Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31048703›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Large apparent growth increases in boreal forests inferred from tree-rings are an artefact of sampling biases.

Louis Duchesne, Daniel Houle, Rock Ouimet, Liam Caldwell, Manuel Gloor, Roel Brienen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Russian forests show strong potential for young forest growth.Communications earth & environment · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Warming-induced tree growth may help offset increasing disturbance across the Canadian boreal forest.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors.

Louis DuchesneMinistère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs, Direction de la recherche forestière, 2700 Einstein Street, Quebec City, Quebec, G1P 3W8, Canada. louis.duchesne@mffp.gouv.qc.ca.
Daniel HouleMinistère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs, Direction de la recherche forestière, 2700 Einstein Street, Quebec City, Quebec, G1P 3W8, Canada.
Rock OuimetMinistère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs, Direction de la recherche forestière, 2700 Einstein Street, Quebec City, Quebec, G1P 3W8, Canada.
Liam CaldwellSchool of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.
Manuel GloorSchool of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.
Roel BrienenSchool of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5397-5755

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tree rings are thought to be a powerful tool to reconstruct historical growth changes and have been widely used to assess tree responses to global warming. Demographic inferences suggest, however, that typical sampling procedures induce spurious trends in growth reconstructions. Here we use the world's largest single tree-ring dataset (283,536 trees from 136,621 sites) from Quebec, Canada, to assess to what extent growth reconstructions based on these - and thus any similar - data might be affected by this problem. Indeed, straightforward growth rate reconstructions based on these data suggest a six-fold increase in radial growth of black spruce (Picea mariana) from ~0.5 mm yr

Indexed as

ArtifactsForestsCanadaCarbon DioxidePiceaQuebecCarbon Dioxide

Identifiers

PMID31048703
PMCPMC6497877

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.