ArticlePloS one2015
Diversity and Interactions of Wood-Inhabiting Fungi and Beetles after Deadwood Enrichment.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Invertebrate Communities and Driving Factors Across Woody Debris Types in Temperate Forests, Northern China.Biology · 2025Article
- Article
- Two novelFungal systematics and evolution · 2024Article
- Long-term development of species richness in a central European beech (Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Saproxylic insects and fungi in deciduous forests along a rural-urban gradient.Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Fungal communities and their association with nitrogen-fixing bacteria affect early decomposition of Norway spruce deadwood.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Article
- Home-Field Advantage in Wood Decomposition Is Mainly Mediated by Fungal Community Shifts at "Home" Versus "Away".Microbial ecology · 2019Article
- A novel application of RNase H2-dependent quantitative PCR for detection and quantification of Grosmannia clavigera, a mountain pine beetle fungal symbiont, in environmental samples.Tree physiology · 2018Article
- Characterization of Unexplored Deadwood Mycobiome in Highly Diverse Subtropical Forests Using Culture-independent Molecular Technique.Frontiers in microbiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Freshly cut beech deadwood was enriched in the canopy and on the ground in three cultural landscapes in Germany (Swabian Alb, Hainich-Dün, Schorfheide-Chorin) in order to analyse the diversity, distribution and interaction of wood-inhabiting fungi and beetles. After two years of wood decay 83 MOTUs (Molecular Operational Taxonomic Units) from 28 wood samples were identified. Flight Interception Traps (FITs) installed adjacent to the deadwood enrichments captured 29.465 beetles which were sorted to 566 species. Geographical 'region' was the main factor determining both beetle and fungal assemblages. The proportions of species occurring in all regions were low. Statistic models suggest that assemblages of both taxa differed between stratum and management praxis but their strength varied among regions. Fungal assemblages in Hainich-Dün, for which the data was most comprehensive, discriminated unmanaged from extensively managed and age-class forests (even-aged timber management) while canopy communities differed not from those near the ground. In contrast, the beetle assemblages at the same sites showed the opposite pattern. We pursued an approach in the search for fungus-beetle associations by computing cross correlations and visualize significant links in a network graph. These correlations can be used to formulate hypotheses on mutualistic relationships for example in respect to beetles acting as vectors of fungal spores.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.