Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34858605›Full record

ArticleNational science review2021

Effects of biotic and abiotic factors on forest biomass fractions.

Renfei Chen, Jinzhi Ran, Weigang Hu, Longwei Dong, Mingfei Ji, Xin Jia, Jingli Lu, Haiyang Gong, Muhammad Aqeel, Shuran Yao and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in National science review, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Tree Biomass and Leaf Area Allometric Relations forPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

14 authors.

Renfei ChenState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystem, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Jinzhi RanState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystem, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Weigang HuState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystem, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Longwei DongState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystem, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Mingfei JiState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystem, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Xin JiaYanchi Research Station, School of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China.
Jingli LuState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystem, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Haiyang GongState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystem, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Muhammad AqeelState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystem, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Shuran YaoState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystem, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Lizhe AnState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystem, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
Jin-Sheng HeState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystem, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5081-3569
Karl J NiklasPlant Biology Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3491-1286
Jianming DengState Key Laboratory of Grassland Agro-Ecosystem, School of Life Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5901-2175

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The extent to which key factors at the global scale influence plant biomass allocation patterns remains unclear. Here, we provide a theory about how biotic and abiotic factors influence plant biomass allocation and evaluate its predictions using a large global database for forested communities. Our analyses confirm theoretical predictions that temperature, precipitation, and plant height and density jointly regulate the quotient of leaf biomass and total biomass, and that they have a much weaker effect on shoot (leaf plus stem) biomass fractions at a global scale. Moreover, biotic factors have larger effects than abiotic factors. Climatic variables act equally on shoot and root growth, and differences in plant body size and age, as well as community species composition, which vary with climate in ways that drown out the variations in biomass fractions. The theory and data presented here provide mechanistic explanations of why climate has little effect on biomass fractions.

Indexed as

allometrybiomass allocationleaf biomassplant densityplant heightscaling exponents

Identifiers

PMID34858605
PMCPMC8566188

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.