# Love Thy Neighbour? Tropical Tree Growth and Its Response to Climate Anomalies Is Mediated by Neighbourhood Hierarchy and Dissimilarity in Carbon- and Water-Related Traits

Daniela Nemetschek, Claire Fortunel, Eric Marcon, Johanna Auer, Vincyane Badouard, Christopher Baraloto, Marion Boisseaux, Damien Bonal, Sabrina Coste, Elia Dardevet, et al.

► To cite this version:

Daniela Nemetschek, Claire Fortunel, Eric Marcon, Johanna Auer, Vincyane Badouard, et al. "Love Thy Neighbour? Tropical Tree Growth and Its Response to Climate Anomalies Is Mediated by Neighbourhood Hierarchy and Dissimilarity in Carbon- and Water-Related Traits." Ecology Letters, 2025, 28 (4), pp.e70028. 10.1111/ele.70028. hal-05050145

HAL Id: hal-05050145

https://hal.science/hal-05050145v1

Submitted on 29 Apr 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
LETTER

OPEN ACCESS

# Love Thy Neighbour? Tropical Tree Growth and Its Response to Climate Anomalies Is Mediated by Neighbourhood Hierarchy and Dissimilarity in Carbon- and Water-Related Traits

Daniela Nemetschek¹,²,³ Ⓓ ID | Claire Fortunel¹ Ⓓ ID | Eric Marcon¹,² Ⓓ ID | Johanna Auer⁴ | Vincyane Badouard¹,² Ⓓ ID |
Christopher Baraloto²,⁵ Ⓓ ID | Marion Boisseaux² Ⓓ ID | Damien Bonal⁶ Ⓓ ID | Sabrina Coste² Ⓓ ID | Elia Dardevet¹ |
Patrick Heuret¹,² Ⓓ ID | Peter Hietz⁷ Ⓓ ID | Sébastien Levionnois¹,² Ⓓ ID | Isabelle Maréchaux¹ Ⓓ ID | Clément Stahl² Ⓓ ID |
Jason Vleminckx⁸ Ⓓ ID | Wolfgang Wanek⁴ Ⓓ ID | Camille Ziegler²,⁶,⁹ Ⓓ ID | Géraldine Derroire¹⁰,¹¹ Ⓓ ID |

¹AMAP, Université de Montpellier, CIRAD, CNRS, INRAE, IRD, Montpellier, France | ²UMR EcoFoG, AgroParisTech, CIRAD, CNRS, INRAE, Université des Antilles, Université de la Guyane, Kourou, France | ³School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK | ⁴Center of Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria | ⁵Department of Biological Sciences, Institute of Environment, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, USA | ⁶INRAE, Université de Lorraine, AgroParisTech, UMR SILVA, Nancy, France | ⁷Institute of Botany, BOKU University, Vienna, Austria | ⁸Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium | ⁹University of Bordeaux, INRAE, UMR BIOGECO, Pessac, France | ¹⁰Cirad, UMR EcoFoG, AgroParisTech, CNRS, INRAE, Université des Antilles, Université de la Guyane, Kourou, France | ¹¹Cirad, UPR Forêts et Sociétés, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France

**Correspondence:** Daniela Nemetschek (danielakrebber@gmail.com; daniela.nemetschek@gmail.com)

**Received:** 27 February 2024 | **Revised:** 25 September 2024 | **Accepted:** 27 October 2024

**Editor:** Liza Comita

**Funding:** This work was supported by Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (CIRAD), Centre d'Etude de la Biodiversité Amazonienne (CEBA), Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-10-LABX-25-01), UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) (EP/Y003810/1), Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD) and the ManagForRes project from Office Français de la Biodiversité (OFB) and 'Centre Méditerranéen de l'Environnement et de la Biodiversité (ANR-10-LABX-04-01).

**Keywords:** climate response | functional traits | neighbourhood interactions | plant-water relations | tree growth | tropical forests

## ABSTRACT

Taxonomic diversity effects on forest productivity and response to climate extremes range from positive to negative, suggesting a key role for complex interactions among neighbouring trees. To elucidate how neutral interactions, hierarchical competition and resource partitioning between neighbours' shape tree growth and climate response in a highly diverse Amazonian forest, we combined 30 years of tree censuses with measurements of water- and carbon-related traits. We modelled individual tree growth response to climate and neighbourhood to disentangle the relative effect of neighbourhood densities, trait hierarchies and dissimilarities. While neighbourhood densities consistently decreased growth, trait dissimilarity increased it, and both had the potential to influence climate response. Greater water conservatism provided a competitive advantage to focal trees in normal years, but water-spender neighbours reduced this effect in dry years. By underlining the importance of density and trait-mediated neighbourhood interactions, our study offers a way towards improving predictions of forest dynamics.

<footnote>This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.</footnote>

<footnote>© 2025 The Author(s). Ecology Letters published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</footnote>
Climate extremes such as heat waves, high atmospheric evaporative demands and low soil water availability (i.e., drought stress sensu lato), negatively affect forest productivity and functioning (Allen et al. 2010; Bauman, Fotunel, Cernusak, et al. 2022; Bauman, Fotunel, Delhaye, et al. 2022). These events are predicted to increase in frequency and intensity with ongoing climate change (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] 2023), which can alter global carbon dynamics (Higgins, Conradi, and Muhoko 2023). At the global scale, tree taxonomic diversity is an important driver of forest productivity (Liang et al. 2016), and can increase forest resistance to drought (Anderegg et al. 2018). However, at local scales such as individual forests or even tree neighbourhoods, the magnitude and even the sign of the effect of diversity on productivity can vary from site to site, depending on the local context (e.g., climate and disturbance regimes, stand structure and composition: Ammer 2019; Belote et al. 2011; Crawford et al. 2021) and temporal variations in resource availability or climate (Forrester and Bauhus 2016). Increasing evidence further suggests that diversity does not always increase forest resistance to droughts locally (Grossiord 2020; Pardos et al. 2021). Uncovering the mechanisms that underlie diversity effects on forest productivity and its response to climate is needed to better understand these context-dependent effects (Grossiord 2020) and improve our ability to predict forest responses to climate change.

Complementarity in resource use among co-occurring species has been proposed to explain increased forest productivity (Jucker, Bouriaud, Avacaritei, and Coomes 2014; Liang et al. 2015; Morin

et al. 2011) and stability to environmental fluctuations, such as climate extremes (Loreau and de Mazancourt 2013; Schnabel et al. 2021) in species diverse stands. As competition for resources takes place at the neighbourhood scale, evidence for such an effect and its signature should be found in the influence of neighbours' identity on individual tree growth (Yu et al. 2024) and its response to climate. Neighbourhood species richness has been shown to influence individual functioning under various conditions (Fichtner et al. 2018, 2020). However, this taxonomic diversity lens only offers limited insights into the mechanisms that drive the effects of neighbourhood diversity, and especially whether complementarity actually plays a major role in the mitigation of negative climate effects (Grossiord 2020; Jucker, Bouriaud, Avacaritei, Dănilă, et al. 2014).

Neighbourhood effects on individual tree growth are the net outcome of simultaneous negative and positive biotic interactions between tree individuals in close proximity to each other (Begon, Townsend, and Harper 2006; Larocque et al. 2013). While their relative importance may change when heat and drought stress occur (Grossiord 2020), their net outcome can be captured by different neighbourhood indices (Figure 1). Negative neighbourhood effects can result from shared enemies or density-dependent (i.e., neutral) interactions for shared resources (Jucker et al. 2016; Larocque et al. 2013; Pommerening and Sánchez Meador 2018). While denser neighbourhoods can reinforce drought effects (Bottero et al. 2017; Gleason et al. 2017), for instance through increased consumption of water, they can simultaneously shelter trees from atmospheric climate extremes (De Frenne et al. 2013; Nemetschek et al. 2024). Interactions

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>**FIGURE 1** | Conceptual illustration of different types of neighbourhood interactions, including neutral interactions, asymmetric competition and resource partitioning between a focal tree (central tree in dark green) and its neighbouring trees (light green). Neutral interactions can be captured by neighbourhood crowding indices (NCI), which depend solely on neighbourhood densities (i.e., the number, size and distance of neighbours). Asymmetric competition and resource partitioning can be respectively captured by the use of neighbourhood indices (NIh and NId) that include functional differences in the form of trait hierarchies (i.e., relative trait differences) or trait dissimilarities (i.e., absolute trait differences) between the focal tree and its neighbours. The expected effect of different types of neighbourhood interactions on individual tree growth (Hypothesis 1) and response to climate stress (Hypothesis 2), correspond to our hypotheses.</figcaption></figure>
between neighbouring trees from different species may additionally be asymmetric, suggesting that differences in species' functional strategies can result into competitive hierarchies between neighbours (Aschehoug et al. 2018; Canham, LePage, and Coates 2004; Craine and Dybzinski 2013; Pommerening and Sánchez Meador 2018). When water becomes limiting, dehydration-tolerant species, which continue to transpire at low water potentials and species with high water demands, reflected by low water use efficiency and high transpiration rates (hereafter water spenders), likely exert higher pressure on shared water resources, than dehydration avoiding species or species with low water demands (hereafter water savers) (Delzon 2015; Martin-StPaul, Delzon, and Cochard 2017; Volaire 2018). Therefore, water-spender neigbours, may have greater negative impacts on drought stress experienced by water-saver trees, than vice versa (Schnabel et al. 2024). Conversely, positive neighbourhood effects may result from facilitation (Brooker et al. 2007; Callaway 1995) or greater functional dissimilarity indicating resource partitioning (Hooper 1998; Pommerening and Sánchez Meador 2018), which could improve soil water availability for instance through hydraulic uplift and redistribution, therefore alleviating climate stress experienced by individual trees (Grossiord 2020; Hafner, Hesse, and Grams 2021; Prieto, Armas, and Pugnaire 2012). Previous work showed a key role of traits related to space, light and nutrients use in explaining the effect of trait difference dependent neighbourhood interactions on tree growth (Fortunel et al. 2016; Kunstler et al. 2016; Uriarte et al. 2010), but these traits offer little insights on water use strategies and responses to water limitations (Brodribb 2017; Grossiord 2020; Maréchaux et al. 2019; Wagner et al. 2014). In a previous study including traits related to light, nutrient and water use (Nemetschek et al. 2024), we showed that species traits of the focal tree alone partly captured interspecific differences in sensitivities to neighbourhood crowding and climate anomalies, but poorly captured their interactive effects. Examining how neighbourhood differences in water-related traits influence neighbourhood interactions in normal and anomalous climate years, may therefore offer additional insight into neighbourhood interactions for water and elucidate their role in shaping individual response to drought (Grossiord 2020).

In the same highly diverse Amazonian forest in which we studied the effect of density-dependent neighbourhood interactions and focal tree traits on species' climate response (Nemetschek et al. 2024), we now further investigate how neighbourhood trait differences in water-related and carbon use traits shape tree growth and modulate its response to heat and drought stress. We used hierarchical Bayesian models to evaluate the separate and interactive effects of (i) climate variables indicating heat, atmospheric and soil water drought stress and (ii) neighbourhood indices capturing the effects of neighbourhood crowding, trait hierarchies and dissimilarities on individual tree growth. Our analyses leveraged trait and 30-year long census data for 89 species from 15 permanent plots, some of which were subjected to initial selective logging and thinning, leading to contrasting neighbourhood structure, composition and dynamics. This long-term census data and its high temporal resolution (biennial) provides a broad range of neighbourhood and climatic conditions (Figure S1) needed to study neighbourhood effects on climate responses of individual tree growth. We hypothesised that:

**Hypothesis 1.** An individuals' growth is lower when surrounded by more neighbours (higher density), by superior competitors (stronger trait hierarchy) and more similar neighbours (lower trait dissimilarity) (Table 1).

**Hypothesis 2.** Neighbourhood is more likely to buffer negative climate effects when trait dissimilarity is high or when being composed of more water-saver species which may positively contribute to overall water conservation at the neighbourhood scale. Conversely, high densities of water-spender and dehydration-tolerant species are more likely to accentuate negative drought-related climate effects (Figure 1; Table 1).

## 2 | Materials and Methods

### 2.1 | Study Site and Inventory Data

This study leverages 30 years of spatially explicit inventory data from the CIRAD permanent forest plots of the Paracou research station (5°18'N, 52°53'W) in French Guiana. Paracou is a tropical lowland forest site with an annual precipitation of 3102 mm year⁻¹ and a pronounced 3-month dry season (<100 mm month⁻¹) spanning from mid-August to mid-November, during which wood production is reduced, and at the end of which water becomes limiting. Additionally, a shorter dry season can be observed in March (Aguilos et al. 2019).

The plot network was established between 1984 and 1990 and consists of fifteen 6.25 ha forest plots, covering 93.75 ha of predominantly terra-firme forest. In 1987, nine plots were subjected to three intensities of silvicultural treatments including thinning, poison-girdling and selective logging. These treatments resulted in 12%–56% loss of aboveground biomass (Gourlet-Fleury, Guehl, and Laroussinie 2004), and led to contrasting community composition (Mirabel, Hérault, and Marcon 2020) and neighbourhood densities (Nemetschek et al. 2024) between plots and years. Since then, tree inventories took place every 2 years, during which the spatial location (precision 0.5 m), status (alive/dead) and circumference (precision 0.5 cm, from which we calculated diameter at breast height [DBH]), of each tree ≥10 cm DBH (i.e., 1.3 m) was recorded (Derroire, Hérault, et al. 2022; Gourlet-Fleury, Guehl, and Laroussinie 2004). More than 590 species and subspecies, from 227 genera and 63 families have been measured at the site (mean 142 species per hectare), with the dominant families being Fabaceae, Chrysobalanaceae, Lecythidaceae, Sapotaceae and Burseraceae (Hérault et al. 2011).

We calculated individual annualised absolute diameter growth rate (AGR, cm year⁻¹) from DBH at the end *t* and the start *t* − 2 of 15 two-year census intervals between 1991 and 2021, excluding aberrant and uncertain growth measurements (see Methods S1 for details).

$$ AGR_{i,s,t} = \frac{\mathrm{DBH}_{i,s,t} - \mathrm{DBH}_{i,s,t-2}}{2} \quad (1) $$

Although most trees at Paracou were botanically identified, some individuals (<10%) only received a vernacular name, mainly due to tree death before botanical identification could
<table><caption>TABLE 1 | Functional traits used in the study, and their functional significance. We additionally provide the source from which data on each trait was compiled.</caption><thead><tr><th>Organ</th><th>Trait</th><th>Abbreviation (Unit)</th><th>Function</th><th>Description</th><th>References</th><th>Data Source</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="7"><strong>Traits pertaining to plant-water relations</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Leaf</td><td>Bulk leaf carbon stable isotope</td><td>δ<sup>13</sup>C (‰)</td><td>Carbon-water use</td><td>High δ<sup>13</sup>C translates into high intrinsic water use efficiency (i.e., high photosynthetic rates relative to stomatal conductance) and therefore greater water conservation</td><td>Farquhar, Ehleringer, and Hubick (1989), Cernusak et al. (2013), Scheidegger et al. (2000)</td><td>Baraloto et al. (2010), Fortunel, Fine, and Baraloto (2012), Vleminkx et al. (2021)</td></tr><tr><td>Leaf</td><td>Water potential at turgor loss point</td><td>π<sub>up</sub> (MPa)</td><td>Drought tolerance or water conservation</td><td>Low π<sub>up</sub> translates into a greater ability to tolerate dehydration thereby maintaining stomatal conductance, hydraulic conductance and photosynthetic gas exchange at lower soil water potential. Conversely, high (i.e., less negative) π<sub>up</sub> indicates early stomatal closure during drought, which allows avoiding dehydration through water conservation</td><td>Bartlett, Scoffoni, and Sack (2012), Martin-StPaul, Delzon, and Cochard (2017)</td><td>Maréchaux et al. (2015, 2019), Nemetschek et al. (2024), Ziegler et al. (2019)</td></tr><tr><td>Leaf</td><td>Minimum conductance</td><td>g<sub>min</sub> (mmolm<sup>-2</sup>s<sup>-1</sup>)</td><td>Water conservation</td><td>Low g<sub>min</sub> translates into low residual water loss after stomatal closure through leaf cuticle and incompletely closed stomata, thereby avoiding dehydration through water conservation</td><td>Blackman et al. (2019), Duursma et al. (2019), Machado et al. (2021)</td><td>Levionnois, Ziegler, et al. (2021), Nemetschek et al. (2024)</td></tr><tr><td>Leaf</td><td>Leaf saturated water content</td><td>LSWC (%)</td><td>Water storage</td><td>High LSWC translates into leaf water reserves that may allow maintenance of leaf water potential when water supply becomes limited</td><td>Blackman et al. (2019), Gleason et al. (2014), Luo et al. (2021)</td><td>Nemetschek et al. (2024)</td></tr></tbody></table>

(Continues)
<table><caption>TABLE 1 | (Continued)</caption><thead><tr><th>Organ</th><th>Trait</th><th>Abbreviation (Unit)</th><th>Function</th><th>Description</th><th>References</th><th>Data Source</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="7">Traits pertaining to carbon use</td></tr><tr><td>Leaf</td><td>Leaf area</td><td>LA (cm<sup>2</sup>)</td><td>Light capture</td><td>Larger leaves require less structural support per leaf area, indicating greater carbon allocation to photosynthesis, while the thinner boundary layer of small leaves permits more efficient heat and gas exchange and thus requires less cooling through transpirational water loss</td><td>Levionnois, Salmon et al. (2021), Michaletz et al. (2016), Wright et al. (2017), Ziegler et al. (2024)</td><td>Baraloto et al. (2010), Fortunel, Fine, and Baraloto (2012), Vleminkx et al. (2021)</td></tr><tr><td>Leaf</td><td>Specific leaf area</td><td>SLA (m<sup>2</sup>kg<sup>-1</sup>)</td><td>Resource capture and defence</td><td>High SLA reflects greater allocation of dry mass to light interception than physical resistance and leaf lifespan and indicates acquisitive carbon use strategy</td><td>Osnas et al. (2013), Wright et al. (2004)</td><td>Baraloto et al. (2010), Fortunel, Fine, and Baraloto (2012), Vleminkx et al. (2021)</td></tr><tr><td>Leaf</td><td>Leaf thickness</td><td>L<sub>thick</sub> (mm)</td><td>Resource capture and defence</td><td>High L<sub>thick</sub> reflects greater allocation of dry mass to structural support, physical resistance and leaf lifespan and indicates conservative carbon use strategy</td><td>Vile et al. (2005)</td><td>Baraloto et al. (2010), Fortunel, Fine, and Baraloto (2012), Vleminkx et al. (2021)</td></tr><tr><td>Leaf</td><td>Leaf toughness</td><td>L<sub>tough</sub> (N)</td><td>Resource capture and defence</td><td>High L<sub>tough</sub> reflects greater allocation of dry mass to structural support, physical resistance and leaf lifespan and indicates conservative carbon use strategy</td><td>Kitajima and Poorter (2010)</td><td>Baraloto et al. (2010), Fortunel, Fine, and Baraloto (2012), Vleminkx et al. (2021)</td></tr><tr><td>Wood</td><td>Stem wood specific gravity</td><td>WSG</td><td>Stem transport, structure and defence</td><td>High wood specific gravity reflects greater allocation of dry mass to mechanical strength and resistance to abiotic and biotic threats and indicates conservative carbon use strategy and slow growth</td><td>Chave et al. (2009), Poorter et al. (2010)</td><td>Baraloto et al. (2010), Fortunel, Fine, and Baraloto (2012), Vleminkx et al. (2021)</td></tr></tbody></table>
take place. To infer the most likely association between the botanical and vernacular name for a given individual, we used the vernabota R package (Derroire, Aubry-Kientz, et al. 2022, see Methods S2 for details). While tree individuals with gapfilled species information were removed from the focal tree data, they were kept in the neighbourhood data (see Section 2.4).

## 2.2 | Climate Data

To study the separate and interactive effects of climate and neighbours, we extracted mean monthly averages of three climate variables from the global high-resolution TerraClimate data set (Abatzoglou et al. 2018): maximum temperature ($T_{max}$), vapour pressure deficit (VPD) and climatic water deficit (CWD), which have been shown to capture tropical tree responses to different aspects of climate stress (Bauman, Fortunel, Cernusak, et al. 2022; Nemetschek et al. 2024). Specifically, these climate indices respectively capture heat stress, atmospheric evaporative demands and soil water availability, the latter by relating precipitation to evapotranspiration. We expressed interannual variation in these indices as the mean of monthly climate anomalies over each of the 2-year census intervals, as follows (CA$_{t}$, Figure S1): For each climate index and month, we calculated their deviations from their respective 30-year monthly mean for the 1991–2021 period, before dividing them by their 30-year monthly standard deviation (SD). We then averaged these standardised monthly climate anomalies over the 24 months prior to each census t (Bauman, Fortunel, Cernusak, et al. 2022; Nemetschek et al. 2024; Rifai et al. 2018, see Methods S3). The highest positive anomalies in $T_{max}$ and VPD are more than a unit of SD (2019–2021), and about 0.5 SD for the highest anomaly in CWD (1997–1999) (Figures S1 and S2). Doing so allowed us to directly interpret climate induced growth variations as responses to higher climate stress than usual.

## 2.3 | Trait Data

To capture species water relations (Table 1), we measured leaf water potential at turgor loss point ($\pi_{tlp}$), leaf minimum conductance ($g_{min}$) and leaf saturated water content (LSWC) in the dry seasons of 2020 and 2021 (Nemetschek et al. 2024). We selected target species according to their abundance to maximise neighbourhood coverage for our growth models. In addition, we combined our three water-related traits with data from previous field campaigns at Paracou (Levionnois, Ziegler, et al. 2021; Maréchaux et al. 2015, 2019; Ziegler et al. 2019). We further compiled data on bulk leaf carbon isotope composition ($\delta^{13}$C), leaf area (LA), specific leaf area (SLA), leaf thickness ($L_{thick}$), leaf toughness ($L_{tough}$) and wood specific gravity (WSG) from previous work conducted in French Guiana (Baraloto et al. 2010; Fortunel, Fine, and Baraloto 2012; Vleminkx et al. 2021). We subsequently calculated species mean trait values from individual trait measurements. Our final trait dataset includes complete trait information on 89 species (from 71 genera and 34 families), that together represent 77% of all unique

individual stems and 78% of growth measurements at Paracou. For more information on the different traits and data sources, see Table 1 and Nemetschek et al. (2024).

## 2.4 | Neighbourhood Indices

For each individual focal tree i at the start of the growth census interval $t-2$, we calculated three neighbourhood indices within a radius of 10 m around the focal tree (Fortunel et al. 2018; Lasky et al. 2014). To capture neighbourhood densities, we calculated a neutral neighbourhood crowding index (NCI) as:

$$NCI_{i,t-2} = \sum_{j \in J(i)} \frac{DBH_{j,t-2}^2}{d_{i,j}} \quad (2)$$

where $J(i)$ are the neighbours of i (such that $i \notin J(i)$) within the 10-m radius and the influence of a given neighbour j on the focal tree i is proportional to its basal area ($DBH_j^2$) and declines linearly with its distance ($d_{ij}$) from the focal tree i.

To respectively capture the effects of trait hierarchies and dissimilarities between the focal tree and its neighbours, we calculated NIh and NId as the weighted average of trait hierarchies and dissimilarities between the focal tree and all its neighbours within the neighbourhood radius as:

$$NIh_{i,t-2} = \frac{1}{NCI_{i,t-2}} \times \left( \sum_{k=1}^{K} \lambda_{s,k} \sum_{j \in J_k(i)} \frac{DBH_{j,t-2}^2}{d_{i,j}} \right) \quad (3)$$

$$NI_{d_{i,t-2}} = \frac{1}{NCI_{i,t-2}} \times \left( \sum_{k=1}^{K} |\lambda_{s,k}| \sum_{j \in J_k(i)} \frac{DBH_{j,t-2}^2}{d_{i,j}} \right) \quad (4)$$

where trait hierarchies are relative trait differences ($\lambda_{s,k} = \text{trait}_s - \text{trait}_k$) and trait dissimilarities are absolute trait differences ($|\lambda_{s,k}| = |\text{trait}_s - \text{trait}_k|$) between the species s of focal tree i and the species k of its $J_k(i) \subseteq J(i)$ neighbours j. $\lambda_{s,k}$ increasingly differs from 0 with increasing relative (hierarchical) and absolute (dissimilarities) trait differences (Lasky et al. 2014). The contribution of trait differences ($\lambda_{s,k}$) between the focal tree and each neighbour j to NIh and NId is weighted by the squared diameter of j and its inverse distance $d_{ij}$ to the focal tree i (i.e., its contribution to the NCI). For a given focal tree, NIh therefore increases when the focal tree has a relatively higher trait value in comparison with its neighbour and decreases when the focal tree has a relatively lower trait value in comparison with its neighbour. NId increases with increasing absolute trait differences (dissimilarities) between the focal and its neighbours. These weighted averages of trait differences, NIh and NId, are therefore not influenced by the density of neighbours, which is further shown by their very low correlation with NCI (see Table S1).

The 89 species for which complete information for all nine traits was available constitute our focal species. As NIh and NId require trait information for all neighbours within the neighbourhood,
we gapfilled missing trait information for all remaining species using the year and plot specific community weighted mean. To reduce the influence of missing species trait information on neighbourhood effect estimates, we only selected focal trees for which at least 75% of their NCI belonged to species with available trait information. For more detailed information on neighbourhood indices and subsetting of focal individuals, see Methods S4.

## 2.5 | Models

We evaluated the separate and interactive effects of climate anomalies and neighbourhood indices (NCI, NIh and NId) on individual absolute growth rates (AGR) using hierarchical Bayesian models. To manage model complexity, we fitted models separately for each combination of (i) trait hierarchies (NIh) and dissimilarities (NId), (ii) the three climate variables ($T_{max}$, VPD and CWD) and (iii) the nine functional traits, resulting in a total of 54 models. The model hierarchy consists of a community-level regression and a species-level response. The community-level regression models AGR responses to covariates via hyperparameters (i.e., statistical distributions from which species-level intercepts and slope coefficients arose), whereas the species-level captures species deviations from the community average parameters.

For each individual *i* of species *s* in plot *p* between censuses *t*−2 and *t*, we modelled the logarithm of scaled and centred absolute tree growth with a normal distribution as:

$$ \log(\text{AGR}_{i,s,t,p}) \sim \mathcal{N}(\mu_{i,s,t,p}, \sigma^2) \quad (5a) $$

where the mean $\mu_{i,s,t,p}$ is a linear function of the natural logarithm of scaled and centred tree size within species at the beginning of the census interval ($DBH_{i,t-2}$), monthly climate anomalies averaged over the census interval ($CA_t$), the natural logarithm of scaled and centred neutral neighbourhood crowding index ($NCI_{i,t-2}$), one of the non-neutral neighbourhood index ($NI_{i,t-2}$) capturing either trait hierarchies ($NI_{i,t-2}$) or trait dissimilarities ($NId_{i,t-2}$) at the beginning of the census interval and their interactive effects with climate anomalies ($CA_t \times NCI_{i,t-2}$ and $CA_t \times NI_{i,t-2}$) (see details on variable transformation in Methods S5) as:

$$ \begin{aligned} \mu_{i,s,t,p} = & \alpha_s + \beta_{1s} \times \log(\text{DBH}_{i,t-2}) + \beta_{2s} \times \text{CA}_t \\ & + \beta_{3s} \times \log(\text{NCI}_{i,t-2}) + \beta_{4s} \times \log(\text{NI}_{i,t-2}) \\ & + \beta_{5s} \times \text{CA}_t \times \log(\text{NCI}_{i,t-2}) + \beta_{6s} \times \text{CA}_t \times \log(\text{NI}_{i,t-2}) \\ & + \gamma_p + \epsilon_i \end{aligned} \quad (5b) $$

$\alpha_s$ and $\beta_{1-6s}$ are species-specific coefficients representing intrinsic AGR ($\alpha_s$), and species responses to tree size ($\beta_{1s}$), climate anomalies ($\beta_{2s}$), neighbourhood crowding ($\beta_{3s}$), hierarchical or dissimilarity neighbourhood index ($\beta_{4s}$) as well as interactive effect of climate anomalies with neighbourhood crowding index ($\beta_{5s}$), or with hierarchical or dissimilarity neighbourhood index ($\beta_{6s}$). We further allowed intercepts to vary by plots $\gamma_p$ and individuals $\epsilon_i$, to capture part of the unexplained growth variation related to plots and individuals (Bauman, Fortunel, Cernusak, et al. 2022; Fortunel et al. 2018).

Species intrinsic AGR $\alpha_s$ and AGR response to covariates $\beta_{1-6s}$ for the *s* species were modelled using a multivariate normal distribution:

$$ \begin{pmatrix} \alpha_s \\ \beta_{1s} \\ \vdots \\ \beta_{6s} \end{pmatrix} \sim \text{MV Normal} \left[ \begin{pmatrix} \alpha \\ \beta_1 \\ \vdots \\ \beta_6 \end{pmatrix}, S \right] \quad (5c) $$

where $\alpha$ represents the community-level intrinsic growth rate, $\beta_{1-6}$ the overall effect of covariates on AGR across all species and $S$ is a covariance matrix. Modelling all species-level parameters as a multivariate normal distribution allows sharing information across species, thus improving the fit for poorly represented species, while preventing overfitting (McElreath 2020). For the full model equation and the specified weakly informative priors see Methods S6.

Models were fitted in the R environment (R Core Team 2021; RStudio Team 2020) on the Meso@LR HPC cluster using the package brms (Bürkner 2017). Bayesian updating of parameters was performed via the No-U-Turn Sampler (NUTS) in Stan (Carpenter et al. 2017) using CmdStanR (Stan Development Team 2022). We used four chains and 3000 iterations (1500 warm up) per chain. Chains of all models mixed well and generally converged within 1500 iterations (Rhat between 1 and 1.05). Model parameter posteriors were summarised through their median and 95% highest posterior density interval (HPDI) using the packages tidyverse (Wickham et al. 2019) and tidybayes (Kay 2022). Model covariates were considered to have a clear effect when the slope coefficients 95% HPDIs did not encompass zero. Additionally, effects of model covariates are discussed as trends when the slope coefficients 90% HPDIs did not encompass zero. For details on parameter estimates see Table S2. To assess the model goodness of fit, we calculated a Bayesian version of conditional and marginal $R^2$ (Gelman et al. 2019), which represent respectively the fraction of variance explained by the fixed and random terms and by the fixed terms only, using the bayes_R2() function of the brms package (Bürkner 2017). Our models had a high explanatory power, with a mean conditional $R^2$ of 61% (Table S3) and showed to be stable across climate-trait model combinations (Methods S7). Some species showed clear deviations from the community-level response to neighbourhood trait differences (NId and NIh), but not to their interaction with climate (Table S4; Figure S6). To ensure that observed effects to NId and NIh were not simply driven by focal tree trait values, we calculated pairwise Pearson correlations between species-specific focal tree trait values and their responses to the separate and interactive effects of neighbourhood trait differences and climate anomalies (Table S5). The few significant correlations we found were weak, suggesting that observed effects are largely attributable to trait differences between neighbours, and species-specific deviations from the community mean are driven by factors other than the traits considered in this study. Furthermore, we ensured that effects of neighbourhood trait dissimilarities were not merely a result of higher densities of conspecific neighbours, by showing the absence of strong correlations between NId and the contribution of conspecific neighbours to NCI (Figure S3). Lastly, we checked that our results were not driven by spatial autocorrelation by showing the absence of strong correlations among residuals of all 54 models (for details see Methods S8; Table S6).
# 3 | Results

## 3.1 | Tree Growth Response to Neighbourhood Indices

Individual tree growth strongly declined (negative β₃) with increasing NCI (neutral neighbourhood crowding), while effect sizes were smaller for both NIh (trait hierarchies) and NId (trait dissimilarities, Figure 2). Depending on the trait greater NIh either increased (positive β₄) or reduced (negative β₄) tree growth,

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

**FIGURE 2** | Community-level effect of neutral neighbourhood crowding (NCI, β₂), hierarchical (NIh, β₄) and dissimilarity (NId, β₄) neighbourhood index on tree growth. Standardised coefficients where highly stable across the three climate models (*T*<sub>max</sub>, VPD and CWD) and are therefore here only shown for the *T*<sub>max</sub> models. Standardised coefficients are shown for NCI as mean estimates across the two NI and nine trait models and for NIh and NId separately for each of the nine trait models: Carbon (δ¹³C) isotope composition, water potential at turgor loss point (π<sub>tlp</sub>), leaf saturated water content (LSWC), minimum conductance (g<sub>min</sub>), leaf area (LA), specific leaf area (SLA), leaf thickness (*L*<sub>thick</sub>), leaf toughness (*L*<sub>tough</sub>) and wood specific gravity (WSG). For separate estimates for each model see Figures S4 and S5. Blue and green colours denote traits pertaining to water relations and carbon use, respectively. Circles show posterior medians of standardised coefficients, and lines indicate 95% HPDIs. Model covariates were considered to have a clear effect when the slope coefficients 95% HPDIs did not encompass zero. Filled circles indicate clear negative and positive effects (i.e., slope coefficient 95% HPDI not encompassing zero), and empty circles indicate no clear effects. Positive β<sub>3-4</sub> values indicate faster growth with increasing neighbourhood index, while negative β<sub>3-4</sub> values indicate slower growth with increasing neighbourhood index (details in Table S2).

while greater NId consistently increased (positive β₄) it. More specifically, higher NIh in δ¹³C and SLA increased growth, indicating that focal trees grew faster when their intrinsic water use efficiency and specific leaf area was higher than those of their neighbours. On the other hand, growth declined with increasing NIh in π<sub>tlp</sub>, g<sub>min</sub>, LA, *L*<sub>thick</sub>, *L*<sub>tough</sub> or WSG, indicating that focal trees grew slower when they had higher water potential at turgor loss point, higher minimum conductance, larger, thicker or tougher leaves as well as higher wood specific gravity than that of their neighbours. Lastly, higher NId in δ¹³C, π<sub>tlp</sub>, LSWC, g<sub>min</sub>, LA, SLA (trend observed for 90% HDPI but not for 95%), *L*<sub>thick</sub> and WSG positively influenced tree growth, indicating trees grew faster when their neighbours were more dissimilar in these trait values.

## 3.2 | Tree Growth Response to Interactive Effects of Climate Anomalies and Neighbourhood Indices

Positive anomalies in *T*<sub>max</sub>, VPD and CWD reduced tree growth (negative β₂). Moreover, higher NCI led to a clear buffering (positive β₅, Figure 3) of negative effects of *T*<sub>max</sub>, while also showing a strong trend to buffer negative effects of VPD and CWD. Only a few trait differences between the focal tree and its neighbours led to a clear modulation of growth through trait hierarchies (NIh) or dissimilarities (NId), and these effects depended on the climate variable. More specifically, negative effects of *T*<sub>max</sub> were reinforced (negative β₆) for trees with relatively higher δ¹³C than their neighbours (higher NIh). On the other hand, negative effects of *T*<sub>max</sub> tended to be buffered (positive β₆) for trees with relatively higher π<sub>tlp</sub> (trend) and g<sub>min</sub> (trend) than their neighbourhood (higher NIh). Furthermore, negative effects of *T*<sub>max</sub> were reinforced (negative β₆) with increasing trait dissimilarities (higher NId) in LSWC but tended to be attenuated (positive β₆) for trees surrounded by more dissimilar neighbours regarding δ¹³C (trend), *L*<sub>thick</sub> (trend) and *L*<sub>tough</sub> (Figure 3a).

While increasing trait hierarchies in LA, *L*<sub>thick</sub> (trend) and *L*<sub>tough</sub> reinforced the negative effects of VPD on tree growth (negative β₆), increasing trait hierarchies in π<sub>tlp</sub> (trend) and greater dissimilarity (higher NId) in *L*<sub>tough</sub> (trend) tended to buffer them (positive β₆, Figure 3b).

Lastly, while focal trees with more dissimilar neighbourhoods regarding π<sub>tlp</sub> (higher NId) were less affected by higher CWD, greater dissimilarities in δ¹³C (higher NId) accentuated negative effects of CWD (negative β₆). Additionally, focal trees tended to be less affected (positive β₆) from higher CWD when having relatively higher LA (trend) than their neighbours (higher NIh, Figure 3c).

# 4 | Discussion

By combining 30 years of high temporal resolution census data with data on neighbourhood trait differences pertaining to plant-water relations and carbon use (Table 1) from a highly diverse tropical forest, our study indicates that neutral and asymmetric competition likely act in concert with resource partitioning to shape tropical tree growth (Figure 1) and its response to heat (*T*<sub>max</sub>), atmospheric (VPD) and soil water drought
(CWD) stress (Figure 2). Building on our previous study show-
ing that focal tree traits can explain species' sensitivity to neigh-
bourhood densities, climate and to some extend their interactive
effects (Nemetschek et al. 2024), we here provide novel insights
on the potential mechanisms underlying positive and negative
neighbourhood interactions in both normal and anomalous cli-
mate years, by focusing on neighbourhood trait difference me-
diated effects.

Neighbourhood crowding (NCI), capturing neighbourhood
density, strongly reduced individual tree growth (Figure 1) and
had by far the largest effect size of any of the six tested model
covariates. This suggests that competition for shared space and
resources is a key driver of tree growth at Paracou (Nemetschek
et al. 2024) and that competitive interactions between neigh-
bouring trees are foremost driven by their size and proximity
in space (Laurans et al. 2014; Moravie, Pascal, and Auger 1997).
Previous studies have shown that neighbourhood taxonomic
diversity can positively influence tree performance, likely
through increased functional dissimilarity between neighbours

promoting resource partitioning (Ammer 2019; Forrester and
Bauhus 2016). Our results provide direct and strong support
of this hypothesis as greater dissimilarity in all nine tested
traits consistently stimulated individual tree growth at our site
(Figure 2). Greater dissimilarity between neighbours in traits re-
lated to carbon use and root strategies have also previously been
shown to increase tropical and subtropical tree performance
(Fortunel et al. 2016; Huang et al. 2022; Lasky et al. 2014; Uriarte
et al. 2010). Here we show for the first time that this extends to
traits pertaining to leaf water relations (δ¹³C, πtlp, LSWC, gmin),
uncovering the importance of complementary water use and
drought response strategies even in predominantly light- rather
than water-limited tropical forests such as Paracou (Wagner
et al. 2016). This complementarity may be especially benefi-
cial when a shift from light to water limitation can be observed
(Meng et al. 2022), such as during the pronounced dry season at
Paracou (Figure S2).

Providing further evidence for the importance of interactions
for water at the neighbourhood scale, we show that greater trait

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

**FIGURE 3** | Community-level effects of climate anomaly (β₂), and the interactions between climate anomaly and neutral neighbourhood crowding (Climate anomaly NCI, β₅), hierarchical (Climate anomaly NIh, β₆) and dissimilarity (Climate anomaly NIId, β₆) neighbourhood index on tree growth. Standardised coefficients from (a) Tₘₐₓ, (b) VPD and (c) CWD models are shown for climate anomalies and its interaction with NCI as mean estimates across the two NI and nine trait models (see Figures S4 and S5 for separate estimates) and for the interaction between climate anomaly and NIh and NIId separately for each of the nine trait models: Carbon (δ¹³C) isotope composition, water potential at turgor loss point (πtlp), leaf saturated water content (LSWC), minimum conductance (gmin), leaf area (LA), specific leaf area (SLA), leaf thickness (Lthick), leaf toughness (Ltough) and wood specific gravity (WSG). Blue and green colours denote traits pertaining to water relations and carbon use, respectively. Circles show posterior medi-ans of standardised coefficients, and lines indicate 95% HPDIs. Model covariates were considered to have a clear effect when the slope coefficients 95% HPDIs did not encompass zero. Filled circles indicate clear negative and positive effects (i.e., slope coefficient 95% HPDI not encompassing zero), and empty circles indicate no clear effects. Positive β₅-₆ values indicate a buffering effect of either NCI or NI, while negative β₅-₆ values indicate an accentuating effect of either NCI or NI (details in Table S2).
hierarchies in water-related traits, here used to capture asym-
metric neighbourhood interactions (Figure 1), significantly in-
fluence tree growth (Figure 2). Our results suggest that a higher
water use efficiency (higher δ¹³C), a greater ability to maintain
physiological functioning under decreasing water availability
(more negative π<sub>tlp</sub>) and conserve water under drought stress
(lower g<sub>min</sub>) than its neighbours may provide a competitive ad-
vantage, as reflected by faster growth. Contrasting to our find-
ings for water-related traits and previous research (Fortunel
et al. 2016; Kunstler et al. 2016), greater conservatism in car-
bon use relative to neighbours (lower SLA and greater L<sub>thick</sub>,
L<sub>tough</sub> and WSG) was consistently associated with reduced tree
growth. This highlights that greater resource conservatism in
comparison with neighbours does not always result in a com-
petitive advantage in tropical forests. Having more conserva-
tive carbon use strategies than one's neighbours implies being
surrounded by more resource-acquisitive neighbours that
may faster deplete common resources (Garbowski et al. 2020;
Goldberg 1990). Specifically, faster growth at the expense of less
mechanically resistant leaf and wood tissue (Chave et al. 2009;
Reich 2014) promotes fast colonisation of forest gaps both verti-
cally and horizontally (Westoby et al. 2002), which constitutes a
strong competitive advantage in disturbed plots making up 51%
of growth observations at Paracou.

In line with our findings in Nemetschek et al. (2024), denser
neighbourhoods consistently attenuated negative climate effects
on tree growth (Figure 3) likely through sheltering trees from
atmospheric climate extremes, thereby improving local micro-
climatic conditions (De Frenne et al. 2019; Tymen et al. 2017;
Wright 2024). Simultaneously, neighbourhood taxonomic diver-
sity can influence growth responses to drought (Grossiord 2020).
If resource partitioning is a key driver of positive diversity ef-
fects on drought resistance, their magnitude should depend on
the functional identity of focal trees (Fichtner et al. 2020), that
of their neighbours (Schnabel et al. 2024) and ultimately on
their functional differences. Our results suggest that in certain
cases greater trait dissimilarities can indeed increase individual
growth resistance to climate stress. However, this effect can differ
largely across traits and climate variables. Greater dissimilarities
in leaf economics traits tended to buffer negative effects of the
atmospheric climate variables T<sub>max</sub> (for L<sub>thick</sub> and L<sub>tough</sub> [trend])
and to a lesser extend for VPD (for L<sub>thick</sub> [trend]). Increased com-
plementarity in leaf morphology could indicate greater canopy
space filling (Forrester and Bauhus 2016, but see Hildebrand
et al. 2021), which likely increases thermal insulation (De Frenne
et al. 2019; Zhang et al. 2022). Conversely, greater dissimilarities
in π<sub>tlp</sub> mitigated negative effects of soil water stress (CWD). π<sub>tlp</sub>
is a key drought tolerance trait (Bartlett, Scoffoni, and Sack 2012)
and a strong predictor of leaf water potential at stomatal clo-
sure (Martin-StPaul, Delzon, and Cochard 2017; Rodriguez-
Dominguez et al. 2016). This finding aligns with previous studies
showing that diversity in stomatal regulation and drought re-
sponse strategies can reduce plant-water stress by positively af-
fecting local soil moisture (Grossiord 2020; Moreno et al. 2023).
However, in contrast to our expectations, we observed that
greater trait dissimilarities in water use efficiency (as indicated
by 13C) reinforced negative effects of soil water stress (CWD).
While π<sub>tlp</sub> and δ¹³C can inform on species' water use strategies,
the two traits (Maréchaux et al. 2019) and thus resulting neigh-
bourhood indices (Figure S3) were found largely uncorrelated

in French Guyanese forests. These contrasting results, there-
fore highlight their different functions (Table 1) in influencing
tree water-status and neighbourhood interactions. Additionally,
intertree variation in water use and thus neighbourhood inter-
actions for water may also depend on rooting depth, which has
been shown to vary independently of tree size in Paracou (Stahl
et al. 2013) and may influence the relationship between leaf- and
whole-tree level water use.

Even in normal climate years, trees at Paracou still experience
great exposure to heat, high atmospheric water demands and
low soil water availability, reaching its peak during the dry sea-
son (Figure 2). Interestingly, our results indicate that the com-
petitive advantage of water-saver species observed in normal
years decreases in extreme climate years, as the negative effect
of a higher water consumption by the neighbourhood becomes
more important (Figures 2 and 3). Specifically, greater wateruse
efficiency (higher δ¹³C) relative to neighbours benefited individ-
ual tree growth in normal years, but reinforced negative effects
of temperature stress (T<sub>max</sub>). Higher temperatures can lead to
increased evapotranspiration, hence greater abundances of rel-
atively less water-saver neighbours likely exert greater pressure
on local soil water resources when temperature stress occurs
(Grossiord et al. 2014; Mas et al. 2024). Conversely, trees with
larger LA relative to their neighbours grew slower in normal
years but suffered less from negative effects of soil water (CWD)
stress. While larger leaves require less structural support per
leaf area, indicating greater carbon allocation to photosynthe-
sis (Michaletz et al. 2016), they require more cooling through
(higher) transpirational water loss, which necessitates greater
water supply per unit leaf area (Wright et al. 2017). Similarly,
trees with higher residual water loss (g<sub>min</sub>) also tended to be
more buffered against negative effects of temperature stress
(T<sub>max</sub>). Our results therefore suggest a positive effect of water-
saver species on local soil water availability during drought
and heat waves, which may particularly benefit water-spender
species (Mas et al. 2024; Moreno et al. 2023). These findings
can also provide mechanistic insights to why species with low
drought tolerance profit most from neighbourhood diversity
during drought, as shown by Fichtner et al. (2020). Conversely
our results indicate that water-spender tree neighbours likely
decrease water resources to the detriment of the focal tree
(Garbowski et al. 2020; Goldberg 1990), increasing the climate
stress experienced particularly for water-saver species.

As forest ecosystems are increasingly likely to experience en-
vironmental conditions beyond their normal range, under-
standing if currently observed biotic interactions will hold in a
changing climate is crucial (Grossiord et al. 2019). By consider-
ing neighbourhood differences in water-related traits in addition
to carbon-related ones, our study shows that the consistent pos-
itive effect of resource partitioning, here inferred from neigh-
bourhood dissimilarities, observed under normal conditions
becomes more complex in climatically stressful years. Similarly,
our results suggest that trees profit from greater water-saving
capacities relative to their neighbours in normal years but as
climate stress increases, become increasingly affected by their
neighbours' overall water consumption. Our results, in com-
bination with the findings of our previous study (Nemetschek
et al. 2024), highlighting the importance of focal tree traits in ex-
plaining tropical tree growth and response to climate, strongly
suggest that climate change adapted forest management should carefully consider species' differences in water use strategies in combination with neighbourhood interactions (Forrester et al. 2016). While we previously showed that focal tree traits can explain species sensitivities to neighbourhood densities (Nemetschek et al. 2024), in the present study species-specific responses to neighbourhood trait differences and their interaction with climate were not merely driven by the here considered trait values of the focal tree (see Table S5). Furthermore, except for certain carbon use traits, traits mediating focal tree growth and response to climate in Nemetschek et al. (2024) did not have the same effect when their neighbourhood differences were considered in the present study (see Table S7). This stresses the importance of also considering the functional identity of the focal tree in relation to its neighbours to better understand patterns of tree growth and climate response in diverse tropical forests. Having said this, across trait models, some species showed clear and consistent deviations from the community-level response to NID and NIh, but not their interaction with climate (Table S4; Figure S6). Preliminary exploration of these interspecific differences in responses revealed that the strength and direction of species responses to neighbourhood trait differences may be driven by species' succession status, as early successional species tended to deviated more strongly from the community-level response (Figure S6). We therefore stress the importance of moving beyond the taxonomic diversity lens to understand how different types of neighbourhood interactions affect tree performance in these new conditions, which provides a promising way forward to assess the productivity and resilience of entire forest ecosystems under climate change.

## Author Contributions

D.N., G.D., C.F. and E.M. designed the study. D.N., M.B., J.A., V.B., C.B., D.B., S.C., E.D., C.F., P.H., P.H., S.L., I.M., C.S., J.V., W.W. and C.Z. collected or contributed trait data. D.N. formatted and vetted the plot census, climate and functional trait data, with help from G.D., C.F., E.M. and M.B. D.N., G.D., C.F. and E.M. designed the tree growth models. D.N. performed the analyses, with help from G.D., C.F. and E.M. D.N. and G.D. led the interpretation of the results, and D.N. wrote the first draft, with frequent discussions with G.D. and inputs from C.F. and E.M. All authors contributed substantially to revisions and gave final approval for publication.

## Acknowledgements

We thank the many colleagues who participated in field and lab work for trait data collection in French Guiana and at the University of Vienna, especially Coralie Dalban-Pilon, Jocelyn Cazal, Stéphane Fourtier, Jean-Yves Goret, Paul Mischler, Gaëlle Jaouen, Laetitia Proux, Camille Girard-Tercieux, Jeanne Clément, Ghislain Vieilledent and Sylvain Schmitt. We thank the CIRAD fieldwork team for the tree inventory, and Pascal Petronelli, Giacomo Sellan and Julien Engel for botanical identification. We thank Stefan Dullinger, Fabian Fischer, Charlotte Grossiord, Tommaso Jucker and Raphaël Pélissier for helpful discussions. The modelling work has been realised with the support of Meso@ LR-Platform at the University of Montpellier. We thank the Meso@LR team, in particular Bertrand Pitollat, and Philippe Verley for technical support. DN was supported by a PhD grant cofunded by Cirad and 'Centre d'Etude de la Biodiversité Amazonienne', an 'Investissements d'Avenir' grant managed by Agence Nationale de la Recherche (CEBA, ref. ANR-10-LABX-25-01) and by a grant from UKRI (EP/Y003810/1). This work has benefited from a grant (ManagForRes project) from Office Français de la Biodiversité (OFB) and 'Centre Méditerranéen

de l'Environnement et de la Biodiversité', an 'Investissements d'Avenir' grant managed by Agence Nationale de la Recherche (CeMEB, ref. ANR-10-LABX-04-01). This work was also supported by the Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD).

## Data Availability Statement

Data and R Code to reproduce results, figures and tables represented in this manuscript are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10719861.

## Peer Review

The peer review history for this article is available at https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer-review/10.1111/ele.70028.

## References

Abatzoglou, J. T., S. Z. Dobrowski, S. A. Parks, and K. C. Hegewisch. 2018. "TerraClimate, a High-Resolution Global Dataset of Monthly Climate and Climatic Water Balance From 1958–2015." *Scientific Data* 5: 170191.

Aguilos, M., C. Stahl, B. Burban, et al. 2019. "Interannual and Seasonal Variations in Ecosystem Transpiration and Water Use Efficiency in a Tropical Rainforest." *Forests* 10: 14.

Allen, C. D., A. K. Macalady, H. Chenchouni, et al. 2010. "A Global Overview of Drought and Heat-Induced Tree Mortality Reveals Emerging Climate Change Risks for Forests." *Forest Ecology and Management* 259: 660–684.

Ammer, C. 2019. "Diversity and Forest Productivity in a Changing Climate." *New Phytologist* 221: 50–66.

Anderegg, W. R. L., A. G. Konings, A. T. Trugman, et al. 2018. "Hydraulic Diversity of Forests Regulates Ecosystem Resilience During Drought." *Nature* 561: 538–541.

Aschehoug, E. T., R. Brooker, D. Z. Atwater, J. L. Maron, and R. M. Callaway. 2018. "The Mechanisms and Consequences of Interspecific Competition." *Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics* 47: 263–281.

Baraloto, C., C. E. Timothy Paine, L. Poorter, et al. 2010. "Decoupled Leaf and Stem Economics in Rain Forest Trees." *Ecology Letters* 13: 1338–1347.

Bartlett, M. K., C. Scoffoni, and L. Sack. 2012. "The Determinants of Leaf Turgor Loss Point and Prediction of Drought Tolerance of Species and Biomes: A Global Meta-Analysis." *Ecology Letters* 15: 393–405.

Bauman, D., C. Fortunel, L. A. Cernusak, et al. 2022. "Tropical Tree Growth Sensitivity to Climate Is Driven by Species Intrinsic Growth Rate and Leaf Traits." *Global Change Biology* 28: 1414–1432.

Bauman, D., C. Fortunel, G. Delhaye, et al. 2022. "Tropical Tree Mortality Has Increased With Rising Atmospheric Water Stress." *Nature* 608: 528–533.

Begon, M., C. R. Townsend, and J. L. Harper. 2006. *Ecology: From Individuals to Ecosystems*. 4th ed. Malden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Belote, R. T., S. Prisley, R. H. Jones, M. Fitzpatrick, and K. de Beurs. 2011. "Forest Productivity and Tree Diversity Relationships Depend on Ecological Context Within Mid-Atlantic and Appalachian Forests (USA)." *Forest Ecology and Management* 261: 1315–1324.

Blackman, C. J., D. Creek, C. Maier, et al. 2019. "Drought Response Strategies and Hydraulic Traits Contribute to Mechanistic Understanding of Plant Dry-Down to Hydraulic Failure." *Tree Physiology* 39, no. 6: 910–924.

Bottero, A., A. W. D'Amato, B. J. Palik, et al. 2017. "Density-Dependent Vulnerability of Forest Ecosystems to Drought." *Journal of Applied Ecology* 54: 1605–1614.
Brodribb, T. J. 2017. "Progressing From 'Functional' to Mechanistic Traits." *New Phytologist* 215: 9–11.

Brooker, R. W., F. T. Maestre, R. M. Callaway, et al. 2007. "Facilitation in Plant Communities: The Past, the Present, and the Future." *Journal of Ecology* 96: 18–34.

Bürkner, P. C. 2017. "brms: An R Package for Bayesian Multilevel Models Using Stan." *Journal of Statistical Software* 80: 1–28.

Callaway, R. M. 1995. "Positive Interactions Among Plants." *Botanical Review* 61: 306–349.

Canham, C. D., P. T. LePage, and K. D. Coates. 2004. "A Neighborhood Analysis of Canopy Tree Competition: Effects of Shading Versus Crowding." *Canadian Journal of Forest Research* 34: 778–787.

Carpenter, B., A. Gelman, M. D. Hoffman, et al. 2017. "Stan: A Probabilistic Programming Language." *Journal of Statistical Software* 76: 1–32.

Cernusak, L. A., N. Ubierna, K. Winter, J. A. M. Holtum, J. D. Marshall, and G. D. Farquhar. 2013. "Environmental and Physiological Determinants of Carbon Isotope Discrimination in Terrestrial Plants." *New Phytologist* 200: 950–965.

Chave, J., D. Coomes, S. Jansen, S. L. Lewis, N. G. Swenson, and A. E. Zanne. 2009. "Towards a Worldwide Wood Economics Spectrum." *Ecology Letters* 12: 351–366.

Craine, J. M., and R. Dybzinski. 2013. "Mechanisms of Plant Competition for Nutrients, Water and Light." *Functional Ecology* 27: 833–840.

Crawford, M. S., K. E. Barry, A. T. Clark, et al. 2021. "The Function-Dominance Correlation Drives the Direction and Strength of Biodiversity-Ecosystem Functioning Relationships." *Ecology Letters* 24: 1762–1775.

De Frenne, P., F. Rodríguez-Sánchez, D. A. Coomes, et al. 2013. "Microclimate Moderates Plant Responses to Macroclimate Warming." *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* 110: 18561–18565.

De Frenne, P., F. Zellweger, F. Rodríguez-Sánchez, et al. 2019. "Global Buffering of Temperatures Under Forest Canopies." *Nature Ecology & Evolution* 3: 744–749.

Delzon, S. 2015. "New Insight Into Leaf Drought Tolerance." *Functional Ecology* 29: 1247–1249.

Derroire, G., M. Aubry-Kientz, A. Mirabel, E. Marcon, and H. Bruno. 2022. "vernabota: Association between vernacular and botanical names for Guyafor data." R package. https://ecofog.github.io/vernabota/.

Derroire, G., B. Hérault, V. Rossi, L. Blanc, S. Gourlet-Fleury, and L. Schmitt. 2022. "Paracou Biodiversity Plots."

Duursma, R. A., C. J. Blackman, R. Lopéz, N. K. Martin-StPaul, H. Cochard, and B. E. Medlyn. 2019. "On the Minimum Leaf Conductance: Its Role in Models of Plant Water Use, and Ecological and Environmental Controls." *New Phytologist* 221: 693–705.

Farquhar, G. D., J. R. Ehleringer, and K. T. Hubick. 1989. "Carbon Isotope Discrimination and Photosynthesis." *Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology* 40: 503–537.

Fichtner, A., W. Härdtle, H. Bruelheide, M. Kunz, Y. Li, and G. Von Oheimb. 2018. "Neighbourhood Interactions Drive Overyielding in Mixed-Species Tree Communities." *Nature Communications* 9: 1–8.

Fichtner, A., F. Schnabel, H. Bruelheide, et al. 2020. "Neighbourhood Diversity Mitigates Drought Impacts on Tree Growth." *Journal of Ecology* 108: 865–875.

Forrester, D. I., and J. Bauhus. 2016. "A Review of Processes Behind Diversity—Productivity Relationships in Forests." *Current Forestry Reports* 2: 45–61.

Forrester, D. I., D. Bonal, S. Dawud, et al. 2016. "Drought Responses by Individual Tree Species Are Not Often Correlated With Tree

Species Diversity in European Forests." *Journal of Applied Ecology* 53: 1725–1734.

Fortunel, C., P. V. A. Fine, and C. Baraloto. 2012. "Leaf, Stem and Root Tissue Strategies Across 758 Neotropical Tree Species." *Functional Ecology* 26: 1153–1161.

Fortunel, C., J. R. Lasky, M. Uriarte, et al. 2018. "Topography and Neighborhood Crowding Can Interact to Shape Species Growth and Distribution in a Diverse Amazonian Forest." *Ecology* 99: 2272–2283.

Fortunel, C., R. Valencia, S. J. Wright, N. C. Garwood, and N. J. Kraft. 2016. "Functional Trait Differences Influence Neighbourhood Interactions in a Hyperdiverse Amazonian Forest." *Ecology Letters* 19: 1062–1070.

Garbowski, M., B. Avera, J. H. Bertram, et al. 2020. "Getting to the Root of Restoration: Considering Root Traits for Improved Restoration Outcomes Under Drought and Competition." *Restoration Ecology* 28: 1384–1395.

Gelman, A., B. Goodrich, J. Gabry, and A. Vehtari. 2019. "R-Squared for Bayesian Regression Models." *American Statistician* 73: 307–309.

Gleason, K. E., J. B. Bradford, A. Bottero, et al. 2017. "Competition Amplifies Drought Stress in Forests Across Broad Climatic and Compositional Gradients." *Ecosphere* 8: e01849.

Gleason, S. M., C. J. Blackman, A. M. Cook, C. A. Laws, and M. Westoby. 2014. "Whole-Plant Capacitance, Embolism Resistance and Slow Transpiration Rates all Contribute to Longer Desiccation Times in Woody Angiosperms From Arid and Wet Habitats." *Tree Physiology* 34: 275–284.

Goldberg, D. E. 1990. "Components of Resource Competition in Plant Communities." In *Perspectives on Plant Competition*, edited by J. B. Grace and D. Tilman, 27–49. Cambridge: Academic Press.

Gourlet-Fleury, S., J. M. Guehl, and O. E. Laroussinie. 2004. *Ecology and Management of a Neotropical Rainforest: Lessons Drawn From Paracou, a Long-Term Experimental Research Site in French Guiana*. Paris: Elsevier.

Grossiord, C. 2020. "Having the Right Neighbors: How Tree Species Diversity Modulates Drought Impacts on Forests." *New Phytologist* 228: 42–49.

Grossiord, C., A. Gessler, A. Granier, M. Pollastrini, F. Bussotti, and D. Bonal. 2014. "Interspecific Competition Influences the Response of Oak Transpiration to Increasing Drought Stress in a Mixed Mediterranean Forest." *Forest Ecology and Management* 318: 54–61.

Grossiord, C., S. Sevanto, D. Bonal, et al. 2019. "Prolonged Warming and Drought Modify Belowground Interactions for Water Among Coexisting Plants." *Tree Physiology* 39: 55–63.

Hafner, B. D., B. D. Hesse, and T. E. Grams. 2021. "Friendly Neighbours: Hydraulic Redistribution Accounts for One Quarter of Water Used by Neighbouring Drought Stressed Tree Saplings." *Plant, Cell & Environment* 44: 1243–1256.

Hérault, B., B. Bachelot, L. Poorter, et al. 2011. "Functional Traits Shape Ontogenetic Growth Trajectories of Rain Forest Tree Species." *Journal of Ecology* 99: 1431–1440.

Higgins, S. I., T. Conradi, and E. Muhoko. 2023. "Shifts in Vegetation Activity of Terrestrial Ecosystems Attributable to Climate Trends." *Nature Geoscience* 16: 147–153.

Hildebrand, M., M. D. Perles-Garcia, M. Kunz, W. Härdtle, G. von Oheimb, and A. Fichtner. 2021. "Tree-Tree Interactions and Crown Complementarity: The Role of Functional Diversity and Branch Traits for Canopy Packing." *Basic and Applied Ecology* 50: 217–227.

Hooper, D. U. 1998. "The Role of Complementarity and Competition in Ecosystem Responses to Variation in Plant Diversity." *Ecology* 79: 704–719.

Huang, Z., S. Ran, Y. Fu, et al. 2022. "Functionally Dissimilar Neighbours Increase Tree Water Use Efficiency Through Enhancement of Leaf Phosphorus Concentration." *Journal of Ecology* 110: 2179–2189.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2023. *Climate Change 2022 – Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jucker, T., O. Bouriaud, D. Avacaritei, and D. A. Coomes. 2014. "Stabilizing Effects of Diversity on Aboveground Wood Production in Forest Ecosystems: Linking Patterns and Processes." *Ecology Letters* 17: 1560-1569.

Jucker, T., O. Bouriaud, D. Avacaritei, et al. 2014. "Competition for Light and Water Play Contrasting Roles in Driving Diversity-Productivity Relationships in Iberian Forests." *Journal of Ecology* 102: 1202-1213.

Jucker, T., A. C. Sanchez, J. A. Lindsell, H. D. Allen, G. S. Amable, and D. A. Coomes. 2016. "Drivers of Aboveground Wood Production in a Lowland Tropical Forest of West Africa: Teasing Apart the Roles of Tree Density, Tree Diversity, Soil Phosphorus, and Historical Logging." *Ecology and Evolution* 6: 4004-4017.

Kay, M. 2022. "tidybayes: Tidy Data and Geoms for Bayesian Models."

Kitajima, K., and L. Poorter. 2010. "Tissue-Level Leaf Toughness, but Not Lamina Thickness, Predicts Sapling Leaf Lifespan and Shade Tolerance of Tropical Tree Species." *New Phytologist* 186: 708-721.

Kunstler, G., D. Falster, D. A. Coomes, et al. 2016. "Plant Functional Traits Have Globally Consistent Effects on Competition." *Nature* 529: 204-207.

Larocque, G. R., N. Luckai, S. N. Adhikary, A. Groot, F. W. Bell, and M. Sharma. 2013. "Competition Theory-Science and Application in Mixed Forest Stands: Review of Experimental and Modelling Methods and Suggestions for Future Research." *Environmental Reviews* 21: 71-84.

Lasky, J. R., M. Uriarte, V. K. Boukili, and R. L. Chazdon. 2014. "Trait-Mediated Assembly Processes Predict Successional Changes in Community Diversity of Tropical Forests." *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* 111: 5616-5621.

Laurans, M., B. Hérault, G. Vieilledent, and G. Vincent. 2014. "Vertical Stratification Reduces Competition for Light in Dense Tropical Forests." *Forest Ecology and Management* 329: 79-88.

Levionnois, S., C. Salmon, T. Alméras, et al. 2021. "Anatomies, Vascular Architectures, and Mechanics Underlying The Leaf Size-Stem Size Spectrum in 42 Neotropical Tree Species." *Journal of Experimental Botany* 72: 7957-7969.

Levionnois, S., C. Ziegler, P. Heuret, et al. 2021. "Is Vulnerability Segmentation at the Leaf-Stem Transition a Drought Resistance Mechanism? A Theoretical Test With a Trait-Based Model for Neotropical Canopy Tree Species." *Annals of Forest Science* 78, no. 4: 1-16.

Liang, J., T. W. Crowther, N. Picard, et al. 2016. "Positive Biodiversity-Productivity Relationship Predominant in Global Forests." *Science* 354: 196.

Liang, J., M. Zhou, P. C. Tobin, A. D. McGuire, and P. B. Reich. 2015. "Biodiversity Influences Plant Productivity Through Niche-Efficiency." *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* 112: 5738-5743.

Loreau, M., and C. de Mazancourt. 2013. "Biodiversity and Ecosystem Stability: A Synthesis of Underlying Mechanisms." *Ecology Letters* 16: 106-115.

Luo, Y., C. L. Ho, B. R. Helliker, and E. Katifori. 2021. "Leaf Water Storage and Robustness to Intermittent Drought: A Spatially Explicit Capacitive Model for Leaf Hydraulics." *Frontiers in Plant Science* 12: 2269.

Machado, R., L. Loram-Lourenço, F. S. Farnese, et al. 2021. "Where Do Leaf Water Leaks Come From? Trade-Offs Underlying the Variability in Minimum Conductance Across Tropical Savanna Species With Contrasting Growth Strategies." *New Phytologist* 229: 1415-1430.

Maréchaux, I., M. K. Bartlett, L. Sack, et al. 2015. "Drought Tolerance as Predicted by Leaf Water Potential at Turgor Loss Point Varies Strongly Across Species Within an Amazonian Forest." *Functional Ecology* 29: 1268-1277.

Maréchaux, I., L. Saint-André, M. K. Bartlett, L. Sack, and J. Chave. 2019. "Leaf Drought Tolerance Cannot Be Inferred From Classic Leaf Traits in a Tropical Rainforest." *Journal of Ecology* 108: 1030-1045.

Martin-StPaul, N. K., S. Delzon, and H. Cochard. 2017. "Plant Resistance to Drought Depends on Timely Stomatal Closure." *Ecology Letters* 20: 1437-1447.

Mas, E., H. Cochard, J. Deluigi, et al. 2024. "Interactions Between Beech and Oak Seedlings Can Modify the Effects of Hotter Droughts and the Onset of Hydraulic Failure." *New Phytologist* 241: 1021-1034.

McElreath, R. 2020. *Statistical Rethinking: A Bayesian Course With Examples in R and Stan*. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Meng, L., J. Chambers, C. Koven, et al. 2022. "Soil Moisture Thresholds Explain a Shift From Light-Limited to Water-Limited Sap Velocity in the Central Amazon During the 2015-16 El Niño Drought." *Environmental Research Letters* 17: 064023.

Michaletz, S. T., M. D. Weiser, N. G. McDowell, et al. 2016. "The Energetic and Carbon Economic Origins of Leaf Thermoregulation." *Nature Plants* 2: 1-9.

Mirabel, A., B. Hérault, and E. Marcon. 2020. "Diverging Taxonomic and Functional Trajectories Following Disturbance in a Neotropical Forest." *Science of the Total Environment* 720: 137397.

Moravie, M. A., J. P. Pascal, and P. Auger. 1997. "Investigating Canopy Regeneration Processes Through Individual-Based Spatial Models: Application to a Tropical Rain Forest." *Ecological Modelling* 104: 241-260.

Moreno, M., G. Simioni, H. Cochard, et al. 2023. "Functional Diversity Reduces the Risk of Hydraulic Failure in Tree Mixtures Through Hydraulic Disconnection." *bioRxiv*. 2023.06.09.544345. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.06.09.544345.

Morin, X., L. Fahse, M. Scherer-Lorenzen, and H. Bugmann. 2011. "Tree Species Richness Promotes Productivity in Temperate Forests Through Strong Complementarity Between Species." *Ecology Letters* 14: 1211-1219.

Nemetschek, D., G. Derroire, E. Marcon, et al. 2024. "Climate Anomalies and Neighbourhood Crowding Interact in Shaping Tree Growth in Old-Growth and Selectively Logged Tropical Forests." *Journal of Ecology* 0: 590-612.

Osnas, J. L. D., J. W. Lichstein, P. B. Reich, and S. W. Pacala. 2013. "Global Leaf Trait Relationships: Mass, Area, and the Leaf Economics Spectrum." *Science* 340: 741-744.

Pardos, M., M. del Río, H. Pretzsch, et al. 2021. "The Greater Resilience of Mixed Forests to Drought Mainly Depends on Their Composition: Analysis Along a Climate Gradient Across Europe." *Forest Ecology and Management* 481: 118687.

Pommerening, A., and A. J. Sánchez Meador. 2018. "Tamm Review: Tree Interactions Between Myth and Reality." *Forest Ecology and Management* 424: 164-176.

Poorter, L., I. McDonald, A. Alarcón, et al. 2010. "The Importance of Wood Traits and Hydraulic Conductance for the Performance and Life History Strategies of 42 Rainforest Tree Species." *New Phytologist* 185: 481-492.

Prieto, I., C. Armas, and F. I. Pugnaire. 2012. "Water Release Through Plant Roots: New Insights Into Its Consequences at the Plant and Ecosystem Level." *New Phytologist* 193: 830-841.

R Core Team. 2021. *R: A language and environment for statistical computing*. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.
Reich, P. B. 2014. "The World-Wide 'Fast - Slow' Plant Economics Spectrum: A Traits Manifesto." *Journal of Ecology* 102: 275-301.

Rifai, S. W., C. A. Girardin, E. Berenguer, et al. 2018. "ENSO Drives Interannual Variation of Forest Woody Growth Across the Tropics." *Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B: Biological Sciences* 373: 20170410.

Rodriguez-Dominguez, C. M., T. N. Buckley, G. Egea, et al. 2016. "Most Stomatal Closure in Woody Species Under Moderate Drought Can Be Explained by Stomatal Responses to Leaf Turgor." *Plant, Cell & Environment* 39: 2014-2026.

RStudio Team. 2020. *RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R*. Boston, MA: RStudio, PBC.

Scheidegger, Y., M. Saurer, M. Bahn, and R. Siegwolf. 2000. "Linking Stable Oxygen and Carbon Isotopes With Stomatal Conductance and Photosynthetic Capacity: A Conceptual Model." *Oecologia* 125: 350-357.

Schnabel, F., K. E. Barry, S. Eckhardt, et al. 2024. "Neighbourhood Species Richness and Drought-Tolerance Traits Modulate Tree Growth and δ¹³C Responses to Drought." *Plant Biology* 26: 330-345.

Schnabel, F., X. Liu, M. Kunz, et al. 2021. "Species Richness Stabilizes Productivity via Asynchrony and Drought-Tolerance Diversity in a Large-Scale Tree Biodiversity Experiment." *Science Advances* 7: 1643.

Stahl, C., B. Hérault, V. Rossi, B. Burban, C. Bréchet, and D. Bonal. 2013. "Depth of Soil Water Uptake by Tropical Rainforest Trees During Dry Periods: Does Tree Dimension Matter?" *Oecologia* 173: 1191-1201.

Stan Development Team. 2022. "CmdStanR: the R interface to CmdStan."

Tymen, B., G. Vincent, E. A. Courtois, et al. 2017. "Quantifying Micro-Environmental Variation in Tropical Rainforest Understory at Landscape Scale by Combining Airborne LiDAR Scanning and a Sensor Network." *Annals of Forest Science* 74: 32.

Uriarte, M., N. G. Swenson, R. L. Chazdon, et al. 2010. "Trait Similarity, Shared Ancestry and the Structure of Neighbourhood Interactions in a Subtropical Wet Forest: Implications for Community Assembly." *Ecology Letters* 13: 1503-1514.

Vile, D., É. Garnier, B. Shipley, et al. 2005. "Specific Leaf Area and Dry Matter Content Estimate Thickness in Laminar Leaves." *Annals of Botany* 96: 1129-1136.

Vleminckx, J., C. Fortunel, O. Valverde-Barrantes, et al. 2021. "Resolving Whole-Plant Economics From Leaf, Stem and Root Traits of 1467 Amazonian Tree Species." *Oikos* 130: 1193-1208.

Volaire, F. 2018. "A Unified Framework of Plant Adaptive Strategies to Drought: Crossing Scales and Disciplines." *Global Change Biology* 24: 2929-2938.

Wagner, F., V. Rossi, C. Baraloto, D. Bonal, C. Stahl, and B. Hérault. 2014. "Are Commonly Measured Functional Traits Involved in Tropical Tree Responses to Climate?" *International Journal of Ecology* 2014: 389409.

Wagner, F. H., B. Hérault, D. Bonal, et al. 2016. "Climate Seasonality Limits Leaf Carbon Assimilation and Wood Productivity in Tropical Forests." *Biogeosciences* 13: 2537-2562.

Westoby, M., D. S. Falster, A. T. Moles, P. A. Vesk, and I. J. Wright. 2002. "Plant Ecological Strategies: Some Leading Dimensions of Variation Between Species." *Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics* 33: 125-159.

Wickham, H., M. Averick, J. Bryan, et al. 2019. "Welcome to the Tidyverse." *Journal of Open Source Software* 4: 1686.

Wright, A. J. 2024. "Plant-Plant Interactions Can Mitigate (Or Exacerbate) hot Drought Impacts." *New Phytologist* 241: 955-957.

Wright, I. J., N. Dong, V. Maire, et al. 2017. "Global Climatic Drivers of Leaf Size." *Science* 357: 917-921.

Wright, I. J., P. B. Reich, M. Westoby, et al. 2004. "The Worldwide Leaf Economics Spectrum." *Nature* 428: 821-827.

Yu, W., G. Albert, B. Rosenbaum, et al. 2024. "Systematic Distributions of Interaction Strengths Across Tree Interaction Networks Yield Positive Diversity-Productivity Relationships." *Ecology Letters* 27: e14338.

Zhang, S., D. Landuyt, K. Verheyen, and P. De Frenne. 2022. "Tree Species Mixing Can Amplify Microclimate Offsets in Young Forest Plantations." *Journal of Applied Ecology* 59: 1428-1439.

Ziegler, C., H. Cochard, C. Stahl, et al. 2024. "Residual Water Losses Mediate the Trade-Off Between Growth and Drought Survival Across Saplings of 12 Tropical Rainforest Tree Species With Contrasting Hydraulic Strategies." *Journal of Experimental Botany* 75: 4128-4147.

Ziegler, C., S. Coste, C. Stahl, et al. 2019. "Large Hydraulic Safety Margins Protect Neotropical Canopy Rainforest Tree Species Against Hydraulic Failure During Drought." *Annals of Forest Science* 76: 115.

## Supporting Information

Additional supporting information can be found online in the Supporting Information section.