plan how we will use lit review results

[teixeirak]

@NidhiVinod , I'd like to plan how we'll use all the results of the lit review. This will help guide both (1) planning of display items in the manuscript and (2) how you focus your attention with this going forward.

This will be different for each section in the review, and corresponding response_variable_group in the spreadsheet.

biophysical environment

• the display item for this section will be the NEON figure (#2), and possibly also a tropical forest lidar figure from @m-n-smith.
• results from the review should be integrated into the text
• we do not need to be fully comprehensive in our lit review of this theme, and I feel that we have enough, with one exception:
• [x] it would be nice to find a reference on freeze risk across the vertical profile
• going forward, let's not target references for this section. If we come across really good ones that are not yet in the spreadsheet, you can add them, or alternatively just make sure they make it into the review. You should, however, add this when it's part of a study for which you're entering results in other categories.
• note also that @m-n-smith will contribute knowledge of the literature here.

Trait variation

• the currently planned display item for this section will be a table (#9)
• we have established that we do not want to try to be comprehensive with this part of the review. Thus, for the table, we definitely don't want a separate row for separate studies; rather, we want one row per trait, e.g.:

Trait	Forest Types	response	References
LMA	any	sun > shade	REFS
Drought deciduous leaf habit	tropical drought deciduous	canopy> understory	Condit et al., Meakem et al. 2018

• I'm not sure where we stand in terms of comprehensiveness of the review. This is something I'd like to discuss with you and coauthors.

Leaf temperature

• The planned display item here is a figure showing how T_leaf responds to various physical drivers dependent upon traits (#6).
• results from the review should be integrated into the text
• we do not need to be fully comprehensive in our lit review of this theme
• going forward, let's not target references for this section. If we come across really good ones that are not yet in the spreadsheet, you can add them, or alternatively just make sure they make it into the review. You should, however, add this when it's part of a study for which you're entering results in other categories.
• note also that @m-n-smith will contribute here.

Leaf metabolism and thermal responses

• This section is the main/original target of the lit review, and the one for which we want to be as comprehensive as possible.
• The main display item here should be a table summarizing results of the lit review (#9)
• going forward, we want to make sure we're as comprehensive as possible for this section. The exception is that we don't want to be comprehensive in reviewing contrasts between A_max and R_dark (tons on that).

Ecology

• I'm not yet sure what display items we want here:
  • A table summarizing the lit review is definitely an option (#9).
  • We previously said we should include the analysis of temperature sensitivity from cores. This is still on the table, but I'm not entirely sure if that's a good idea/high priority.
• I'd like to discuss this with you and coauthors in order to determine how we should treat these studies in the review going forward

[NidhiVinod]

Thank you for this clear plan, looking forward to discussing more about it!