ArticleMicroorganisms2022
In-Forest Planting of High-Value Herb
Article in Microorganisms, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trade-off between growth, nutrient absorption and medicinal quality ofFrontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Effect of intercropping medicinal herbs inFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Sarcandra glabra in-forest planting, an anthropogenic activity that may introduce a variety of disturbances into the forest, is being popularly promoted in southern China, while its consequential influences on soil nutrients, as well as the arbuscular mycorrhiza fungal (AMF) community of key forest keystone plants, are still unelucidated, which hampers the assessment of ecological safety and the improvement of agronomic measurements. In this research, topsoil from a 3-year-old Sarcandra glabra planted forest and a nearby control forest were sampled, and the annual variation in the soil nutrients and AMF community of the keystone tree Cunninghamia lanceolata were investigated. Our result showed that the total amount of soil organic carbon of the Sarcandra glabra cultivation group was significantly higher than that of the control group (p < 0.05), which indicated that Sarcandra glabra cultivation significantly enhanced the topsoil carbon storage. Yet, there were only insignificant differences in the Shannon index and Chao index of the AMF community between the two groups (p > 0.05). PCoA analysis found that the compositional differences between two groups were also insignificant. This indicated that Sarcandra glabra cultivation had no significant influence on the diversity and composition of the Cunninghamia lanceolata AMF community. However, we found that the differences in the total amounts of nitrogen and total phosphorus between the two groups were relatively lower in April and September, which indicated the higher nutrient demands and consumption of Sarcandra glabra in these two periods and suggested that a sufficient fertilizer application in these two stages would reduce the potential competition for nutrients between Sarcandra glabra and Cunninghamia lanceolata in order to ensure Sarcandra glabra production and forest health. Lastly, our results reported a total extra income ranging from of CNY 127,700 hm−2 (7 years of cultivation) to CNY 215,300 hm−2 (10 years cultivation) provided by Sarcandra glabra in-forest planting, which indicated its powerful potential for mitigating poverty. Our research systematically investigated the annual variation in the soil nutrient content and keystone tree AMF community caused by Sarcandra glabra cultivation and offers constructive guidance for Sarcandra glabra cultivation and fertilization management and ecological safety assessment.
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.