ArticleScientific reports2020
Assessing the current and potential future distribution of four invasive forest plants in Minnesota, U.S.A., using mixed sources of data.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Invasive plants are an ongoing subject of interest in North American forests, owing to their impacts on forest structure and regeneration, biodiversity, and ecosystem services. An important component of studying and managing forest invaders involves knowing where the species are, or could be, geographically located. Temporal and environmental context, in conjunction with spatially-explicit species occurrence information, can be used to address this need. Here, we predict the potential current and future distributions of four forest plant invaders in Minnesota: common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), glossy buckthorn (Frangula alnus), garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora). We assessed the impact of two different climate change scenarios (IPCC RCP 6.0 and 8.5) at two future timepoints (2050s and 2070s) as well as the importance of occurrence data sources on the potential distribution of each species. Our results suggest that climate change scenarios considered here could result in a potential loss of suitable habitat in Minnesota for both buckthorn species and a potential gain for R. multiflora and A. petiolata. Differences in predictions as a result of input occurrence data source were most pronounced in future climate projections.
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.