ArticleScientific reports2021
Big trees drive forest structure patterns across a lowland Amazon regrowth gradient.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ecological Constraints on Tropical Forest Recovery Challenge the "Long-Term" Vision of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.Bioscience · 2026Article
- Mapping the density of giant trees in the Amazon.The New phytologist · 2026Article
- Human disturbances and the daytime activity of sympatric otters along equatorial Amazonian rivers.PeerJ · 2023Article
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
Degraded Amazonian forests can take decades to recover and the ecological results of natural regeneration are still uncertain. Here we use field data collected across 15 lowland Amazon smallholder properties to examine the relationships between forest structure, mammal diversity, regrowth type, regrowth age, topography and hydrology. Forest structure was quantified together with mammal diversity in 30 paired regrowth-control plots. Forest regrowth stage was classified into three groups: late second-regrowth, early second-regrowth and abandoned pasture. Basal area in regrowth plots remained less than half that recorded in control plots even after 20-25 years. Although basal area did increase in sequence from pasture, early to late-regrowth plots, there was a significant decline in basal area of late-regrowth control plots associated with a decline in the proportion of large trees. Variation in different forest structure responses was explained by contrasting variables, with the proportion of small trees (DBH < 20 cm) most strongly explained by topography (altitude and slope) whereas the proportion of large trees (DBH > 60 cm) was explained by plot type (control vs. regrowth) and regrowth class. These findings support calls for increased efforts to actively conserve large trees to avoid retrogressive succession around edges of degraded Amazon forests.
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.