ArticleNature communications2020
Consistent population declines but idiosyncratic range shifts in Alpine orchids under global change.
Article in Nature communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- The legacy of past climate warming: strong local adaptation in rear-edge populations.Evolution letters · 2026Article
- Physiological Indicators for Post-Translocation Monitoring ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Patterns of Orchid Diversity and Their Potential Habitat Under Climate Change in Chongqing, China.Biology · 2026Article
- Climate change impacts onPlant diversity · 2025Article
- Spatial Distribution of Genetic, Ploidy, and Morphological Variation of the Edaphic Steno-EndemicPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Phylogeography ofEcology and evolution · 2024Article
- Predictions of species distributions based only on models estimating future climate change are not reliable.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Forest Orchids under Future Climate Scenarios: Habitat Suitability Modelling to Inform Conservation Strategies.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Elevational homogenization of mountain parasitoids across six decades.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Pollination mechanism inAoB PLANTS · 2023Article
- Red-listed plants are contracting their elevational range faster than common plants in the European Alps.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- The effect of global warming on the Australian endemic orchid Cryptostylis leptochila and its pollinator.PloS one · 2023Article
- 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mountains are plant biodiversity hotspots considered particularly vulnerable to multiple environmental changes. Here, we quantify population changes and range-shift dynamics along elevational gradients over the last three decades for c. two-thirds of the orchid species of the European Alps. Local extinctions were more likely for small populations, after habitat alteration, and predominated at the rear edge of species' ranges. Except for the most thermophilic species and wetland specialists, population density decreased over time. Declines were more pronounced for rear-edge populations, possibly due to multiple pressures such as climate warming, habitat alteration, and mismatched ecological interactions. Besides these demographic trends, different species exhibited idiosyncratic range shifts with more than 50% of the species lagging behind climate warming. Our study highlights the importance of long-term monitoring of populations and range distributions at fine spatial resolution to be able to fully understand the consequences of global change for orchids.
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.