Plant traits-the morphological, anatomical, physiological, biochemical and phenological characteristics of plants-determine how plants respond to environmental factors, affect other trophic levels, and influence ecosystem properties and their benefits and detriments to people. Plant trait data thus represent the basis for a vast area of research spanning from evolutionary biology, community and functional ecology, to biodiversity conservation, ecosystem and landscape management, restoration, biogeography and earth system modelling. Since its foundation in 2007, the TRY database of plant traits has grown continuously. It now provides unprecedented data coverage under an open access data policy and is the main plant trait database used by the research community worldwide. Increasingly, the TRY database also supports new frontiers of trait-based plant research, including the identification of data gaps and the subsequent mobilization or measurement of new data. To support this development, in this article we evaluate the extent of the trait data compiled in TRY and analyse emerging patterns of data coverage and representativeness. Best species coverage is achieved for categorical traits-almost complete coverage for 'plant growth form'. However, most traits relevant for ecology and vegetation modelling are characterized by continuous intraspecific variation and trait-environmental relationships. These traits have to be measured on individual plants in their respective environment. Despite unprecedented data coverage, we observe a humbling lack of completeness and representativeness of these continuous traits in many aspects.We, therefore, conclude that reducing data gaps and biases in the TRY database remains a key challenge and requires a coordinated approach to data mobilization and trait measurements. This can only be achieved in collaboration with other initiatives. Geosphere-Biosphere Program (IGBP) and DIVERSITAS, the TRY database (TRY-not an acronym, rather a statement of sentiment; https ://www.try-db.org; Kattge et al., 2011) was proposed with the explicit assignment to improve the availability and accessibility of plant trait data for ecology and earth system sciences. The Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry (MPI-BGC) offered to host the database and the different groups joined forces for this community-driven program. Two factors were key to the success of TRY: the support and trust of leaders in the field of functional plant ecology submitting large databases and the long-term funding by the Max Planck Society, the MPI-BGC and the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, which has enabled the continuous development of the TRY database.

1. Plant biodiversity is often partitioned into taxonomic diversity (species composition and abundance), phylogenetic diversity (breadth of evolutionary lineages)

Phylogenetic and functional diversity are relevant for restoration planning, as they influence important ecosystem functions and services. However, it is unknown whether initial phylogenetic and functional diversity of restorations as planned and planted are maintained over time, that is, the extent to which diversity of the restoration planting is reflected in the diversity of the resulting plant community. Furthermore, in the tallgrass prairie, many restorations are planted from seed. Among-species variation in emergence and establishment affects the transition from seed mixes to realized plant communities in these restorations. We evaluated emergence and early establishment of experimental communities in a biodiversity plot experiment designed to test how phylogenetic and functional diversity influence restoration outcomes. We planted the same experimental communities starting from both seeds and plugs to assess differences in establishment. Our results suggest that phylogenetically and functionally diverse species mixes tend to produce phylogenetically and functionally diverse restored plant communities. After 3 years, experimental communities generally maintained their phylogenetic and functional diversity from seed and plug mixes to established vegetation, despite declines in species richness. While plots planted from seeds had on average 1.3 fewer species than plots planted from plugs, phylogenetic and functional diversity did not significantly differ between the two. Furthermore, most species exhibited no significant differences in percent cover when planted from seeds or plugs. Seeds are generally more cost-effective for restoration than plugs, and our results indicate these two establishment methods achieved similar biodiversity outcomes.