Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40534987›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2025

Response of Bud Banks of a Freshwater Herbaceous Marsh Plant (

Mengdie Zhou, Changwei Zhang, Xianglong Jin, Qiyao Zhang, Peng Zhang, Anni Bao, Yanjing Lou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Mengdie ZhouJilin Provincial Joint Key Laboratory of Changbai Mountain Wetland and Ecology Northeast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences Changchun China.
Changwei ZhangJilin Provincial Joint Key Laboratory of Changbai Mountain Wetland and Ecology Northeast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences Changchun China.
Xianglong JinJilin Provincial Joint Key Laboratory of Changbai Mountain Wetland and Ecology Northeast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences Changchun China.
Qiyao ZhangJilin Provincial Joint Key Laboratory of Changbai Mountain Wetland and Ecology Northeast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences Changchun China.
Peng ZhangJilin Provincial Joint Key Laboratory of Changbai Mountain Wetland and Ecology Northeast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences Changchun China.
Anni BaoJilin Provincial Joint Key Laboratory of Changbai Mountain Wetland and Ecology Northeast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences Changchun China.
Yanjing LouJilin Provincial Joint Key Laboratory of Changbai Mountain Wetland and Ecology Northeast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences Changchun China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3848-1279

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Exploring plant adaptation strategies under habitat variations from the perspective of bud banks is essential for understanding vegetation regeneration under global changes. However, the response of wetland plant bud banks to combined water and nutrient fluctuations remains unclear. In this study, field surveys across three vegetation zones (wet meadow, tussock marsh, and marsh) and pot experiments with three flooding periods (no flooding, flooding for 1-5 weeks, and flooding for 6-10 weeks), four nitrogen levels (1, 10, 30, and 100 mg/L) and two nitrogen forms (ammonium and nitrate) of

Indexed as

bud banksclonal plantsenvironmental changesflooding conditionnitrogen addition

Identifiers

PMID40534987
PMCPMC12173836

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.