Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35784794›Full record

ReviewiScience2022

Biotic responses to climate extremes in terrestrial ecosystems.

Madhav P Thakur, Anita C Risch, Wim H van der Putten

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in iScience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Effects of climate on the phenology ofEcology and evolution · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Journal of insect conservation · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

3 authors.

Madhav P ThakurInstitute of Ecology and Evolution and Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland.
Anita C RischSwiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL, Switzerland.
Wim H van der PuttenDepartment of Terrestrial Ecology, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO- KNAW), Wageningen, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anthropogenic climate change is increasing the incidence of climate extremes. Consequences of climate extremes on biodiversity can be highly detrimental, yet few studies also suggest beneficial effects of climate extremes on certain organisms. To obtain a general understanding of ecological responses to climate extremes, we present a review of how 16 major taxonomic/functional groups (including microorganisms, plants, invertebrates, and vertebrates) respond during extreme drought, precipitation, and temperature. Most taxonomic/functional groups respond negatively to extreme events, whereas groups such as mosses, legumes, trees, and vertebrate predators respond most negatively to climate extremes. We further highlight that ecological recovery after climate extremes is challenging to predict purely based on ecological responses during or immediately after climate extremes. By accounting for the characteristics of the recovering species, resource availability, and species interactions with neighboring competitors or facilitators, mutualists, and enemies, we outline a conceptual framework to better predict ecological recovery in terrestrial ecosystems.

Indexed as

AnimalsEcologyPlant Ecology

Identifiers

PMID35784794
PMCPMC9240802

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.