ArticleScientific reports2024
Effects of Eucalyptus wood and leaf litter on saproxylic insects in the southeastern United States.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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.
- Native and non-native ambrosia beetles compete for deadwood resources.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2026Article
- Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Although Eucalyptus is widely planted outside its native range for timber and pulp production, the effects of these exotic plantations on biodiversity relative to native semi-natural forests or plantations of native tree species remain incompletely understood. Here, we compare the diversity of saproxylic beetles (Coleoptera) and true bugs (Hemiptera) between non-native Eucalyptus benthamii Maiden and Cambage (Camden white gum) and native Pinus taeda L. (loblolly pine) stands on the upper Coastal Plain of South Carolina, U.S.A. We sampled insects emerging from logs of both species placed in both stand types after 1, 2, 6, and 12 months in the field. Beetle and true bug richness and diversity were both significantly lower from eucalypt than from pine wood. Moreover, the two communities were compositionally distinct. Whereas pine supported many species of host-specific phloeoxylophagous beetles, most species collected from eucalypts were mycophagous or predatory taxa capable of utilizing a wide range of hosts. Species richness did not differ between logs placed in eucalypt vs. pine stands but Shannon's diversity was significantly higher in the eucalypt stands, possibly due to greater sun exposure in the latter. Contrary to a previous study, we found no support for the idea that eucalypt litter reduces the diversity of saproxylic insects. Our findings add to the growing body of evidence that non-native plantations are less favorable to biodiversity than those consisting of native tree species.
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.