Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37435025›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2023

Effects of forest management on native bee biodiversity under the tallest trees in the world.

Nya Ealy, Jaime Pawelek, Jenny Hazlehurst

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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.

Nya EalyCalifornia State University East Bay Hayward California USA.
Jaime PawelekEssig Museum of Entomology, Valley Life Sciences Berkeley California USA.
Jenny HazlehurstCalifornia State University East Bay Hayward California USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3520-9846

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is not clear if mature secondary growth coniferous forests can support similar pollinator communities as old growth coniferous forests, or how active management (e.g., retention forestry) in mature secondary growth forests may affect pollinator communities. We compare the native bee community and plant-bee interaction networks of old growth, naturally regenerating and actively managed (retention forestry) mature secondary growth forests of similar stand age. Old growth forests had a higher bee species richness and Shannon's diversity index, but not Simpson's diversity index, than both actively managed and naturally regenerating mature secondary forests. Forest type (old-growth, naturally regenerating mature secondary growth, and actively managed mature secondary growth) had a significant effect on bee community composition. Redwood forest bee-plant interaction networks were small in size and had lower complexity than expected and few connector species. While studies suggest that small-scale timber harvest may increase bee biodiversity in the short-term in other coniferous forest habitats, our study suggests that there may be long-term negative effects of clear-cutting that lower bee biodiversity in mature secondary growth forests as compared to mature old-growth forests.

Indexed as

biodiversityHymenopterainteraction networksredwood forestrestoration

Identifiers

PMID37435025
PMCPMC10329937

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.