ArticlePloS one2019
Does historical land use affect the regional distribution of fleshy-fruited woody plants?
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Species richness and composition of current vegetation may reflect historical land use. We develop and examine the hypothesis that regional distribution and richness of fleshy-fruited woody plants, a group sharing life-form and dispersal system, reflect historical land use in open or semi-open habitats. Historical land use was based on maps from around the year 1900 for two regions in Sweden, and field data was gathered from surveys made in these regions. Species richness was positively related to historical land use indicated as open habitat in 1900. In one of the regions, five out of nine examined species were positively related to historical land use (with historical effect R2 ranging between 0.03 and 0.22). In the other region, we found a weaker positive relationship with historical land use in two out of nine examined species (R2 0.01 and 0.02). We conclude that current occurrence and richness of fleshy-fruited woody species is partly a legacy of historical land use, and that regions may vary in this respect. Based on a comparison between the two regions examined here, we discuss some potential causes behind this variation.
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.