ArticleFrontiers in plant science2025
Effects of simulated litter inputs on plant-microbe carbon pool trade-offs in degraded alpine meadows.
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.
- Simulated litter input drives shifts in carbon allocation strategies within alpine meadows of the three rivers source region.Frontiers in plant science · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Litter, as a major carbon source in alpine meadow ecosystems, seriously affect the variation of plant-microbe carbon pools in alpine meadows. In order to study the response of plant-microbial biomass carbon pool trade-offs in degraded alpine meadow to litter inputs. Methods: We investigated the effects of different levels of litter inputs on the carbon pools of alpine meadows plant aboveground communities, the carbon pools of the root, and the total carbon pools of the plant communities and the soil microbial biomass carbon pools, and clarified the variable factors that affect the balance of the plant-microbial biomass carbon pools and the process of influencing the trade-offs. Result: (1) Litter inputs had a positive effect on plant carbon pools, and the aboveground community carbon pools, root carbon pools, total plant community carbon pools and soil microbial biomass carbon pools of alpine meadows were all maximized in the T3 treatment. (2) The trade-off analyses showed that the trade-off relationships of ungrazed alpine meadows TPCPMBCP in the following order under different levels of litter treatments: T1(0.0414) > T2 (0.0269) > T0 (0.0086) > T3 (0.0012), the trade-off relationship of TPCP-MBCP in lightly grazed alpine meadows was in the order of T2 (0.0494) > T3 (0.0140) > T0 (0.0097) > T1 (0.002), and the tradeoff relationship of TPCP-MBCP in moderately grazed alpine meadows was in the order of T3 (0.0383) > T1 (0.0307) > T2 (0.0196) > T0 (0.0005). (3) Propensity analysis showed that the TPCP-MBCP trade-offs tended to favor MBCP under ungrazed, lightly grazed and moderately grazed meadows under the T1 treatment. (4) Structural equation modeling showed that RB and APC were positively correlation, RCP was significantly negatively correlated with the TPCPMBCP trade-off in lightly grazed grassland ( Discussion: There was no uniform pattern in TPCP-MBCP trade-off and propensities in ungrazed, lightly grazed, and moderately grazed alpine meadows under different levels of litter inputs. This study can help to optimize the grazing management measures, predict the changes of carbon pools in alpine meadows and clarify the transfer and storage of carbon pools between plants and microorganisms, so as to provide a theoretical basis for the study of carbon pools in degraded alpine meadows.
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.