Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40104958›Full record

ArticleEcology2025

Tree diversity shapes the spectral signature of light transmittance in developing forests.

Laura J Williams, Kyle R Kovach, J Antonio Guzmán Q, Artur Stefanski, Raimundo Bermudez, Ethan E Butler, Domitille Coq-Etchegaray, Catherine Glenn-Stone, Peter Hajek, Johanna Klama and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Laura J WilliamsHawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3555-4778
Kyle R KovachForest and Wildlife Ecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1498-6363
J Antonio Guzmán QDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St Paul, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0721-148X
Artur StefanskiDepartment of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St Paul, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5412-1014
Raimundo BermudezDepartment of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St Paul, Minnesota, USA.
Ethan E ButlerDepartment of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St Paul, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3482-1950
Domitille Coq-EtchegarayDepartment of Geography, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Catherine Glenn-StoneDepartment of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St Paul, Minnesota, USA.
Peter HajekGeobotany, Faculty of Biology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Johanna KlamaGeobotany, Faculty of Biology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Belinda E MedlynHawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia.
Christian MessierCentre for Forest Research, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Aboubakr MoradiDepartment of Geography, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Alain PaquetteCentre for Forest Research, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1048-9674
Maria H ParkDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St Paul, Minnesota, USA.
Michael Scherer-LorenzenGeobotany, Faculty of Biology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Philip A TownsendForest and Wildlife Ecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7003-8774
Peter B ReichDepartment of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St Paul, Minnesota, USA.
Jeannine Cavender-BaresDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St Paul, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3375-9630
Meredith C SchumanDepartment of Geography, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.

Funding

Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg (Innovationsfonds Forschung)National Science Foundation Division of Biological Infrastructure NSF-DBI-2021898National Science Foundation Division of Environmental Biology NSF-DEB-1638720National Science Foundation Long Term Ecological Research NSF-DEB-1831944NOMIS Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Greater tree diversity often increases forest productivity by increasing the fraction of light captured and the effectiveness of light use at the community scale. However, light may shape forest function not only as a source of energy or a cause of stress but also as a context cue: Plant photoreceptors can detect specific wavelengths of light, and plants use this information to assess their neighborhoods and adjust their patterns of growth and allocation. These cues have been well documented in laboratory studies, but little studied in diverse forests. Here, we examined how the spectral profile of light (350-2200 nm) transmitted through canopies differs among tree communities within three diversity experiments on two continents (200 plots each planted with one to 12 tree species, amounting to roughly 10,000 trees in total), laying the groundwork for expectations about how diversity in forests may shape light quality with consequences for forest function. We hypothesized-and found-that the species composition and diversity of tree canopies influenced transmittance in predictable ways. Canopy transmittance-in total and in spectral regions with known biological importance-principally declined with increasing leaf area per ground area (LAI) and, in turn, LAI was influenced by the species composition and diversity of communities. For a given LAI, broadleaved angiosperm canopies tended to transmit less light with lower red-to-far-red ratios than canopies of needle-leaved gymnosperms or angiosperm-gymnosperm mixtures. Variation among communities in the transmittance of individual leaves had a minor effect on canopy transmittance in the visible portion of the spectrum but contributed beyond this range along with differences in foliage arrangement. Transmittance through mixed species canopies often deviated from expectations based on monocultures, and this was only partly explained by diversity effects on LAI, suggesting that diversity effects on transmittance also arose through shifts in the arrangement and optical properties of foliage. We posit that differences in the spectral profile of light transmitted through diverse canopies serve as a pathway by which tree diversity affects some forest ecosystem functions.

Indexed as

BiodiversityForestsLightTreesbiodiversity–ecosystem functioncanopy structureIDENTleaf optical propertieslight quality cuesneighborhood interactionsphotoreceptorsspectral canopy transmittance

Identifiers

PMID40104958
PMCPMC11920942

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.