ArticleFrontiers in plant science2025
Effects of litter input on soil aggregation and aggregate carbon turnover differ among three subtropical forests in southeastern China.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background and aims: Litter input plays important roles in controlling soil aggregation and aggregate carbon (C) content. However, the effects of litter input on soil aggregate C turnover in different forest types remain unclear. Methods: We examined the changes of aggregate mass proportion, and the litter-derived and native C content among soil aggregates after three years of aboveground and root litter input, using Results: Belowground root litter rather than aboveground litter input enhanced soil aggregation. Litter input increased total C content across all aggregates, and the effects were no different between aboveground litter and belowground root litter input except for the >2 mm fraction. Belowground root litter input led to less native C content across three forest types. However, belowground root litter input resulted in more formation of litter-derived C than aboveground litter input under masson pine plantations, but not for both natural forest and Chinese fire plantation, suggesting a different effect of litter input on the litter-derived C formation among forest types. In addition, forest type affected soil aggregation and aggregate C turnover, and the differences in litter quantity and litter C:N ratio can explain the changes in soil aggregation and aggregate C turnover among forest types. Conclusion: Our results imply that belowground root litter input plays a more important role in controlling soil aggregation and aggregate C turnover than aboveground litter, and the impact on newly litter-derived C formation depends on forest type.
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.