Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31167028›Full record

ReviewAnnals of botany2019

The ecology and significance of below-ground bud banks in plants.

Jacqueline P Ott, Jitka Klimešová, David C Hartnett

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of botany, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

67 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Effects of fire timing and snow cover on tallgrass prairie plant re-emergence phenology, growth rate, and flowering.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Jacqueline P OttForest and Grassland Research Laboratory, Rocky Mountain Research Station, U.S. Forest Service, Rapid City, SD, USA.
Jitka KlimešováInstitute of Botany of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Dukelská, CZ - Třeboň, Czech Republic.
David C HartnettDivision of Biology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBelow-ground bud banks have experienced much recent interest due to discoveries that they (1) account for the majority of seasonal population renewal in many communities, (2) are crucial to regeneration following disturbance, and (3) have important consequences for plant population dynamics and plant and ecosystem function across a number of habitats. SCOPE: This review presents an overview of the role of bud banks in plant population renewal, examines bud bank life history, summarizes bud bank traits and their potential ecological implications, synthesizes the response of bud banks to disturbance, and highlights gaps to guide future research. The characteristics and life history of buds, including their natality, dormancy, protection and longevity, provide a useful framework for advancing our understanding of bud banks. The fate of buds depends on their age, size, type, location, and biotic and abiotic factors that collectively regulate bud bank dynamics. A bud bank can provide a demographic storage effect stabilizing population dynamics, and also confer resistance to disturbance and invasion. Regeneration capacity following disturbance is determined by interactions among the rates of bud natality, depletion and dormancy (meristem limitation), and the resources available to support the regeneration process. The resulting response of plants and their bud banks to disturbances such as fire, herbivory and anthropogenic sources determines the community's regenerative capacity.

conclusionsVegetation responses to environmental change may be mediated through changes in bud bank dynamics and phenology. Environmental change that depletes the bud bank or prohibits its formation likely results in a loss of vegetation resilience and plant species diversity. Standardization of bud sampling, examination of bud banks in more ecosystems and their response to environmental variation and disturbance regimes, employment of stage-structured bud bank modelling and evaluation of the cost of bud bank construction and maintenance will benefit this expanding field of research.

Indexed as

EcosystemFiresEcologyHerbivoryPlantsbelow-ground organsBudbud bankclonaldisturbancemeristemplant traitspopulation dynamics

Identifiers

PMID31167028
PMCPMC6612937

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.