ReviewPlants (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Impact of Land-Use Change on Vascular Epiphytes: A Review.
Review in Plants (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contrasting Photochemical Stability and Oxidative Injury Shape Drought Responses in Ferns and Mosses.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Traditional Knowledge and Biocultural Roles of Edible Flowers in Local Food Systems of Baise City, Guangxi, China.Biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Epiphytic Plants: Perspective on Their Diversity, Distribution, Systematics and Conservation in the Changing Environment.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
Human-caused habitat conversion, degradation, and climate change threaten global biodiversity, particularly in tropical forests where vascular epiphytes-non-parasitic plants growing on other plants-may be especially vulnerable. Epiphytes play vital ecological roles, in nutrient cycling and by providing habitat, but are disproportionately affected by land-use changes due to their reliance on host trees and specific microclimatic conditions. While tree species in secondary forests recover relatively quickly, epiphyte recolonization is slower, especially in humid montane regions, where species richness may decline by up to 96% compared to primary or old-growth forests. A review of nearly 300 pertinent studies has revealed a geographic bias toward the Neotropics, with limited research from tropical Asia, Africa, and temperate regions. The studies can be grouped into four main areas: 1. trade, use and conservation, 2. ecological effects of climate and land-use change, 3. diversity in human-modified habitats, and 4. responses to disturbance. In agricultural and timber plantations, particularly those using exotic species like pine and eucalyptus, epiphyte diversity is significantly reduced. In contrast, most native tree species and shade-grown agroforestry systems support higher species richness. Traditional polycultures with dense canopy cover maintain up to 88% of epiphyte diversity, while intensive management practices, such as epiphyte removal in coffee and cacao plantations, cause substantial biodiversity losses. Conservation strategies should prioritize preserving old-growth forests, maintaining forest fragments, and minimizing intensive land management. Active restoration, including the translocation of fallen epiphytes and planting vegetation nuclei, is more effective than passive approaches. Future research should include long-term monitoring to understand epiphyte dynamics and assess the broader impacts of epiphyte loss on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning.
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.