ArticleBMC plant biology2025
Effects of photosynthetic properties, soil environment and bioactive constituents of Eucommia ulmoides Oliver under two planting models.
Article in BMC plant biology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe distinct cultivation approaches of Eucommia ulmoides Oliver (EUO) have significant impacts on the planting environment, yield, content of bioactive constituents, and economic benefits. In this study, we systematically investigated the effects of the traditional arbor forest model of EUO planting (AFMEP) and the using leaf model of EUO planting (ULMEP), a dwarf dense planting model, on various parameters. These parameters include physicochemical properties, microbial diversity, and enzyme activities of the soil, as well as photosynthetic characteristics, active ingredient content, and carbon storage of the plant, alongside the economic benefits of EUO.
resultsThe maximum net photosynthetic rate of ULMEP leaves increased by 128.4% compared to that of AFMEP leaves. The contents of alkali-hydrolyzable nitrogen, available phosphorus, organic matter, and total soluble salts in the ULMEP soil were 0.91-1.68 mg kg⁻¹, 0.25-1.0 mg kg⁻¹, 1.03-4.27 g kg⁻¹, and 0.06-0.11 g kg⁻¹ lower than those in the AFMEP soil, respectively. Soil moisture content in different layers of the ULMEP was higher than that of the AFMEP. Except for urease activity, no significant differences were found in the enzymatic activities of the rhizosphere soil between the two models. Acidobacteria and Zygomycota, which prefer low-nutrient environments, show higher relative abundance in the ULMEP soil. In contrast, Ascomycota and Basidiomycota, which favor nutrient-rich environments, were more relatively abundant in the AFMEP soil. The relative abundance of oligotrophic bacteria in ULMEP was higher than that in AFMEP, while the eutrophic bacteria were more abundant in AFMEP as compared to ULMEP. Meanwhile, the geniposidic acid, chlorogenic acid, and aucubin content in ULMEP leaves increased by 94.2%, 39.0%, and 75.8%, respectively. The carbon storage and economic efficiency in plants under ULMEP were three times more than those in AFMEP.
conclusionsULMEP has excellent economic and ecological benefits, making it a suitable planting model for producing bark and leaves. This may result from the combined effects of genotypes, environmental factors, management practices, and their interactions. These results provide important information for the selection and management of future EUO cultivation models.
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.