ArticlePloS one2022
Plant families exhibit unique geographic trends in C4 richness and cover in Australia.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular phylogenetics and evolutionary history ofFrontiers in plant science · 2026Review
- Geographic distribution of CFrontiers in plant science · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Numerous studies have analysed the relationship between C4 plant cover and climate. However, few have examined how different C4 taxa vary in their response to climate, or how environmental factors alter C4:C3 abundance. Here we investigate (a) how proportional C4 plant cover and richness (relative to C3) responds to changes in climate and local environmental factors, and (b) if this response is consistent among families. Proportional cover and richness of C4 species were determined at 541 one-hectare plots across Australia for 14 families. C4 cover and richness of the most common and abundant families were regressed against climate and local parameters. C4 richness and cover in the monocot families Poaceae and Cyperaceae increased with latitude and were strongly positively correlated with January temperatures, however C4 Cyperaceae occupied a more restricted temperature range. Seasonal rainfall, soil pH, soil texture, and tree cover modified proportional C4 cover in both families. Eudicot families displayed considerable variation in C4 distribution patterns. Proportional C4 Euphorbiaceae richness and cover were negatively correlated with increased moisture availability (i.e. high rainfall and low aridity), indicating they were more common in dry environments. Proportional C4 Chenopodiaceae richness and cover were weakly correlated with climate and local environmental factors, including soil texture. However, the explanatory power of C4 Chenopodiaceae models were poor, suggesting none of the factors considered in this study strongly influenced Chenopodiaceae distribution. Proportional C4 richness and cover in Aizoaceae, Amaranthaceae, and Portulacaceae increased with latitude, suggesting C4 cover and richness in these families increased with temperature and summer rainfall, but sample size was insufficient for regression analysis. Results demonstrate the unique relationships between different C4 taxa and climate, and the significant modifying effects of environmental factors on C4 distribution. Our work also revealed C4 families will not exhibit similar responses to local perturbations or climate.
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.