ArticleRoyal Society open science2025
Biomass distribution of sympatric mammals in a European temperate forest.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Biomass distribution of sympatric mammals in a European temperate forest.Royal Society open science · 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The distribution of biomass among trophic levels and different types of organisms is a key characteristic of ecosystems. However, such biomass distributions might exhibit large perturbations owing to human activities. We used long-term camera trap data from a temperate forest ecosystem within the Cantabrian range, northern Spain, to quantify the biomass distribution of 10 mammal species ranging in body mass from 300 g to almost 100 kg. The species are representative of three distinct orders and include trophic levels from primary to secondary consumers. The observed biomass distribution was bottom-heavy with a disproportionally low biomass of secondary consumers, in particular large-bodied predators. In addition, the ratio of plant biomass to the biomass of mammalian primary consumers was over 6000 : 1 for total above-ground-plant biomass and over 700 : 1 for plant biomass available for mammal consumption. We suggest that the observed biomass distribution both among mammals and between mammals and plants provide an example of trophic downgrading, and highlight the radical effects human activities might have on the structure of terrestrial ecosystems.
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.