Economic Growth
FORBIDDEN FOOD IN THE QUR’AN AND THE BIBLE
No full textFood is a basic human need. All halal food is good. Otherwise, all forbidden food
is bad. Forbidden food is food that is forbidden by religion to eat. Today, the global era
that is all technologically. Global cultures that have experienced tremendous
development are food, clothing and entertainment. Especially the culture of eating and
drinking, has now become quite prominent in our society, especially Muslims. So, it is
very important for each individual to pay attention to every food they will consume,
because the food that enters the body will affect the limbs. Because every religion in
general has the same mission, namely to provide salvation to its people based on the
Holy Book, the author decided to research forbidden foods in the Qur’an and the Bible
(comparative study).
The research objective is the purpose to be achieved from the research conducted
by the researcher. Based on the research background that have been stated previously,
this study aims to: a) to find out what are the verses that discuss forbidden food in the
Qur’an and the Bible; b) to find out how the interpretation of the interpreter of the
Qur’an about the verse of forbidden food in the Qur’an and the interpretation of the
interpreter of the Bible about the verse of forbidden food in the Bible; and c) to find
out how the similarities and differences between forbidden foods are in the Qur’an and
the Bible.
This type of research is library research, in which the data used in this study were
obtained from various written sources or reading materials such as books and other
literature related to the discussion in this study. This research is also qualitative, in
which the data obtained is data that shows the circumstances or events that are stated
not in the form of numbers. The primary data in this study were sourced from the
Qur’an and the Bible and their interpretations, such as: Tafsir Al-Qur’ân Al-‘Aẓîm by
Ibnu Katsir, Tafsir Al-Mishbah by M. Quraish Shihab, Al-Qur’an dan Tafsirnya (Edisi
yang disempurnakan) by Departemen Agama RI, Tafsir Al-Azhar by Hamka, The
Wycliffe Bible Commentary by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harisson and
Tafsiran Matthew Henry by Matthew Henry. Meanwhile, secondary data in this study
were sourced from books, scientific journals, previous studies, and others related to this research. Based on the type, nature and source of data, the technique used by the
author in collecting data is to use the documentation method. The data analysis
technique in this study uses comparative-analysis, namely an analysis that describes
the forbidden foods contained in the Qur’an and the Bible, then critically analyzed and
looks for similarities and differences between the two Holy Book.
The results of this research indicate that the forbidden food that is mentioned
directly is in Q.S. al-Baqarah (2): 173, Q.S. al-Mâidah (5): 3, Q.S. al-An’am (6): 145,
and Q.S. an-Naḥl (16): 115 and the explanation of unclean food is specifically
mentioned in the ‘Clean and Unclean Animals’ theme found in Leviticus 11 and
Deuteronomy 14. The interpretation of the verses of the Qur’an regarding forbidden
food, explains that the foods that are forbidden directly in the Qur’an are dirty and
contain dangers that can harm the body and religion if consumed. Food obtained from
the wrong way is also something vile because the act is inappropriate and not in
accordance with religious teachings. Likewise, the interpretation of Bible verses
regarding unclean food, explains that foods that are specifically forbidden in the Bible
are foods that are unclean and must be detested. The similarities and differences
between forbidden foods in the Qur’an and the Bible can be seen from two aspects,
namely in terms of substance and externally. The similarity of forbidden food in terms
of substance is carcass, blood, pork, and animals classified as wild. While the
similarities in terms of external substances are all food that is exposed to or mixed with
unclean or other forbidden foods. Meanwhile, the difference between forbidden foods
in the Qur’an and the Bible is in terms of substances, namely khamr and animal fat.
While the differences in terms of external substances are all animals that are
slaughtered not for Allah, food obtained from unlawful ways, and all unclean animals
in the Bible that are not contained in the Qur’an
Work Values
No full textResearch has identified TV series and, also more recently social media, as different actors in vocational socialization, providing individuals with career-related information (Levine & Aley, 2022; Vranken & Vandenbosch, 2022). Individuals have even indicated observing information about one particular type of career-related information, i.e., “work values”, in both media outlets (Vranken & Vandenbosch, 2022). Work values refer to job qualities “that individuals believe should be satisfied as a result of their participation in the work role” (Brown, 2002, p. 49). Various types of work values exist, i.e., (1) intrinsic work values (i.e., inherently satisfying job qualities like performing interesting tasks), (2) extrinsic work values (i.e., material job benefits, such as earning potential), (3) social work values (i.e., social qualities of work such as having good working relationships), and (4) prestige work values (i.e., prestigious job qualities such as having job impact; Ros et al., 1999). It remains unclear which type of work values prevail most often in TV series and social media. More precisely, the limited amount of quantitative and qualitative content analyses on job portrayals in TV series studied such portrayals from the perspective of professional success and counter-stereotypes (Devos et al., 2024; Warren et al., 2016). When reading the results of these studies from a work value perspective, it seems that work value messages occur in popular TV series (Devos et al., 2024; Warren et al., 2016). Content analytical research on job portrayals in a social media context is even more scarce. These existing studies largely focused on counter-stereotypical job portrayals (Heizmann & Liu, 2022; Steinke et al., 2024). Therefore, systematic quantitative insights that document how and which types of work values appear most often in TV series and on social media remained overall lacking. Understanding which work values prevail in popular media is a prerequisite for hypothesizing the potential effects of exposure to such content (Slater, 2015). We, therefore, conducted two quantitative content analyses that examined portrayals of work values among characters in popular fiction series (Vranken, 2023) and work values among workers in public feed posts on Instagram (Vranken & Vandenbosch, 2023).
Field of Application/ Theoretical Foundation
Social Cognitive Theory (SCT, Bandura, 2009) has been dominantly applied in media research to understand the links between exposure to work value messages in TV series/social media and individuals’ work value endorsement (defined as the extent to which individuals attach importance to certain work values in a job; Vranken & Vandenbosch, 2022; Wenhold & Harisson, 2019). According to SCT (Bandura, 2009), media users may learn about the importance of work values via mediated role models, which may subsequently affect individuals’ work value endorsement. Evidence from some qualitative and cross-sectional studies supports that adolescents and emerging adults learn about work values through TV series and social media role models (Vranken & Vandenbosch, 2022; Wenhold & Harisson, 2019). Yet, systematic insights into the prevalence of various work value messages remained lacking (Vranken, 2023; Vranken & Vandenbosch, 2023). Such insights could help researchers gain a more nuanced understanding of the potential of TV series and social media to socialize work values that might negatively impact media users’ well-being. More precisely, research has demonstrated that endorsing extrinsic and prestige work values is linked to negative outcomes, like job dissatisfaction, while the endorsement of intrinsic and social work values is associated with positive career development and positive well-being outcomes (Vansteenkiste et al., 2007).
References/Combination with other Methods of Data collection
So far, only two quantitative content analyses exist that examined portrayals of work values in TV series and social media. Two separate content analyses were conducted because TV series and social media were considered as two distinct media outlets that have unique features (i.e., verbal and visual portrayals in TV series vs. textual and visual references in a social media context), and also differ in media production processes and motivations for consumption (Vranken, 2023; Vranken & Vandenbosch, 2022).
Example Studies: Vranken (2023); Vranken & Vandenbosch (2023)
Information on Vranken (2023)
Author: Vranken (2023)
Research Questions: How frequently are different intrinsic, extrinsic, social, and prestige work values portrayed as being violated vs. mixed vs. upheld among characters in TV series popular among adolescents (RQ1)? Does the nature of portrayals of different intrinsic, extrinsic, social, and prestige work values (i.e., violation vs. mixed portrayal vs. upholding) depend on characters’ job types (RQ2), gender (RQ3), and ethnicity (RQ4)?
Object of Analysis: The codes were applied to explore the prevalence of work value portrayals among characters who had a clearly defined job (n = 334) across six fiction series that were popular among adolescents (i.e., You, CSI, The Big Bang Theory, The Good Doctor, Spinning Out, Dynasty). All episodes of the final season that aired during coding were included.
Information about Variables: A novel codebook was developed. First, various intrinsic work values (i.e., skill utilization, achievements, the possibility for creative input, job satisfaction, possibility to learn, freedom, job variety, intellectual stimulation), extrinsic work values (i.e., job advancement, extra job benefits, job recognition, feedback opportunities, safe work environment, physically non-demanding job, well-equipped work environment, job hour stability, earning potential), social work values (i.e., altruism, good working relationships, the chance to work with people, the chance to help others), and prestige work values (i.e., leadership, having a respected job, job impact, decision-making) were coded as absent (= 0) or present (= 1). References included visual and verbal portrayals of a work value.
Second, for each work value that was present, the nature of a work value portrayal was considered in terms of a violation vs. mixed portrayal vs. upholding of a work value. A violation occurred when a character attached importance to a work value but was mostly portrayed as not achieving a work value (e.g., not being able to use one’s skills because the job does not allow it). An upholding occurred when the character attached importance to a work value and was mostly portrayed as achieving this work value (e.g., being able to use one’s skills because the job allows it). Mixed portrayals occurred when a character was portrayed with both the upholding and violation of a work value in an equal amount of scenes. To determine the upholding vs. violation vs. mixed portrayal of a work value, we created a score per character. For each character, the total number of scenes that included a work value portrayal was divided by the total number of scenes in which a work value was portrayed as upheld. If this score indicated that more than 60% of the scenes included an upholding, the work value was coded as upheld among a character. The same calculations were made for violations of work values.
Level of Analysis: Character-level
Scale level: Ordinal
Values: First, the presence of a work value was coded (0 = absent, 1 = present). Afterward, the nature of a work value was coded (1 = violation, 2 = mixed portrayal, 3 = upholding). The latter coding categories were used in the study.
Reliability: Two coders coded work values messages of characters in the six selected series. Krippendorff’s alpha ranged from 0.73 to 1 (skill utilization .84, achievement .78, possibility for creative input .97, job satisfaction .73, freedom .91, intellectual stimulation .79, extra job benefits, .79, job recognition .94, job security .85, feedback opportunities .79, safe work environment .92, physically non-demanding job .93, well-equipped work environment .88, job hour stability 1, earning potential .87, altruism .90, good working relationships .87, chance to work with people .85, chance to help others .90, leadership .81, having a respected job .83, job impact .79, decision-making .87).
Codebook: The full codebook with all coding categories and definitions can be found on OSF: https://osf.io/jzsg3/
Information on Vranken & Vandenbosch (2023)
Authors: Ilse Vranken and Laura Vandenbosch
Research Interest: The study aimed to document the prevalence of various intrinsic, extrinsic, social, and prestige work values on a textual and visual level in job-related public Instagram feed posts and whether such portrayals differed according to sex and ethnicity of the poster and gender typicality and status levels of their jobs. On a textual level, the study also distinguished whether an upholding or violation of different work values occurred most frequently and whether these portrayals differed according to the sex and ethnicity of the poster, and gender typicality and status levels of their jobs.
Object of Analysis: The codes were applied to 1,260 public Instagram feed posts of workers that included a hashtag in the caption referring to various jobs in terms of gender typicality (i.e., female job, male job, gender-neutral job) and status levels (i.e., low-, medium-, high status). Status levels of jobs were determined based on the ISEI-08, which is an international tool that assigns status scores to careers ranging from 10 to 89 (Ganzeboom & Treiman, 2010). A list was compiled of jobs that fell in the low (10-36), medium (37-63), and high (64-89) status categories. Based on this list, and numbers regarding the sex distribution in these jobs (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2022), we selected two professions within each status category combined with each classification of gender typicality (i.e., female job, male job, gender-neutral job). This resulted in a final selection of hashtags related to 18 different professions (e.g., #surgeon, #highschoolteacher, #graphicdesigner, #bartender).
Only publicly available posts were selected by entering the chosen hashtags in a search of Instagram posts from March-April 2022. Multiple inclusion criteria were applied: (1) the caption was written in English (i.e., posts with captions in other languages were excluded), (2) the information was posted by an individual, not by a commercial enterprise, (3) the information was posted by a person pertaining to their job or related lifestyle (e.g., posts of a party where somebody dresses up as a surgeon were excluded), and (4) videos and memes were excluded.
Information about Variables: On a visual and textual level, references to five intrinsic- (i.e., skill utilization, creative abilities, having a satisfying job, learning new things, job variety), seven extrinsic-(i.e., job recognition, leisure time outside of work, job security, earning potential, feedback, job advancement, extra job benefits), five social- (i.e., the opportunity to work with people, good working relationships, helping others, fun workplace, contributing to people/society) and three prestige work values (i.e., leadership, prestigious job, job impact) were coded. References to other intrinsic- (i.e., intellectual stimulation, being oneself in the job, independence), extrinsic- (i.e., job security, safe work environment), and prestige work values (i.e., decision-making) were solely coded on a textual level because these values were difficult to capture visually.
If a work value was present on a textual level, we also coded the type of reference. More precisely, references to the upholding of a work value (i.e., the poster “achieved” a work value such as being satisfied in the job) or the violation of a work value (i.e., the poster did not “achieve” a work value, such as feeling dissatisfied in the job) were coded. While Vranken (2023) also coded a mixed reference of work values in the TV series content analysis, this study coded the upholding and violation separately. Mixed references can be examined when a post includes both a reference to an upholding and a violation of a work value.
Level of Analysis: Work values were coded on a textual (i.e., caption/hashtags) and visual level (i.e., picture) in public Instagram feed posts of workers. The textual level included the hashtag and related caption text. Emoticons were omitted. The visual level included one picture. If a post included multiple pictures, only the first picture was selected.
Scale level: Nominal
Values: On a textual and visual level, general references to the different work values were coded (0= absent, 1= present). If a work value was present textually, references to the upholding (0 = absent, 1 = present) and violation (0= absent, 1= present) were coded.
Reliability: Two coders coded the Instagram posts. Krippendorff’s alpha ranged from .71 to 1.
Codebook: The codebook can be found on OSF: https://osf.io/pjru8/
References
Bandura, A. (2009). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. In Media effects (pp. 110-140). Milton Park: Routledge.
Brown, D. (2002). The Role of Work and Cultural Values in Occupational Choice, Satisfaction, and Success: A Theoretical Statement. Journal of Counseling & Development, 80(1), 48–56. https://doi.org/10.1002/J.1556-6678.2002.TB00165.X
Devos, S., Konings, F., Eggermont, S., & Vandenbosch, L. (2024). Exploring the prevalence of success stories in popular work-related television series: A content analysis. Poetics, 102, 101866. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2024.101866
Ganzeboom, H. B. G., and D. J. Treiman. 2010. International Stratification and Mobility File: Conversion Tools. Amsterdam: Department of Social Research Methodology. http://www.harryganzeboom.nl/ismf/index.htm
Heizmann, H., & Liu, H. (2022). “Bloody Wonder Woman!”: Identity performances of elite women entrepreneurs on Instagram. Human Relations, 75(3), 411-440. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726720979034
Levine, K. J., & Aley, M. (2022). Introducing the sixth source of vocational anticipatory socialization: Using the internet to search for career information. Journal of career development, 49(2), 443-456. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845320940798
Ros, M., Schwartz, S. H., & Surkiss, S. (1999). Basic individual values, work values, and the meaning of work. Applied psychology, 48(1), 49-71.
Slater, D. M., Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2015). Message variability and heterogeneity: A core challenge for communication research. Annals of the International Communication Association, 39(1), 3-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2015.11679170
Steinke, J., Coletti, A., & Gilbert, C. (2024). # WomenInSTEM: exploring self-presentation of identity on Instagram. Journal of Science Communication, 23(1), A03.
Vansteenkiste, M., Neyrinck, B., Niemiec, C. P., Soenens, B., De Witte, H., & Van den Broeck, A. (2007). On the relations among work value orientations, psychological need satisfaction and job outcomes: A self‐determination theory approach. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 80(2), 251-277. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317906X111024
Vranken, I., & Vandenbosch, L. (2022). Exploring late adolescents’ experiences with career-related messages on entertainment TV and in social media in Belgium: A focus group study. Journal of Adolescent Research. Advance Online Publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/07435584221140611
Vranken, I. (2023). (Social) media portrayals of careers: An exploration of career portrayals in popular (social) media and their effects on late adolescents. [Doctoral dissertation, KU Leuven]. Limo.
Vranken, I., & Vandenbosch, L. (2023). Social and vocational identity in workers’ online posts: a large-scale Instagram content analysis of job-related hashtags. Behaviour & Information Technology, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2023.2264928
Wenhold, H., & Harrison, K. (2019). Emerging adult women’s career role modeling and wishful identification with female TV news personalities. Communication Quarterly, 67(1), 41-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2018.1526813
Warren, S., Goodman, M., Horton, R., & Bynum, N. (2016). Stemming the tide: the presentation of women scientists in CSI. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology, 8(3), 360-381. https://genderandset.open.ac.uk/index.php/genderandset/article/view/45
Coal demand for electricity generation in South Africa : analysis and conditional forecasts to the year 2020
No full textBibliography: leaves 201-221.The purpose of this thesis is to provide an analytical framework for the examination of the demand for coal for the generation of electricity where more than 50 of the coal produced in the country is consumed. More specifically, the aim of the thesis is to identify the factors influencing the demand for steam-coal, disentangle their interrelationships, and evaluate their relative influence and importance
Lonchodryinus bakeri Kieffer
No full textLonchodryinus bakeri (Kieffer) (Figs 1, 2) Anteon bakeri Kieffer, 1906: 239. Prenanteon bakeri (Kieffer): Kieffer, 1914: 212. Prenanteon micropunctatus Fenton, 1927: 15 (synonymized by Olmi, 1984); type locality: Nerepis (New Brunswick, Canada). Prenanteon bakeri (Kieffer): Muesebeck & Walkley, 1951: 1041. Prenanteon micropunctatus Fenton: Muesebeck & Walkley, 1951: 1042. Prenanteon bakeri (Kieffer): Krombein, 1979: 1242. Prenanteon micropunctatus Fenton: Krombein, 1979: 1242. Lonchodryinus bakeri (Kieffer): Olmi, 1984: 278. Lonchodryinus bakeri (Kieffer): Halstead & Haines, 1987: 392. Lonchodryinus bakeri (Kieffer): Moya-Raygoza & Olmi, 2010: 95. Redescription. Female: fully winged; length 2.50 –3.00 mm. Head black, except mandibles testaceous; occasionally head partly yellow or reddish; antennae completely testaceous-darkened, or testaceous, except segments 3–10 darkened; mesosoma black; occasionally pronotum partly yellow or reddish; gaster black or brown; legs testaceous or brown-testaceous, except proximal region of coxae black; occasionally only hind cox ae basally black. Antennae clavate; antenn al segm ents in the follow ing p ro portio ns: 11: 6: 15: 17: 14: 13: 10: 9: 9: 11. Head shiny, smooth, finely punctate, without sculpture among punctures; occasionally anterior half more strongly punctate; frontal line absent; face without longitudinal keels; occipital carina complete; POL = 6; OL = 3; OOL = 7; OPL = 7; TL = 7. Pronotum shiny, strongly punctate; pronotal tubercles reaching tegulae. Scutum shiny, finely punctate, without sculpture among punctures, more strongly punctate near anterior margin of scutum. Notauli incomplete, reaching approximately 0.50–0.65 length of scutum. Scutellum and metanotum shiny, smooth, without sculpture; occasionally metanotum slightly rugose. Propodeum reticulate rugose, without a transverse keel between dorsal and posterior surface; posterior surface with two longitudinal keels and median area as rugose as lateral areas; occasionally longitudinal keels of posterior surface hardly visible. Forewing hyaline, without dark transverse bands; distal part of stigmal vein longer than proximal part (11: 7). Fore tarsal segments in the following proportions: 12: 3: 3: 6: 15. Segment 2 of fore tarsus produced into a hook. Enlarged claw (Fig. 1) with a proximal prominence bearing a long bristle. Segment 5 of fore tarsus (Fig. 1) with 2 rows of approximately 23–27 lamellae; distal apex with a group of approximately 4–7 lamellae. Tibial spurs 1, 1, 2. Male: fully winged; length 1.75–3.25 mm. Head black, except mandibles testaceous; antennae brown, except segments 1–2 or only 1 testaceous; occasionally antennae totally brown; mesosoma and gaster black; legs testaceous, except hind coxae proximally black; occasionally legs brown, except articulations and part of fore legs testaceous. Antennae filiform; antennal segments in the following proportions: 10: 6: 14: 15: 14: 14: 13: 13: 12: 13. Head shiny, smooth, strongly punctate, without sculpture among punctures; frontal line absent; face without longitudinal keels, with a median longitudinal furrow; occipital carina complete; POL = 6; OL = 3; OOL = 6; OPL = 3; TL = 4; OPL at least 1.5 times as long as greatest breadth of posterior ocelli. Scutum, scutellum and metanotum shiny, smooth, punctate, without sculpture among punctures. Notauli incomplete, reaching approximately 0.5 length of scutum. Propodeum dull, without a transverse keel between dorsal and posterior surface; dorsal surface reticulate rugose; posterior surface with two hardly visible longitudinal keels and with median area as rugose as lateral areas. Forewing hyaline, without dark transverse bands; distal part of stigmal vein approximately as long as proximal part. Parameres (Fig. 2) without a distal inner process and without papillae on inner side. Tibial spurs 1, 1, 2. Type locality. Ormsby Co. (Nevada, USA) Type material. Female holotype! of A. bakeri in CAS; female holotype! of P. micropunctatus in USNM. Hosts. unknown. Distribution. Nearctic region: Canada, Mexico, USA. Material examined. CANADA: Alberta: 49 ° 50 ’N 114 ° 25 ’W (CNC!); Lethbridge (CNC!); Banff Nat. Park, Eisenhower Jct. (CNC!); Banff, Johnston Canyon (CNC!); Battle River (CNC!); Morley (CNC!); Frank (CNC!); Mc Murray (CNC!); Waterton Lakes Nat. Park, Cameron L. Rd. (CNC!); Waterton (PMA!); 25 mi. N Coleman (TAMU!); Cataract Creek Campground (PMA!); Haynes (CNC!); Swan Hills, 4.5 Km S of Jerry Creek Campground (PMA!); Swan Hills, Jerry Creek (PMA!); 2 Km S P. Lougheed Prov. Park along Hwy. 40, 51° 30 ’N 115 °00’W (PMA!); Brazeau River, 5 Km S Forestry Trunk Road (PMA!); Edmonton (USNM!); Banff, Mt. Cascade, 7500–8600 ’, Shate ridge, 12.VIII. 1925 (USNM!); Grizzly Mt., Slave L., 3000 ’, 5.VIII. 1924 (USNM!); 20 mi. W Calgary, Jumping Pd. Creek (CNC!); 15 mi. E Morley (CNC!); 8 mi. E Morley (CNC!). British Columbia: 30 Km W of Spallumchem, Falkland, Una Rest Area, 19.VII. 1988, R. Danielsson coll. (MZLU!); Kitimat (CNC!); Stone Mt. Park (AEI!); Kitwanga (TAMU!); Stewart (TAMU!); Queen Charlotte Islands, Moresby Island, Sandspit (AMNH!); Hixon (CNC!); Cowichan Lake (CNC!); mi. 392 Alaska Hwy., Summit L. (CNC!); mi. 496 Alaska Hwy., Liard Hot Spg. (CNC!); Ketchum Lake (CNC!); Pete Lake (CNC!); Atlin (CNC!); Terrace (CNC!); Terrace, Shames (CNC!); Terrace, Lakelse Lake (CNC!); Terrace, Spring Creek (CNC!); Terrace, Gagon Road (CNC!); Robson (CNC!); Pr. Rupert (CNC!); Hedley, Nickle Plate City (CNC!); Cultus Lake (CNC!); 15 Km E of Briscoe (TAMU!); 10 Km E of Coldstream, Lumby (MZLU!); 15 Km E of Osoyoos (MZLU!); 11 mi. NNW of Fernie (TAMU!); Vancouver, Mesoche Island (AMNH!); West Harisson Lake Road, 0.8 Km N Fish Hatchery, 49 ° 19.26 ’N 121 ° 52.41 ’W, 30 m, 19.VI. 2000, open mossy knoll, Goulet & Gillespie coll., 1 female (CNC!); 30 Km S hwy. 5, Valemont, 22.VII. 1985, A. Finnamore & T. Thormin coll. (CNC!); Bear Lake, 20–29.VII. 1903, R.P. Currie coll. (USNM!); Nancy Green Lake, about 24 Km WSW Castlegar, 14.VIII. 2002, M. von Tschirnhaus coll. (TCC!). Labrador: Cartwright (CNC!); Hebron (CNC!); Goose Bay (CNC!); Raleigh (AEI!); Doyles (AEI!). Manitoba: Churchill (CNC!); Brandon (CNC!); Churchill, Warkworth Creek (CNC!). New Brunswick: Nerepis, female holotype of P. micropunctatus (USNM!); Kouchibouguac Nat. Park (CNC!); Prince of Wales (CNC!). Newfoundland: South Branch (CNC!). Northwest Territories: Good Hope (CAS!); Norman Wells (CNC!). Nova Scotia: Victoria Co., Mt. Barren, Hunter’s (FSCA!); Victoria Co., mi. 15 Highland Road (FSCA!); Victoria Co., Highland Road, mi. 16 East Road (FSCA!); Victoria Co., Baddeck, Beinn Bhreagh (FSCA!). Ontario: Stittsville (CNC! AEI!); Ottawa (CNC!); Merivale (CNC!); Gloucester (PMA!); Dundas (CNC!); Carleton Co., Constance Bay (CNC!); Hamilton (PMA! CNC!); Thunder Bay (PMA! CNC!); 7 mi. E Griffith (PMA!); Wylde Lake Bog (PMA!); Hartley Bay, Bear’s Den Lodge, 46 °03’N 80 ° 47 ’W, 16- 21.VIII. 1992 (USNM!). Quebec: Kam. Co., Lac Crescence (CNC!); Mistassini (CNC!); Chimo (CNC!); Great Whale River (CNC!); Hull (CNC!); Old Chelsea, Summit of Mt. King (CNC!); Old Chelsea (CNC!); Papineau Co., Buckingham Twp. (CNC!); Gatineau Park (TAMU!); Gatineau Park, King Mt. (PMA!); Gatineau, Camp Fortune (MZLU!); Luskville Falls, 300 m (PMA!); Mt. Pinacle, Summit of Mt. Audette, 712 m (CNC!). Saskatchewan: White Fox (CNC!). Yukon: Klondike Loop J– 3.6, Takhini Hot Springs, 8.VIII. 1978 (CAS!); Tombstone C.G. (TAMU!); Rampart House (CNC!); Dawson (CNC! AEI!); Mile 51 Dempster Hwy. (CNC!); Watson Lake (CNC!); Dawson, Gravel Lake (CNC!); Yukon–British Columbia border, Chilkat Pass (CNC!); Klo-Kut, Old Crowarea, Between Porcupine R. and Small Lake (CNC!). MEXICO: Durango: El Salto (CNC!); Durango (CNC!). USA: Alaska: Deering (CNC!); Umiat (CNC!); Unalakleet (CNC!); Naknek, King Salmon (CNC!); Naknek (CNC!); Anchorage (USNM! CNC!); Mile 289 Rich. Hwy., Shaw Creek (CNC!); Mile 206 Richardson Hwy., Isabel Pass (CNC!); Fairbanks, 135 m, 2.VII.1921, 10.VII. 1978 (CAS! FSCA! MOLC!); Big Delta (CNC!); Paxson (AEI!); George Parks Highway A– 178, Honolulu Creek (CAS!); Valdez, Valdez Glacier Campground (CAS!); Valdez, 7.VII. 1948 (USNM!); Kenai Peninsula, Tern Lake (PMA!); Kodiak Island Refugium, 19.VI. 1962 (USNM!); Taylor Highway, Klondike Loop D– 94.7, Walker Fork Campground, 7.VII. 1978 (CAS!); Sterling, Corey Street, Malaise trap, 14.VI. 2004, Picea glauca forest, D. Collet coll. (DCC!); Mile 12 Seward Hwy., wet meadow, 27.VII. 1997, D. Collett coll. (DCC!). Arizona: Cochise Co., Portal (AEI!); Cochise Co., 12 mi. W Montezuma Pass, Sycamore Canyon, 1.IX. 1991 (USNM!); Cochise Co., Chiricahua Mts., Chiricahua Pk., 9400–9650 ’ (FSCA!); Cochise Co., Chiricahua Mts., Rustler Park, 8300 ’ (AEI! CAS!); Graham Co., Hospital Flat, Pinaleno Mts., 8950 ’ (CAS!); Pima Co., Santa Catalina Mts., Bear Wallow, 8200 ’ (MSUEL!); Coconino Co., 12 mi. NW Flagstaff, Hart Prairie (MSUEL!); Coconino Co., 20 Km N Flagstaff (AEI!). California: Siskiyou Co., Mt. Shasta, Mc. Bride Springs, 1524 m (CNC!); Del Norte Co., Crescent City (AEI!); Tulare Co., Ash Mountain Kaweah Power Station (RDHC!); Tulare Co., Sequoia Nat. Forest, 0.5 airmi. NNE Sherman Pass, Sirretta Road, 35 ° 60 ’N 118 ° 21 ’W, 2300 m (LACM!); Sonoma Co., Plantation (RDHC!); Mono Co., Mill Creek Canyon (CDAE!); Alpine Co., 1 mi. S Monitor Pass (CDAE!); Alpine Co., Lake Alpine, Lily Pond, 1500 ’ (CNC!); Trinity Co., Ward Lake, 7000 ’ (CAS!); Placer Co., Tahoe Nat. Forest, Ward’s Canyon Meadow, 7.2 Km SW of Tahoe City, 2134 m (CAS!); El Dorado Co., Tahoe Keys, S of Lake Tahoe, 1.VIII. 1978 (SEMC!); Nevada Co., Sagehen Creek (UCD!); Nevada Co., Truckee (UCD!); Humboldt Co., Arcata (CAS!); Tuolumne Co., Tuolumne Meadows, 1.VII. 1940 (SEMC!); Tuolumne Co., Tioga Pass, 31.VII. 1940 (SEMC!). Colorado: Larimer Co., Estes Park (CNC!); Larimer Co., 22 Km W Livermore, 2300 m (AEI!); Larimer Co., Hewlett Gulch, 6000 ’ (CSU!); Larimer Co., Twin Sisters (USNM!); Larimer Co., Lory State Park, 6800 ’ (CSU!); Rocky Mountain National Park, Phantom Valley, 9400 ’, 17.VI. 1948 (USNM! AEI!); Rio Blanco Co., 2 mi. S Meeker, 8500 ’ (CNC!); Eagle Co., White River Nat. Forest, 9.2 mi. S Minturn, 9080 ’ (TAMU!); Eagle Co., 20 mi. N Leadville, Hornsilver Campground, 8800 ’ (TAMU!); Chaffee Co., Garfield, on South Arkansas River, 2990 m (CAS!); Clear Creek Co., Mt. Evans, Chicago Cr. (CNC!); Clear Creek Co., Mt. Evans, Doolittle Ranch, 9800 ’, 9.VIII. 1961, B. H. Poole coll. (CNC!); Clear Creek Co., Mt. Evans, Echo Lake (CNC!); Clear Creek Co., West Chicago Cr., 9800 ’ (CNC!); Clear Creek Co., Idaho Springs (CNC!); Clear Creek Co., Loveland Pass (CNC!); Denver Co., Denver (HNHM!); Summit Co., Horosier Pass (CNC!); Garfield Co., 40 mi. S Rangely, 8000 ’ (TAMU!); Laramie Co., Pineywood Springs (MSUEL!); Boulder Co., Lyons (MSUEL!); Park Co., Grant, Geneva Park, 9500–10000 ’, 22.VII. 1916 (USNM!); Jackson Co., Gould (AEI!); Fremont Co., Red Canyon Park, 12 mi. N Caсon City, 38 ° 32 ’N 105 ° 13 ’W, 26.VIII. 1991, G. F. & J. F. Hevel coll. (USNM!); Custer Co., 10 mi. SW Wetmore, 11.VIII. 1971, G. F. & S. Hevel coll. (USNM! AMNH!); Grand Co., 17 mi. N Granby, State Hwy. 125, 26.VII. 1994, R. Wharton coll. (TAMU!). Idaho: Custer Co., Stanley (AEI!); Boise Co., Idaho City (AEI!); Bear Lake Co., Emigration Canyon (USNM!). Iowa: Woodbury Co., Sioux City, 17.VI. 1926 (USNM!). Kansas: Douglas Co., Lawrence (UCD!). Louisiana: Rapides Co., Parish (AEI!). Maine: Washington Co., Machias (MCZ!); Franklin Co., Dryden (AEI! BMNH!). Maryland: Prince Georges Co., Oxon Hill (USNM!); Carroll Co., Finksburg (USNM!); Montgomery Co., Cabin John (AEI!). Massachusetts: Worcester Co., Petersham (MCZ!); Middlesex Co., Bedford (MCZ!); Middlesex Co., Holliston (MCZ!). Michigan: Manistee Co., Dublin (MSUEL!); Kalamazoo Co., Gull Lake Biol. Station (MSUEL!); Lake Co., Big Star Lake (MSUEL!); Lake Co., Branch (MSUEL!); Washtenaw Co. (MOLC!); Washtenaw Co., Ann Arbor (BMNH! BPBM! MZLU!); Washtenaw Co., 5 mi. SW Manchester, 8.VIII. 1975, C.T. Maier coll. (INHS!); Alger Co. (MSUEL!); Benzie Co. (AMNH!); Iron Co. (AMNH!); Iron Co., Iron River (AEI!); Iron Co., Crystal Falls (AEI!); Midland Co. (MSUEL!); Ionia Co., Lake Odessa (BMNH!); Marquette Co., Yellow Dog Plains (AEI!); Chippewa Co. (MSUEL!); Delta Co. (MSUEL!); Schoolcraft Co. (MSUEL!); Mackinac Co. (MSUEL!); Dickinson Co. (MSUEL!). Minnesota: St. Louis Co., 10 mi. W Tower, 14–15.VI. 1982 (USNM!); St. Louis Co., Eagles Nest, 13.VII. 1957 (INHS!). Missouri: Boone Co., Columbia (UCD!). Montana: Gallatin Co., Fairy L., Bridger Range, 15 mi. N Bozeman, 7500 ’ (TAMU!); Gallatin Co., 23 mi. NNW West Yellowstone, Beaver Creek (AMNH!); Madison Co., Tobacco Root Mts., S Willow Crk., Potosi (MSUB!); Flathead Co., West Glacier, 25–29.VII. 1988, H. Andersen coll. (UCR!); Park Co., Sace Creek Trail, 45 ° 36.11 ’N 110 ° 34.20 ’W, 1705 m, 3–6.VIII. 2001, Wharton & Woolley coll. (TAMU!). Nebraska: Platte Co., Columbus (CNC!). Nevada: Ormsby Co., July, female holotype of A. bakeri, Baker coll. (CAS!); further specimen (USNM!). New Hampshire: Coos Co., summit of Mt. Washington, 5288 ’– 6100 ’ (MCZ! CNC!); Strafford Co., Durham (USNM!); Grafton Co., White Mts., 700 m (CNC!); Carroll/Coos Co., Crawford Notch (MCZ!). New Jersey: Sussex Co., High Point State Park (AEI!). New Mexico: Lincoln Co., Sr. Blanca, 9700 ’ (CNC!); Otero Co., Cloudcroft, 27.VI. 1940 (SEMC!). New York: Schuyler Co., Valois, 16.VII. 2001, B. Nusillard coll. (BNC! MOLC!); Long Island, Suffolk Co., Huntington, Kalbfleisch Field Station (AMNH!); Long Island, Suffolk Co., South Haven, 10–18.VI. 1976 (AMNH!); Essex Co., Lake Placid (CNC!); Essex Co., State Truck Road, 25.VII. 1981, S. Heydon coll. (INHS!); Tompkins Co., Along Slaterville Springs– Caroline Center road (LACM!); Rensselaer Co., Troy (AEI!); Westchester Co., Armonk, Calder Center (FSCA!); Long Island, Nassau Co., Farmingdale (MLPA!); Oneida Co., Otter Lake, 25.VII. 1946 (SEMC!). North Carolina: Mc Dowell Co., 37 °00’N 81 ° 30 ’W (PMA!); Haywood Co., Mount Plagah (FSCA!); Macon Co., Highlands (CNC! AEI!); Buncombe/Haywood Co., Mt. Pisgah (AEI!); Haywood/Jackson Co., Balsam Gap, Balsam Mts. (MCZ!). North Dakota: Slope Co., Badlands, 46 ° 35 ’ 51 ’’N 103 ° 26 ’ 45 ’’W, 808 m (AEI!); Slope Co., 46 ° 35 ’N 103 ° 26 ’W (AEI!); Mc Henry Co., 28–31.VII. 1969 (USNM!). Oklahoma: Latimer Co. (FSCA!). Oregon: Clackamas Co., Mt. Hood (AEI!); Grant Co., Blue Mts., Hwy. 73, 1 mi. E Hwy. 52 (PMA!); Grant Co., Aldrich Mts. (AEI!); Union Co., Mt. Emily (AEI!); Benton Co., near Corvallis, Mary’s Peak, 15.VIII. 1984 (USNM!); Benton Co., Corvallis (MCZ!); Crook Co., Ochoco Creek (AEI!); Lincoln Co., 8 mi. E Eddyville, 6.VIII. 1985, sweep, A. Finnamore & T. Thormin coll. (CNC!). South Dakota: Custer Co., Black Hills, Sylvan Lake (CNC!); Lawrence Co., Black Hills Nat. Forest, Cheyenne Crossing (MSUEL!); Lawrence Co., 6.2 mi. SW of Lead, 6000 ’, 10.VII. 1959 (SEMC!). Texas: Kerr Co., Kerrville (AEI!). Utah: Rich Co., Garden City (UCD!); Uintah Co., Vernal, Big Brush Cr. (CNC!); Uintah Co., Vernal (CNC!); Daggett Co., 48 mi. N Vernal (TAMU!); Cache Co., Tony Grove Jct. (AMNH!); Cache Co., Logan Canyon, Bunchgrass Creek (USU!); Cache Co., Logan Canyon, Twin Creek (USU!); Cache Co., Cowley Canyon (USU!); Cache Co., Ant Valley, 21.VII. 1976, G. F. Knowlton coll. (USNM!); Summit Co., Henry’s Fork Park, 9600 ’ (CNC!); Summit Co., Henry’s Fork Park, 9600 ’, 1–10.VIII. 1979, S. & J. Peck coll. (CNC!); Sevier Co., Clear Creek Canyon, 9300 ft., 4.VIII. 1941 (SEMC!). Vermont: Windham Co., Newfane (MCZ!); Orange Co., Strafford, K.W. Cooper coll. (UCR!). Virginia: Fairfax Co., near Annandale, 20.VI. 1987 (in USNM!); Arlington Co., Falls Church (MCZ!); Madison/Page Co., Shenandoah National Park, Big Meadows, 1000 m (MZLU!). Washington: Okanagan Co., Okanagan Nat. Forest (PMA!); Pend Oreille Co., 9 mi. N Metaline Falls (TAMU!); Grays Harbor Co., 15 Km NW Aberdeen (MZLU!); Grays Harbor Co., Westport (AEI!); Whatcom Co., Bellingham (UWM!); Pierce Co., Eatonville (MZLU!); Pierce Co., Mt. Rainier (AEI!); San Juan Co., Orcas Island, Mt. Constitution (MCZ!); Mason Co., Union (MCZ!). Wisconsin: Polk Co. (CAS!); Jackson Co. (AEI! UWM!); Oneida Co. (UWM!); Florence Co. (UWM!); Fond du Lac Co. (AEI!); Grant Co., State Nurs. Boscobel (AEI!); Bayfield Co. (AEI!); Douglas Co., 46 ° 11.3 ’N 91 ° 98.3 ’W, 28.VII. 1988, D.G. McCullough coll. (UCR!). Wyoming: Park Co., Yellowstone Nat. Park, Dunraven Pass (MCZ!); Teton Co., 6.8 mi. N South Entrance of Yellowstone Nat. Park (UWL!); Teton Co., 3.8 mi. N South Entrance of Yellowstone Nat. Park (UWL!); Teton Co., 9 mi. N South Entrance of Yellowstone Nat. Park (UWL!); Teton Co., 9.7 mi. N South Entrance of Yellowstone Nat. Park (UWL!); Teton Co., Hoback Campground, 20 mi. SE Jackson (TAMU!); Teton Co., Grand Teton Nat. Park, UW–NPS Research Station, Scott R. Shaw coll., 28.VII– 15.VIII. 2002; 13–14.VIII. 2002 (UWL! MOLC!); Teton Co., Grand Teton Nat. Park, lodgepole pine forest, grassy clearing, Malaise trap, 16–23.VII. 1991, J. Struttman coll. (UWL!); Teton Co., Grand Teton Nat. Park, Jackson Hole Research Station (MCZ!); Johnson Co., Bighorn Nat. Forest, Tie Hack Campground (MSUEL!); Albany Co., Medicine Bow Nat. Forest, Happy Jack Recreation Area (UWL!); Albany Co., Medicine Bow Nat. Forest, 1.5 mi. S Lincoln Monument (UWL!); Albany Co., Medicine Bow Nat. Forest, 5 mi. SW Lincoln Monument, meadow nr. mixed forest, 20–26.VIII. 1990, S. R. Shaw coll. (UWL!); Albany Co., Medicine Bow Nat. Forest, 0.4 mi. S Lincoln Monument (UWL!); Albany Co., Medicine Bow Nat. Forest, 1.5 mi. W of Centennial, snowy range, mixed forest, Malaise trap, 4–14.VII. 1991, Mina coll. (UWL!); Carbon Co., Mi. 55.5 of Hwy. 130, forest edge, ripar., 25.VII– 8.VIII. 1995, Fortier & Ramirez coll. (UWL!).Published as part of Olmi, Massimo & Guglielmino, Adalgisa, 2010, Revision of Nearctic species of Lonchodryinus Kieffer 1905, with description of a new species from New Mexico (Hymenoptera: Dryinidae), pp. 30-40 in Zootaxa 2654 on pages 31-36, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19891
TRY – a global database of plant traits
No full textPlant traits – the morphological, anatomical, physiological, biochemical and phenological characteristics of plants and their organs – determine how primary producers respond to environmental factors, affect other trophic levels, influence ecosystem processes and services and provide a link from species richness to ecosystem functional diversity. Trait data thus represent the raw material for a wide range of research from evolutionary biology, community and functional ecology to biogeography. Here we present the global database initiative named TRY, which has united a wide range of the plant trait research community worldwide and gained an unprecedented buy‐in of trait data: so far 93 trait databases have been contributed. The data repository currently contains almost three million trait entries for 69 000 out of the world's 300 000 plant species, with a focus on 52 groups of traits characterizing the vegetative and regeneration stages of the plant life cycle, including growth, dispersal, establishment and persistence. A first data analysis shows that most plant traits are approximately log‐normally distributed, with widely differing ranges of variation across traits. Most trait variation is between species (interspecific), but significant intraspecific variation is also documented, up to 40% of the overall variation. Plant functional types (PFTs), as commonly used in vegetation models, capture a substantial fraction of the observed variation – but for several traits most variation occurs within PFTs, up to 75% of the overall variation. In the context of vegetation models these traits would better be represented by state variables rather than fixed parameter values. The improved availability of plant trait data in the unified global database is expected to support a paradigm shift from species to trait‐based ecology, offer new opportunities for synthetic plant trait research and enable a more realistic and empirically grounded representation of terrestrial vegetation in Earth system models
