ArticlePlants (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Elemental Composition of Above and Belowground Mangrove Tissue and Sediment in Managed and Unmanaged Compartments of the Matang Mangrove Forest Reserve.
Article in Plants (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mangrove productivity depends on the storage of nutrients and elements. Elemental concentrations were examined in leaves, roots, and sediments for three age stands (15, 25 years, and VJR) of Rhizophora apiculata in the Matang Mangrove Forest Reserve (MMFR). Six compartments with two compartments each for each age group were used to analyze sixteen elements. Four types of elemental patterns were examined with decreasing order during analysis: (1) Cd < Cu < Pb < Zn < Mg < Mn < Fe < K < Na < Ca and P% < S% < N% < C% in leaves, (2) Cd < Pb < Cu < Zn < Mg < Mn < Fe < K < Na < Ca and P% < S% < N% < C% in roots, (3) Cd < Pb < Cu < Zn < Mg < Mn < K < Fe < Na < Ca and P% < N% < S% < C% in sediment samples and (4) Cd(S) < Pb(S) < Cu(S) < Zn(S) < Mg(S) < Mn(L) < K(L) < Fe(S) < Na(R) < Ca(R) and P%(S) < S%(S) < N%(L) < C%(R) collectively for all samples. Evidence that elements do not store primarily in above-ground biomass can be found in the observation that elements are stored more in sediment and roots. The outcome of the present study shows that the rate of increase of elements in trees (leaves and roots) was less as compared to sediments, where the elemental concentration increased considerably with time. Elemental concentration comparison within three age classes showed that C, N, and S were significantly different in all three types of samples. The δ15N ratios showed positive values in all six compartments which supported the concept that the δ15N ratio could not be observed in N concentration in this study. The δ13C values showed more negative values in all six compartments which represented less salinity and a freshwater intake. The S, P, and heavy metals concentrations were high. The concentrations of Cd, P, N, C, and S in the sediment influenced variations in four compartments in accordance with the three mangrove age groups. The results of this study can be utilized to create management plans for MMFR and conduct risk assessments of the elements’ concentration in sediment.
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.