ArticleNature communications2025
Global alternatives of natural vegetation cover.
Article in Nature communications, 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.
- Disturbance regimes drive widespread plant range disequilibrium in Europe alongside climate change.Nature ecology & evolution · 2026Article
- A spatially adaptive synthetic vegetation index for monitoring ecosystem changes in climatically heterogeneous basins.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Reforestation scenarios shape global and regional temperature outcomes.Communications earth & environment · 2026Article
- Global alternatives of natural vegetation cover.Nature communications · 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
32 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Preserving and restoring terrestrial ecosystems is essential to preventing the decline of life on Earth. To guide global conservation efforts, we present a detailed counterfactual map showing Earth's natural tree, short vegetation, and bare ground cover. This map accounts for environmental filtering along with realistic scenarios of fire frequency and wildlife herbivory. The most likely scenario suggests 43% (5669 ± 74 Mha) of land could support trees, 39% (5183 ± 86 Mha) shrubs and grasses, and 18% (2352 ± 59 Mha) bare ground. Adjustments in fire and herbivory could shift a minimum of 675 Mha of land, stressing the importance of considering alternative outcomes when restoring a landscape. Our findings also suggest that adjustments in fire frequency and wildlife herbivory could have a greater impact on natural vegetation than expected climate changes by 2050, highlighting decision-makers' responsibility to guide conservation and restoration toward a sustainable and biodiverse future.
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.