Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40808366›Full record

ReviewThe New phytologist2025

A unifying framework for understanding how edge effects reshape the structure, composition and function of forests.

Rebecca Banbury Morgan, Tommaso Jucker

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The New phytologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Rebecca Banbury MorganSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol, BS8 1TQ, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0073-0535
Tommaso JuckerSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol, BS8 1TQ, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0751-6312

Funding

Leverhulme Trust RPG-2023-169Natural Environment Research Council NE/S01537X/1UK Research and Innovation EP/Y003810/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to widespread deforestation and habitat fragmentation, today most of the world's forests lie within 1 km of an edge. Forests near edges are warmer, drier, receive more light, and are more exposed to wind and other disturbances than intact forests, profoundly altering the demographic processes that drive their dynamics. For reasons that remain poorly understood, the magnitude and direction of edge effects on forest structure, composition and function vary considerably across forest ecosystems. Here, we develop a unifying framework that aims to reconcile these apparently contrasting outcomes to forest edge creation by explicitly accounting for the effects of edge age, climatic context and forest structure. We begin by identifying four stages of forest edge development, arguing that demographic trajectories after edge creation are actually broadly similar across different forest types. We then consider how regional differences in climate and forest structure help explain why in tropical rainforests aboveground biomass typically declines sharply at forest edges, while in cooler climates the opposite is often true. Finally, we outline a series of concrete predictions made by our framework and discuss how these could be tested using ever-growing archives of remote sensing products that capture ecosystem change across broad spatio-temporal scales. In doing so, we aim to offer a fresh perspective on a research field that has captivated ecologists for half a century.

Indexed as

ForestsTreesBiomassClimateEcosystemaboveground biomassedge effectsforest fragmentationforest structurepatch contrastremote sensing

Identifiers

PMID40808366
PMCPMC12445831

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.