confirm that references are still appropriate

[teixeirak]

@mcgregorian1 , the text of this sentence has changed, and we need to check of the references still work:

Survival is linked to resistance and resilience [@desoto_low_2020; @gessler_way_2020], implying it may be influenced by the same factors.

[mcgregorian1]

Will do tomorrow morning!

[mcgregorian1]

DeSoto says

• trees that died during water shortages were less resilient to previous non-lethal droughts, relative to coexisting surviving trees of the same species. In angiosperms, drought-related mortality risk is associated with lower resistance (low capacity to reduce impact of the initial drought) (from the abstract).

Gessler says

• Resilience: The capacity of individuals and ecosystems to maintain their functioning in the face of disturbance. It is determined by both, the capacity to reduce the impact (resistance) of a disturbance and to recover from the impact (recovery) after the disturbance (Ingrisch & Bahn, 2018).

I'd say the sentence is fine wrt the references. However, I'd say based on these two papers we should really be saying

• "Survival has been shown to be linked to resistance, recovery, and resilience [@desoto_low_2020; @gessler_way_2020], implying they may be influenced by the same factors."
  • or "Survival is inherently linked to a tree's ability to prosper after a drought [@desoto_low_2020; @gessler_way_2020], and because this resilience is affected by the tree's initial resistance and its ability to recover, we assume all three metrics are influenced by the same factors."