Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33407697›Full record

ArticlePlant methods2021

New field wind manipulation methodology reveals adaptive responses of steppe plants to increased and reduced wind speed.

Shudong Zhang, Guofang Liu, Qingguo Cui, Zhenying Huang, Xuehua Ye, Johannes H C Cornelissen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant methods, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Cold and low irradiation shapeFrontiers in plant science · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. In Situ Accumulation of CaOx Crystals inPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Effect of strong wind on laminas and petioles ofFrontiers in plant science · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Shudong ZhangState Key Laboratory of Vegetation and Environmental Change, Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100093, People's Republic of China.
Guofang LiuState Key Laboratory of Vegetation and Environmental Change, Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100093, People's Republic of China.
Qingguo CuiState Key Laboratory of Vegetation and Environmental Change, Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100093, People's Republic of China.
Zhenying HuangState Key Laboratory of Vegetation and Environmental Change, Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100093, People's Republic of China. zhenying@ibcas.ac.cn.
Xuehua YeState Key Laboratory of Vegetation and Environmental Change, Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100093, People's Republic of China. yexuehua@ibcas.ac.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5625-9877
Johannes H C CornelissenSystems Ecology, Department of Ecological Science, Vrije Universiteit, De Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 31470032the CAS President's International Fellowship Initiative (PIFI, 2018VCA0014) for JHCC PIFI, 2018VCA0014the Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences XDA23080302
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWind strongly impacts plant growth, leaf traits, biomass allocation, and stem mechanical properties. However, whether there are common whole-plant wind responses among different plant species is still unclear. We tested this null hypothesis by exposing four eudicot steppe species to three different wind treatments in a field experiment: reduced wind velocity using windbreaks, ambient wind velocity, and enhanced wind velocity through a novel methodology using wind-funneling baffles.

resultsAcross the four species, wind generally decreased plant height, projected crown area, and stepwise bifurcation ratio, and increased root length and stem base diameter. In contrast, the response patterns of shoot traits, especially mechanical properties, to wind velocity were idiosyncratic among species. There was no significant difference in total biomass among different treatments; this might be because the negative effects on heat dissipation and photosynthesis of low wind speed during hot periods, could counteract positive effects during favorable cooler periods.

conclusionsThere are common wind response patterns in plant-size-related traits across different steppe species, while the response patterns in shoot traits vary among species. This indicates the species-specific ways by which plants balance growth and mechanical support facing wind stress. Our new field wind manipulation methodology was effective in altering wind speed with the intended magnitude. Especially, our field wind-funneling baffle system showed a great potential for use in future field wind velocity enhancement. Further experiments are needed to reveal how negative and positive effects play out on whole-plant performance in response to different wind regimes, which is important as ongoing global climatic changes involve big changes in wind regimes.

Indexed as

Biomass and allocationsEcological methodMechanical propertiesMu Us SandlandPlant sizeWind funneling

Identifiers

PMID33407697
PMCPMC7788872

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.