Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26191461›Full record

ArticleApplications in plant sciences2015

Biodiversity comparison among phylogenetic diversity metrics and between three North American prairies.

P Roxanne Steele Kellar, Dakota L Ahrendsen, Shelly K Aust, Amanda R Jones, J Chris Pires

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applications in plant sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

P Roxanne Steele KellarDepartment of Biology, University of Nebraska at Omaha, 6001 Dodge Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68182 USA.
Dakota L AhrendsenDepartment of Biology, University of Nebraska at Omaha, 6001 Dodge Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68182 USA.
Shelly K AustDepartment of Biology, University of Nebraska at Omaha, 6001 Dodge Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68182 USA.
Amanda R JonesDepartment of Biology, University of Nebraska at Omaha, 6001 Dodge Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68182 USA.
J Chris PiresBiological Sciences, University of Missouri, 371b Bond Life Sciences Center, Columbia, Missouri 65211 USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protection of Earth's ecosystems requires identification of geographical areas of greatest biodiversity. Assessment of biodiversity begins with knowledge of the evolutionary histories of species in a geographic area. Multiple phylogenetic diversity (PD) metrics have been developed to describe biodiversity beyond species counts, but sufficient empirical studies, particularly at fine phylogenetic scales, have not been conducted to provide conservation planners with evidence for incorporating PD metrics into selection of priority regions. We review notable studies that are contributing to a growing database of empirical results, we report on the effect of using high-throughput sequencing to estimate the phylogenies used to calculate PD metrics, and we discuss difficulties in selecting appropriate diversity indices. We focused on two of the most speciose angiosperm families in prairies-Asteraceae and Fabaceae-and compared 12 PD metrics and four traditional measures of biodiversity between three North American prairie sites. The varying results from the literature and from the current data reveal the wide range of applications of PD metrics and the necessity for many more empirical studies. The accumulation of results from further investigations will eventually lead to a scientific understanding upon which conservation planners can make informed decisions about where to apply limited preservation funds.

Indexed as

angiospermsAsteraceaebiodiversity assessmentconservation prioritizationFabaceaenext-generation sequencing

Identifiers

PMID26191461
PMCPMC4504721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.