ReviewPlants (Basel, Switzerland)2020
The Woody Planet: From Past Triumph to Manmade Decline.
Review in Plants (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evolution of fruit functional traits provides insights into the drivers of cycle-cup oaks (Plant diversity · 2026Article
- Woody Plant Transformation: Current Status, Challenges, and Future Perspectives.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Accelerated growth increases the somatic epimutation rate in trees.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Geobotanical Study, DNA Barcoding, and Simple Sequence Repeat (SSR) Marker Analysis to Determine the Population Structure and Genetic Diversity of Rare and EndangeredPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Contrasting mycorrhizal functionality in abiotic stress tolerance of woody species.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Main factors affecting the efficacy of medicinal plants during the cultivation process.Frontiers in plant science · 2025Review
- The adaptive evolution of Quercus section Ilex using the chloroplast genomes of two threatened species.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Adaptive divergence and genetic vulnerability of relict species under climate change: a case study of Pterocarya macroptera.Annals of botany · 2023Article
- Article
- Global Estimation and Mapping of the Conservation Status of Tree Species Using Artificial Intelligence.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Article
- Biogeographic Overview of Ulmaceae: Diversity, Distribution, Ecological Preferences, and Conservation Status.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
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
Woodiness evolved in land plants approximately 400 Mya, and very soon after this evolutionary invention, enormous terrestrial surfaces on Earth were covered by dense and luxurious forests. Forests store close to 80% of the biosphere's biomass, and more than 60% of the global biomass is made of wood (trunks, branches and roots). Among the total number of ca. 374,000 plant species worldwide, approximately 45% (138,500) are woody species-e.g., trees, shrubs or lianas. Furthermore, among all 453 described vascular plant families, 191 are entirely woody (42%). However, recent estimations demonstrate that the woody domination of our planet was even greater before the development of human civilization: 1.4 trillion trees, comprising more than 45% of forest biomass, and 35% of forest cover disappeared during the last few thousands of years of human dominance on our planet. The decline in the woody cover of Planet Earth did not decelerate during the last few centuries or decades. Ongoing overexploitation, land use and climate change have pushed ten thousand woody species to the brink of extinction. Our review highlights the importance, origin and past triumph of woody species and summarizes the unprecedented recent decline in woody species on our planet.
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.