ArticleFrontiers in plant science2025
Quantitative vessel mapping on increment cores: a critical comparison of image acquisition methods.
Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2025. 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.
- Beech latewood density as a proxy for temperature reconstruction.Science advances · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Quantitative wood anatomy is critical for establishing climate reconstruction proxies, understanding tree hydraulics, and quantifying carbon allocation. Its accuracy depends upon the image acquisition methods, which allows for the identification of the number and dimensions of vessels, fibres, and tracheids within a tree ring. Angiosperm wood is analysed with a variety of different image acquisition methods, including surface pictures, wood anatomical micro-sections, or X-ray computed micro-tomography. Despite known advantages and disadvantages, the quantitative impact of method selection on wood anatomical parameters is not well understood. Methods: In this study, we present a systematic uncertainty analysis of the impact of the image acquisition method on commonly used anatomical parameters. We analysed four wood samples, representing a range of wood porosity, using surface pictures, micro-CT scans, and wood anatomical micro-sections. Inter-annual patterns were analysed and compared between methods from the five most frequently used parameters, namely mean lumen area ( Results: Our quantitative vessel mapping revealed that values obtained for hydraulic wood anatomical parameters are comparable across different methods, supporting the use of easily applicable surface picture methods for ring-porous and specific diffuse-porous tree species. While intra-annual variability is well captured by the different methods across species, wood density ( Discussion: Our study highlights the potential and limitations of different image acquisition methods for extracting wood anatomical parameters. Moreover, we present a standardized workflow for assessing radial tree ring profiles. These findings encourage the compilation of all studies using wood anatomical parameters and further research to refine these methods, ultimately enhancing the accuracy, replication, and spatial representation of wood anatomical studies.
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.