ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2025
Assessing limits of sustainable seed harvest in wild plant populations.
Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modeling seed germination data to meet biodiversity conservation needs in the Mediterranean.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Article
- Traditional Knowledge of Medicinal Plants Used by the Yao People in Lingyun County, Guangxi, China.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Balancing Harvesting and Conservation: Demographic Responses of a Threatened Palm to Anthropogenic Disturbance.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Assessing limits of sustainable seed harvest in wild plant populations.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025Article
- Plants cultivated for ecosystem restoration can evolve toward a domestication syndrome.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
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
Abstract
Seed harvesting from wild plant populations is key for ecological restoration, but it may threaten the persistence of the source populations. Consequently, several countries have set guidelines limiting the proportions of harvestable seeds. However, these guidelines are inconsistent and lack a solid empirical basis. We used matrix population models based on 280 wild plant species, stored in he COMPADRE Plant Matrix Database, to model the demographic consequences of seed harvesting. Current guidelines do not protect populations of annuals and short-lived perennials because maximal allowed harvest drew all annual species included in our study to extinction. In contrast, current guidelines are overly restrictive for long-lived plants because these plants could tolerate even higher seed removal than currently allowed. The maximum possible fraction of seed production that can be harvested without compromising the long-term persistence of populations was strongly related to generation time of the target species. When harvesting seeds every year, the fraction of seeds that was safe to harvest (safe seed fraction) ranged from 80% in long-lived species to 2% in most annuals. Less frequent seed harvesting substantially increased the safe seed fraction. In the most vulnerable annual species, it was safe to harvest 5%, 10%, or 30% of a population's seed production when harvesting every 2, 5, or 10 years, respectively. Our results provide a quantitative basis for seed harvesting legislation, based on the generation times of species and harvesting regime.
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.