Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34306621›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2021

Temporal patterns of forest seedling emergence across different disturbance histories.

Elle J Bowd, Lachlan McBurney, David P Blair, David B Lindenmayer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Elle J BowdFenner School of Environment and Society College of Science The Australian National University Canberra ACT Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7371-8097
Lachlan McBurneyFenner School of Environment and Society College of Science The Australian National University Canberra ACT Australia.
David P BlairFenner School of Environment and Society College of Science The Australian National University Canberra ACT Australia.
David B LindenmayerFenner School of Environment and Society College of Science The Australian National University Canberra ACT Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Forest ecosystems experience a myriad of natural and anthropogenic disturbances that shape ecological communities. Seedling emergence is a critical, preliminary stage in the recovery of forests post​ disturbance and is triggered by a series of abiotic and biotic changes. However, the long-term influence of different disturbance histories on patterns of seedling emergence is poorly understood.Here, we address this research gap by using an 11-year dataset gathered between 2009 and 2020 to quantify the influence of different histories of natural (wildfire) and anthropogenic (clearcut and postfire salvage logging) disturbances on emerging seedlings in early-successional Mountain Ash forests in southeastern Australia. We also describe patterns of seedling emergence across older successional forests varying in stand age (stands that regenerated in <1900s, 1939, 1970-90, and 2007-11).Seedling emergence was highest in the first three years post disturbance. Stand age and disturbance history significantly influenced the composition and abundance of plant seedlings. Specifically, in salvage-logged forests, plant seedlings were the most different from similarly aged forests with other disturbance histories. For instance, relative to clearcut and unlogged, burnt forests of the same age, salvage logging had the lowest overall richness, the lowest counts of

Indexed as

fireforestsgerminationloggingpost‐disturbancerecoveryseedling

Identifiers

PMID34306621
PMCPMC8293764

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.