Actually I would say the first thing to remark, is that if a function is in $L^p$ then it is only defined almost everywhere. Therefore, you just cannot in general define its trace since it would mean to get the values of the function on a set of measure $0$ (since of dimension smaller). However, if the function is continuous, you see that you can easily define the trace of your function and it will be continuous.
From this preliminary analysis, you deduce that in general, you need some regularity assumptions to define the trace of a function.
Now look at a function with a local singularity such as
$$
f(x) = \frac{1}{|x|^a}
$$
You can see that this function is locally in $L^p(\mathbb{R}^d)$ if $p<d/a$, but if you take the trace on a set of smaller dimension and containing $0$, you see that the trace will only locally be in $L^q$ with $q<d/a - 1/a$, so you loose a part of the integrability when you take the trace. This is from my point of view a way to understand intuitively why starting from a function with a certain regularity, you loose a part of the regularity when taking the trace.
The fractional Sobolev spaces created by real interpolation were investigated a lot by Jacques-Louis Lions, and actually were sometimes called trace spaces. A good reference is the book by Luc Tartar, An Introduction to Sobolev Spaces and Interpolation Spaces. Chapter 16 treat the case of the $L^2$ based $H^s$ Sobolev spaces and Chapter 40 of the more general case of $L^p$ based Sobolev spaces $W^{s,p}$.
An interesting part is also Chapter 33 about the space $H^\frac{1}{2}_{00}$, which in some sense the critical case where one can still define a trace on the border (since $H^s_0(\Omega) = H^s(\Omega)$ when $s\leq 1/2$).