ArticleEcology and evolution2024
Comparison of the coexistence pattern of mangrove macrobenthos between natural and artificial reforestation.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 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.
- Ecological Trade-Offs Between Mangrove Expansion and Waterbird Diversity: Guild-Specific Responses to Pond-to-Mangrove Restoration.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Comparison of the coexistence pattern of mangrove macrobenthos between natural and artificial reforestation.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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The abandoned pond-to-mangrove restoration project provides greater advantages than tidal flats afforestation in restoring mangrove ecosystem services and will be the primary method for mangrove restoration in the future. The existing methods for abandoned pond-to-mangrove restoration include artificial restoration through 'dike-breaking, filling with imported soil and tree planting' and natural restoration through 'dike-breaking and natural succession'. However, little is known about which restoration strategy (natural or artificial restoration) provides more benefits to the biodiversity of mangrove macrobethos. Given a prevailing view suggested that artificial restoration should be the preferred approach for accelerating recovery of biodiversity and vegetation structure in tropical regions, we hypothesised higher macrobenthic biodiversity and more complex community structure in artificial restoration than in natural restoration. To test this hypothesis, macrobenthic biodiversity and ecological processes were monitored in a typical abandoned pond-to-mangrove area of Dongzhaigang Bay, China, where artificial and natural restoration methods were used concurrently. Differences in macrobenthic biodiversity, community structure and ecological processes were compared using diversity indices, complex network analysis and null models. Similar species composition and ecological niche overlap and width among macrobenthos were observed at artificial and natural restoration sites. The biotic heterogeneity and interaction among macrobenthos were higher at the natural restoration sites than at the artificial restoration sites. Macrobenthos community assembly at natural and artificial restoration sites was both determined by deterministic processes, with environmental filtering dominating, which explained 52% and 54% of the variations in macrobenthic community structures respectively. Although our findings did not validate the research hypothesis, higher biotic heterogeneity and species interaction among macrobenthos could support natural restoration as the primary method for abandoned pond-to-mangrove projects, because it is a nature-based solution for mangrove restoration.
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.