Community-wide herbivory
Consistent with our hypothesis, we found that community-wide (CWM)
herbivory decreased as latitude increased from N 26°59′ to N 38°34′
(Slope = -0.203, R2 = 0.079, P = 0.012) (Figure
2); this latitudinal pattern remained even after accounting for the
effects of longitude and altitude (Slope = -0.155, P = 0.069)
(Table S1). Model selection based on AICcsuggested that both latitude (AICc = 222.557,w AIC = 0.525) and altitude (AICc =
224.140, w AIC = 0.238) better predicted community-wide herbivory
than did the null (intercept-only) model (AICc =
224.391, w AIC = 0.210) (Table 1). Among the climatic factors,
temperature seasonality decreased CWM-herbivory (Slope = -0.005,
R2 = 0.107, P = 0.003), while precipitation in
the wettest month (Slope = 0.023, R2 = 0.101, P= 0.004) and mean annual precipitation (Slope = 0.004,
R2 = 0.098, P = 0.004) increased CWM-herbivory
(Table 1; Figure S2). As for the edaphic factors, soil nitrogen (Slope =
0.185, R2 = 0.078, P = 0.003) and soil water
content (Slope = 0.037, R2 = 0.076, P = 0.005)
increased CWM-herbivory, while soil pH showed the opposite effect (Slope
= -0.639, R2 = 0.093, P = 0.003) (Table 1;
Figure S2). Community-wide herbivory was not associated with any plant
community factors in the linear mixed-effect models (Table 1).
Intraspecific variability and species’ turnover represent additive
components of community-wide herbivory; intraspecific variability
increased with latitude (Slope = -0.131, R2 = 0.054,P = 0.018), while turnover was not related to altitude, latitude
or longitude (Figure 2). Among the predicted factors, turnover was not
well explained by any climatic, plant community or soil factors (Table
S2). Meanwhile, soil electrical conductivity increased intraspecific
variability (Slope = 0.007, R2 = 0.053, P =
0.013), but temperature seasonality (Slope = -0.003,
R2 = 0.051, P = 0.022) and soil pH (Slope =
-0.405, R2 = 0.059, P = 0.010) decreased
intraspecific variability (Table S3; Figure S3).