Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37818009›Full record

ReviewHeliyon2023

Trophic resources of the edaphic microarthropods: A worldwide review of the empirical evidence.

Víctor Nicolás Velazco, Leonardo Ariel Saravia, Carlos Eduardo Coviella, Liliana Beatriz Falco

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Heliyon, 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

4 authors.

Víctor Nicolás VelazcoDepartamento de Ciencias Básicas, Universidad Nacional de Luján, Argentina.
Leonardo Ariel SaraviaCentro Austral de Investigaciones Científicas, CADIC-CONICET, Ushuaia, Argentina.
Carlos Eduardo CoviellaDepartamento de Ciencias Básicas, Universidad Nacional de Luján, Argentina.
Liliana Beatriz FalcoDepartamento de Ciencias Básicas, Universidad Nacional de Luján, Argentina.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ecosystem sustainable use requires reliable information about its biotic and abiotic structure and functioning. Accurate knowledge of trophic relations is central for the understanding of ecosystem dynamics, which in turn, is essential for food web stability analyzes and the development of sustainable practices. There is a rapid growth in the knowledge on how belowground biodiversity regulates the structure and functioning of terrestrial ecosystems. Although, the available information about trophic relationships is hard to find and fragmented. Most of the information available worldwide about the food resources of soil microarthropods suggested that out of 3105 hits of initial research on this aspect only a total of 196 published works related particular species, genera, and families to particular trophic resources, the majority of them dealing with soils of the Palearctic region. From the 196 publications we extracted 3009 records relating specific taxonomic groups to their trophic resources, 20 percent mention saprophytic fungi as a food resource, 16 percent cite microfauna, 11 percent mention bacteria, 10 percent litter and 8 percent cite Springtails. The available information was highly skewed, the 73.71 percent comes from Acari, and within these, 50.62 percent correspond just to Sarcoptiformes. The literature on Collembola is very scarce and most of the information is on arthropleona. The review also highlights that available research on the use of trophic resources comes from European sites and the information on this aspect from other parts of the soils of the world is still at large but unknown.

Indexed as

AcariCollembolaFood webSoil microarthropodsTrophic ecology

Identifiers

PMID37818009
PMCPMC10560771

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.