ArticlePloS one2023
Differences of oribatid mite community and trophic structure between karst caves and surface different moss habitats.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Distribution pattern and driving factors of mite communities in karst cave ecosystems.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In order to reveal the community characteristics and trophic structure of oribatid mites in different moss habitats in karst caves, the oribatid mites in the moss habitats of ground (GD), understory (US), cave wall (CW), surface shrub (SB) and farmland (FL) outside the cave were collected in October 2021. Through the identification and data analysis of oribatid mites, 2352 oribatid mites were found, belonging to 45 families and 72 genera, most of which were Gymnonota. The family number, genus number, individual number, individual density, dominant genus composition, community diversity, community similarity, MGP (Analysis methods for ecological groups of oribatid mites) ecological group of oribatid mites and trophic structure of oribatid mites in different moss were analyzed. The results showed that: (1) The number of families, genera, individuals, and individual density of SB and FL are higher than those of the other three habitats; (2) Platyliodes, Oppiella, Tectocepheus, Scutovertex, Scheloribates and Trichogalumna are the dominant genera of the oribatid mites in the cave moss habitat, among them, Tectocepheus and Trichogaluna have the most obvious advantages; (3) The diversity index of shrub (SB) was higher than that of other four habitats; Similarity between ground and cave wall, shrub and farmland is high; (4) The MGP ecological group of oribatid mites in different habitats is dominated by O type (Overall type belongs to MGP analysis results, 20%≤M,G,P≤50%), and a total of 42 genera of oribatid mites preliminarily constitute the trophic structure of oribatid mites in the cave moss habitat. Based on the above results, it can be concluded that there are differences in the community structure of oribatid mites in different moss habitats in the study area, and the use of dominant genera of mites can preliminarily indicate the environmental conditions of different moss habitats. This study enriches the study of mites in karst cave mosses, and can provide theoretical significance for the protection of cave biodiversity in karst areas.
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.