ArticleEcology and evolution2022
Removing climbers more than doubles tree growth and biomass in degraded tropical forests.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of Climate, Soil, Topography and Disturbance on Liana Prevalence.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- The principles of natural climate solutions.Nature communications · 2024Review
- Corrigendum.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Fifteen essential science advances needed for effective restoration of the world's forest landscapes.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Quantifying the Effect Size of Management Actions on Aboveground Carbon Stocks in Forest Plantations.Current forestry reports · 2023Review
- Sustained timber yield claims, considerations, and tradeoffs for selectively logged forests.PNAS nexus · 2022Article
- Removing climbers more than doubles tree growth and biomass in degraded tropical forests.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedCorrigendum.2023
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Huge areas of tropical forests are degraded, reducing their biodiversity, carbon, and timber value. The recovery of these degraded forests can be significantly inhibited by climbing plants such as lianas. Removal of super-abundant climbers thus represents a restoration action with huge potential for application across the tropics. While experimental studies largely report positive impacts of climber removal on tree growth and biomass accumulation, the efficacy of climber removal varies widely, with high uncertainty as to where and how to apply the technique. Using meta-analytic techniques, we synthesize results from 26 studies to quantify the efficacy of climber removal for promoting tree growth and biomass accumulation. We find that climber removal increases tree growth by 156% and biomass accumulation by 209% compared to untreated forest, and that efficacy remains for at least 19 years. Extrapolating from these results, climber removal could sequester an additional 32 Gigatons of CO
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.