ArticleHeliyon2024
Response on root regrowth potential to soil moisture in Sedum species during winter in Særheim, Norway.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The impact of winter moisture on root metabolism and root integrity has potential consequences for the geographical distribution of drought-adapted succulent species and for their long-term performance on green roofs. The interacting effects of soil characteristics and precipitation frequency on root mortality under winter conditions and the potential to grow new roots in spring were evaluated for six Methods: To test for the impact of soil moisture during winter on root regrowth potential in six Sedum species, we used a combination of two substrates with differing water-holding capacity and four contrasting watering regimes. Specially, for the fine and coarse substrates, total pore volume was 42 and 46 %, respectively, and maximum water-holding capacity (i.e. field capacity) was 0.50 and 0.33 kg water per L, respectively. The four watering treatments involved overhead watering to runoff (approx. 10 mm): once every second week, once a week, three times per week and three times per week with 1 cm standing water in trays from January to March 2019. Results: It was found that winter soil moisture had no major impact on root mortality or root regrowth potential in spring. Root mortality was not affected by watering frequency and regrowth potential showed no directional response to increased watering frequency, although species-specific responses were involved. Root diameter did not differ between the substrates, but there were some differences between the species. Conclusions: Root response to transient waterlogging or moist but unsaturated soil may not be an important mechanism for determining the survival and distribution of temperate
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.