ReviewEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2020
Integration of medicinal and aromatic plants in an urban landscape as a living heritage: an example in Malatya City (Turkey).
Review in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2020. 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.
- Evaluation of urban green space per capita with new remote sensing and geographic information system techniques and the importance of urban green space during the COVID-19 pandemic.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2022Article
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
Abstract
This paper aims to determine the potential for using medicinal aromatic plants, which have been considered living heritage since prehistoric times, in urban landscapes. The area of study covers Malatya City and its counties, which are found in Eastern Anatolia, a region of importance in terms of the endemic species in Turkey. Malatya is specifically selected as the study area, as the city's geomorphological, hydrological and climatic characteristics favour a high floral diversity. The methods used in this paper consist of five stages: floristic field works conducted in Battalgazi county (Malatya) in the scope of the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) Project No. 217O290, the identification of the plants by a taxonomist, the determination of the medicinal and aromatic species in other counties of Malatya based on literature review, the establishment of criteria for the application potential of the identified species in landscape designs and the assessment of the use of the identified species in landscape architecture according to the parameters set in the criteria. Aromatic medicinal species were analysed to generate planting designs in landscape projects; the aesthetic properties (flower, leaf and fruit characteristics), sensory properties (scent and texture), seasonal change characteristics (flowering period and colour change) and use areas (flower parterres, solitary plantings, live fences and site coverings) of the plants were analysed. As a result of ethnobotanical and floristic studies carried out within the boundaries of the study area, a total of 189 medical aromatic species were identified. A total of 157 of these species were herbaceous plants. In conclusion, it was determined that 80 aromatic medicinal species conform to the planting design criteria and could be used in landscape designs in Malatya City.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32720051What 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.