ArticlePloS one2018
Do invasive alien plants really threaten river bank vegetation? A case study based on plant communities typical for Chenopodium ficifolium-An indicator of large river valleys.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Invasion Risk ofEcology and evolution · 2025Article
- Impact of the Invasive Alien MacrophyteBiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Riparian zones are very rich in species but subjected to strong anthropogenic changes and extremely prone to alien plant invasions, which are considered to be a serious threat to biodiversity. Our aim was to determine the spatial distribution of Chenopodium ficifolium, a species demonstrating strong confinement to large river valleys in Central Europe and an indicator of annual pioneer nitrophilous vegetation developing on river banks, which are considered to be of importance to the European Community. Additionally, the habitat preferences of the species were analysed. Differences in the richness and abundance of species diagnostic for riverside habitats, as well as the contribution of resident and invasive alien species in vegetation plots along three rivers differing in terms of size and anthropogenic impact were also examined. Finally, the effect of invaders on the phytocoenoses typical for C. ficifolium was assessed. The frequency of C. ficifolium clearly decreased with an increasing distance from the river. Among natural habitats, the species mostly preferred the banks of large rivers. The vegetation plots developing on the banks of the three studied rivers differed in total species richness, the number and cover of resident, diagnostic and invasive alien species, as well as in species composition. Our research indicates that abiotic and anthropogenic factors are the most significant drivers of species richness and plant cover of riverbank vegetation, and invasive alien plants affect this type of vegetation to a small extent.
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.