SynthesisInternational journal of biometeorology2020
Phenological changes in herbaceous plants in China's grasslands and their responses to climate change: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of biometeorology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Negative effects of urbanization on plants: A global meta-analysis.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Dominance by non-native grasses suppresses long-term shifts in plant species composition and productivity in response to global change.Oecologia · 2022Article
- Increasing Interspecific Difference of Alpine Herb Phenology on the Eastern Qinghai-Tibet Plateau.Frontiers in plant science · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Plant phenological events are sensitive indicators of climate change, and their change could markedly affect the structure and function of ecosystems. Previous studies have revealed the spatiotemporal variations in the phenological events of woody plants. However, limited studies have focused on the phenophases of herbaceous plants. In this study, by using a meta-analysis method, we extracted information about the phenological changes in herbaceous plants in China's grasslands from existing studies (including the period, station, species, phenophases, phenological trends, and climatic determinants) and analyzed the patterns manifested in the dataset. The results showed that the spring phenophases (e.g., first leaf date and first flowering date) of the herbaceous plants mainly advanced over the past 30 years, but a large difference existed across grassland types. The spring phenophases of forages (species from the Cyperaceae, Gramineae, and Leguminosae families) became earlier in the desert steppe and alpine steppe but showed no apparent trends in the alpine meadow and even became later in the meadow steppe and typical steppe. In most cases, the increase in spring temperatures and precipitation promoted the greening up of herbaceous plants, while sunshine duration was positively correlated with the green-up date of herbaceous plants. For the autumn phenophases, the proportions of the earlier and later trends were very close, but the trends varied among the grassland types. The leaf coloring dates of the forages were delayed in the meadow steppe and alpine steppe but showed no distinct pattern in the typical steppe or alpine meadow and even became earlier in the desert steppe. In most cases, the increase in growing season temperature led to an earlier leaf coloring date of the herbaceous plants, but the increase in the preseason precipitation delayed the leaf coloring date. Our results suggested that the phenophases of herbaceous plants have complicated responses to multiple environmental factors, which makes predicting future phenological changes difficult.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32734424What 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.