ArticleScientific reports2024
Windthrow in riparian buffers affects the water quality of freshwater ecosystems in the eastern Canadian boreal forest.
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 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.
- Fish-mediated impacts highlight the conservation value of Esker kettle lakes.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the wide application of riparian buffers in the managed boreal forest, their long-term effectiveness as freshwater protection tools remains unknown. Here, we evaluate windthrow incidence in riparian buffers in the eastern Canadian boreal forest and determine the effect of windthrow on the water quality index of the adjacent freshwater ecosystems. We studied 40 sites-20 riparian buffers, aged 10 to 20 years after harvesting and 20 control sites within intact riparian environments-distributed among clay and sandy (esker) soils and black spruce (Picea mariana) and jack pine (Pinus banksiana) stands. We observed more windthrow in the harvested stands (36%) relative to the control sites (16%), regardless of substrate and species. We determined that the most important factors explaining windthrow were exposition, harvesting, aquatic environment size, and stand characteristics. These factors drive wind exposure, speed, and force, which determine post-harvest windthrow risk. Furthermore, windthrow negatively affected the water quality index of the adjacent aquatic systems, i.e., greater windthrow decreased the protective effect of the riparian buffer. We recommend increasing the use of partial harvest near riparian environments and adapting riparian buffers to site conditions to ensure the long-term protection of adjacent freshwater ecosystems.
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.